If you were a lawful good paladin and a devil who could not lie told you to kill a child or it would kill one hundred but would in no way either directly or indirectly harm the hundred if you did kill the child, would you do it?
The children all being normal children of the standard player races, none of whom you know.
Which choice would you expect to make your paladin fall?
Kill the EVIL demon and save the 100 people without killing some random child. There's always a third option.
Listening to the devil in the first place is the option that'd make me fall. Wording's a bitch here.
>Is demon going to kill 100?
Kill demon.
>Is target child going to kill 100?
Kill demon, steer child to church for guidance.
>Devil could not lie
Why in the fuck would I trust its garbage? It could be making clever wordplay and through such bypassing any magical effect. Smite.
Kill demon, kill child, kill 100 people.
>devil who could not lie
No such thing
I'd kill both the devil and the children. By doing so I would remove an evil entity from the world and also ensure that, by dying for a righteous cause, the children ascend to heaven before they had the opportunity to commit sins and damn themselves to hell.
Yeah sorry. By it I meant the devil
>could not lie
as in it cannot tell a lie, it can misdirect and shit
the children are normal children, no more or less evil than the norm for their race
Assuming I had literally no other choice, it depends
What does my religion say? Is it highly utilitarianistic? then I would kill the child. Does it say I can't specifically murder an innocent no matter what? Then I would let the devil kill the hundred but spare the child.
>as in it cannot tell a lie, it can misdirect and shit
Again, no such thing. Satan's servants are liars by nature.
>the children are normal children, no more or less evil than the norm for their race
They have original sin, which makes them evil just like everyone else. Dying for a righteous cause ensures them a place in heaven, more than I can say for most people.
Catholic Pally for the win.
Personally, I'd slay the devil, take the children to the church, and assign each as a squire to a fellow paladin, so that it will be part of thier mission to make them righteous defenders of the faith. Even if the devil esubstanciates again, it'll have 101 Paladins with an APB to smite on its unholy face.
Kill the child. The demon leaves and presents his offer to 99 other paladins. At least 100 children still died. Good job, sir childkiller.
>Why do I keep getting placed in these situations in which I am forced to kill children?
>Can't shake nagging feeling that I am a really bad Paladin
>Can't be, I've already saved 700 grown people
>Haven't been able to cast Smite or Lay on hands in a while
>Not my problem, about to make it 800 innocent people saved
Assume that someone is using my dreams and tear at the foundations.
There is no way this is real.
I am not killing Baby Hitler.
>who could not lie told you to kill a child or it would kill
Just because it can't lie doesn't mean it can see the future.
Also it's probably lying
Kill the devil.
...
"I know that ethics class you took makes you think you understand every little thing about the duality of man and human morality, Steve, but could you stop forcing me into situations where you try to force my paladin to fall? I'm going to force feed this thing it's own tail, by the way."
The correct answer is to attack the devil if it's at all possible.
Kill the devil, ignore its lies about children. If it actually could see the future it would have been able to see me killing it after approaching me.
I think OP means that the devil will kill the 100 people. But I'm not sure, there's a dangling participle.
Kill the devil, slap the GM for being a faggot. Justice!
>all these fags in the thread thinking they can change the prompt by adding dumb shit like "hurr well I'll just SAVE EVERYONE" or "well I just kill the devil and prevent bad stuff from happening"
Can no one here actually even answer OP's philosophy 101 question?
Kill the devil, ask my god what to do next.
Devil didn't say it wouldn't kill the 100 if I do as it asks, only that it will if I don't. So it comes down to whether or not the devil is an asshole. And I think it's fair to assume that it will choose to be an asshole so there's no reason to trust it on this.
>Can no one here actually even answer OP's philosophy 101 question?
Sure: Suck my dick
If he is lawful then he will pass the buck to his god. After all just because the devil cannot lie it doesn't mean is not tricking you.
After all if he believes he is saying the truth, he is not lying.
Or the people who dies if the kid stays alive could be all cultists who kill children.
After all for a lawful and religious character, aka a paladin, there is no higher law that his or her god.
And calling your god for a yes or no answer is low cost anyway.
>Can no one here actually even answer OP's philosophy 101 question?
Sure, we just don't want to.
In the choice between killing 1 child and killing 100, both options are Evil, and therefore both cause the Paladin to fall. The lesser of two sins is still sin.
If forced into this situation with no way to find a third option, the Paladin's solemn duty is to kill one child to save a hundred children. He *will* fall, but that's the hand he's been dealt. He then - if he ever deserved to be a Paladin - will do what he can to slay the devil that forced him into this situation, after making sure that the surviving children are safe.
By slaying the devil he may regain his paladinhood.
This. Being a paladin is easy.
Let the devil do what it wants. If you kill the child, then the blood is on your hands. If it kills 100, the blood is on its. You can't be condemned for not doing evil in order to result in good.
>B-but the devil is super strong and will kill you
>You say that like it's going to stop me...
That's the answer to the philosophy 101 question.
Sounds like OP needs to ask a better question.
>both options are Evil
No they aren't, the devil is doing the evil thing.
Just because someone says "you're responsible for my actions" doesn't mean you are responsible for their actions.
Killing the Devil IS the answer, you dimwit.
If you're not trying your best to save EVERYONE as a paladin, and if you're dealing with a devil as a paladin, then you're doing it wrong.
The devil is doing AN evil thing. Killing the child is still an evil action as well. Again, the lesser of two evils, IS STILL EVIL by definition.
You still killed a child, the child's blood is still on your hands, his soul has departed for the afterlife because of what you did. You are always responsible for your own actions, no matter the contrived circumstances you find yourself in.
Now, like I and others said, the real option is to attack the devil. But if for whatever reason that's not an option...then you fall. Plain and simple. And then if you ever deserved to be a paladin, you accept that, and move forward to make amends, starting with hunting down the devil.
If you can't kill the devil then the only good option is to not kill the child.
Because even if someone says "you are responsible for my actions" that doesn't mean you are responsible for their actions and once again you don't know if the devil is lying or not.
>and once again you don't know if the devil is lying or not.
That's a terrible risk you're taking, and you're predicating it on the idea that the devil won't take an opportunity to kill 100 children. That's not a safe bet at all.
On the other hand, devils may be lying shits, but they're LAWFUL lying shits. If a devil says "kill this kid and I won't kill 100 people", it's actually reasonably safe to assume that the devil won't kill the 100 people if you kill the 1 kid, particularly if you're a paladin: the glee at having made a paladin fall will probably satisfy the devil.
Then that brings us back to "Because even if someone says "you are responsible for my actions" that doesn't mean you are responsible for their actions
Also just because someone is Lawful doesn't mean they won't lie. I'm still sure that the devil doesn't actually have a plan to kill 100 children and would only do so out of spite for not killing a kid in front of it. I'd bet good money the first thing it would do is try to find an orphanage and then get pissed off at how few children are actually inside of an orphanage.
I kill the demon and spare the child, instead showing him love and mercy so that he might learn these ideals, and grow into a man as the greatest knight the world shall ever know.
>b-b-but the devil will kill you
I've never understood why people assume paladins have self-preservation instincts stronger than their justiceboners. Heck, the guys are LITERALLY immune to fear.
>If you were a lawful good paladin
That's a very brave assumption there OP.
Thanks bro.
The issue is that it was a shitty question with a common sense answer, kill the devil.
For the sake of what little discussion you want to bring though, a Paladin is generally lawful good. Devils are naturally evil making the paladin only choice by default is to kill it. Killing a human being regardless of age is murder making the paladin lawful nature keeping him from harming it, at most he could send it elsewhere to be rightfully judged but being a fucking baby I'm sure it wouldn't go to jail.
You don't even need philosophy 101 for this. Try using common sense as it is faster without making you sound like a smartass.
>Waah! Stop subverting my paladin falls bait thread!
If I were that Paladin I'd attack the devil even if I knew it'd kill me.
I guess doing this to your players is one way to stop being a forever DM.
Might screw you on getting to play with the group again though.
Lawful people use diplomacy and bluffing. Chaotic people use force.
If i kill a child after he kills 100 people a get more expirience, right?
Kill the devil.
Where's the conundrum here, exactly?
You do know that the devil isn't lying though. That's part of the premise.
I don't buy the 'well I won't co-operate so the blame falls squarely on the devil's shoulders' argument though. You're wilfully steering towards a future in which a 100 kids die, you had the power to stop it but you didnt. That sounds evil to me.
I raise my holy avenger and strike down the fiend.
Deus Vult, sceleste.
Smite Evil
Attack the monster offering the choice. Even if I die, I die gloriously and without being forced into LOL YU FALL scenario.
Then leave the game.
>I don't believe the devil is responsible for its own actions if it warns a third party.
I'm going to kill someone.
If you don't stop me, that death is your fault, not mine.
>ITT: objective morality as a system does only work as long as you dont look too deeply into it
as a GM i make the right decision in moral dilemmas like this up to the player. his god may understand his action if he sees that the intention was good, even in the case of a grave mistake.
it only really works if the dilemma is big enough.
There is no dilemma though. Kill the demon, moral quandary averted.
the paladin might not be able to defeat the creature in question, and fighting meaninglessly and dying is frowned upon in my player's order as foolishness.
if he is able to kill it , it is of course the best choice to destroy this monster
>Why in the fuck would I trust its garbage?
I fucking love you Veeky Forums.
>A Paladin Order that scoffs at a man willing to die for his morals
Your Order is fucked up.
Just because we get angry at someone for enablign a crime that doesn't mean we see the criminal as any less guilty user.
That's not how guilt works. It's not a zero sum process.
>losing a member
>losing all that time and effort put into it
they would have respected his sacrifice if it would have been good for anything at all though. like buying time for a stronger comrade to arrive.
not simply running into every bad guy and dying is the only way this order managed to survive this far. dont waste yourself, since you also waste property of your god
Therefore the Paladin can't fall for the actions of the Demon.
You know what's fucked up?
People throwing their lives away and all their ability to do good in the future for no purpose other than giving the middle finger to a moral quandry.
That's not justice. That's pettiness.
>Waste
Only as a mortal agent. Once you die, ypou join your God and carry on your crusade. Even in death, duty does not end. Or if you were really dedicated, warn your order about the threat as a ghost.
It's an evil act to allow a devil to kill people when you could have stopped him.
The devil doesn't absolve you of guilt just because he could have stopped himself too.
Again, in a setting where there is a verifiable afterlife and you can serve beyond life, there is no reason to mourn the loss of the mortal shell.
in our setting souls get reincarnated tho
Then the only correct course of action is to attack the demon.
>When you could have stopped him
And if he's too powerful to be killed, you couldn't have stopped him so again, no fall.
Any DM who is this level of an asshat needs a spanking.
Then watch out for a Honey Badger Paladin I guess.
>Smite Balls
we like to roll as what someone gets reincarnated
my own character became an axolotl once. after 5 seconds of existential madness , his soul adapted to body and brain of the creature
LOOK AT MY SWORD! IT'S A NICE SHINY SWORD!
"AAAH! NOT THE SSSSWORD! IT'S TOO SHINY FOR USSSS!
This is now a paladin thread.
Post paladins that would make the right choice and smite this bitch-ass demon.
Same proincipke, different animal I guess.
Bat Paladin, Slug Paladin, whatever. If you get reborn but ypour mind remains, no new form should keep you from your goal, it will only be a matter of time before you are reborn as something useful.
But, I get it, the goal posts will keep getting shifted to make the situation no win. What fun. I guess when the universe wants your Paladin to Fall, they fall. Great point. Well made.
Damn straight.
Is your sword not grossly incandescent, party fighter?
There is no other choice.
...
>when the universe wants your Paladin to Fall, they fall. Great point. Well made.
This.
This is literally all these threads ever prove.
...
...
...
...
...
...
Welp, found our first Blackguard.
Punching evil bastard in the face would not make you fall. He deserves it, just be sure, that DM would not sue you for assault.
That ain't a paladin boi, that there's a Drakeblood Knight
>Which choice would you expect to make your paladin fall?
Both.
If the DM wants to make my retorical paladin to fall, it will fall. but if the means in which he pretends to do so are this blatant I won't give him the pleasure. Spare the child, Smite the devil. Roll new character.
Honestly, though, it's not a bad way to go. When the DM is hell-bent on putting you in a "lol u fall" scenario, there are two responses:
1. Keep taking third options and doing the right thing only to be constantly put into more no-win situations.
2. Rob the DM of all satisfaction he could get by forcing you to fall.
are you fucking joking? any decision other than to furiously resist and actively combat the devil with all of my will and ability is unworthy of a paladin.
>this isn't a paladin, it's a paladin that thinks dragons are cool
Bruh.
>pass the buck to his god.
>After all for a lawful and religious character, aka a paladin, there is no higher law that his or her god.
>And calling your god for a yes or no answer is low cost anyway.
Why is this user the ONLY one who has the right answer so far?
Assuming that the Devil can't be stopped from killing a 100 children unless the Paladin kills 1 child,
the only option for the Paladin here is to pray his fucking heart out until the God answers him [or the point becomes moot because the Devil has slaughtered the children].
If the God answers the Paladin, the Paladin has the 100% right course of action, what ever it might be. (Killing the Child, futilely trying to battle the Devil, etc).
If the God doesn't answer, the Paladin is at a bit of a loss, but what ever else he might do he at least tried the non-evil option first.
That's not true. Aladdin was certainly Chaotic, but he beat Jafar by bluffing.
The Joker is the epitome of Chaotic Evil, and he lies and bluffs all the damn time.
Philosophy 101 can suck my dick. How's that for an answer, you weak willed scrab? Kill the devil, and save the child from his destiny. That's the only correct answer for Paladin.
Try to kill the demon because paladins are stupid.
There a screen-cap I took a little while ago that proscribes the sort of protocol that these sort of entities require.
Paladin probably slayed 100 of something that week. Heck, even peasants kill hundreds of chicken in a year's time. Smite the demon, disregard trickery.
>steer child to church for guidance
>some cleric molests the child
>the child hates the church
>grows to be a powerful warrior
>the warrior sets out to destroy the church
>kills exactly one hundred people before being put down
Kill baby
Go back to holy order
Give baby to head cleric for resurrection
Make jazz hands at the devil the whole time
Bind the demon, sell the 101 children into slavery, then use the money made from selling the children to buy the tools needed to start harvesting the demon's blood to sell.
>a devil who could not lie
Oxymoronic but okay
>would you do it?
Obviously not. You'd really have to be a dunce to go along with anything a devil says, he might not be able to lie but he still doesn't wish you well, his advice is certain to be malicious. I'd raise the child myself so we could do the whole "beloved foster child falls to evil but is redeemed by the love of his family" trope.
>you had the power to stop it
No, I never did. The power to stop the killing of 100 children lay only in the devil. He can claim all that he wants that other people are responsible for it, but his actions are his own.
This.
Killing the child and then turning around and saying "the devil made me do it" isn't even on the level of good and evil at that point, it's just nonsensical drivel and no paladin worth his preferment would ever fail at logic that hard.
....just like people in real life dumb enough to say shit like "the devil made me do it".
To be fair to real life idiots, we don't live in a real world where a literal devil appirates and poses philosophy 101 situations to us.