My friend is playing a LG Paladin and the party is planning to do a heist on a bad guy's home to search for evidence of wrongdoing and any clues about the BBEG.
The LG Paladin is not sure if he can go along, since they'd be unlawfully breaking into someone's home and if they get discovered, fighting a bunch of guards who are just doing their job.
Is this something a LG player can't do?
He can do it, here's the logic:
>He is a paladin
>The bad guy is bad
>He has an implicit warrant
>The guards are doing their job, but it is a job for a bad person
>the guards have compromised their own character by working for such an employer, assuming that they are willing.
It all depends on how the player feels, a LG player can do whatever the fuck they want. Depending on what it is it might affect their alignment if it's becoming a pattern. Personally I wouldn't if I was playing a LG Paladin, I'd specifically look the other way and apologize for not being comfortable helping them in the matter.
Depending on what type of paladin it is that's still not how Lawful works at all since they have to specifically steal what they need.
There's a reason the spell 'Atonement' exists. The Paladin probably wouldn't be for looting, and may or may not attempt to hold back enough to not kill the guards.
But if he has reason to believe the guy is associating with Capital E - EVIL then he can justify entering the house unannounced.
The player wants to go but doesn't know how he can justify it as LG.
They don't necessarily need to steal anything. There's a wizard that knows a password they need there. The plan is to sneak in there, KO the guy, interrogate and/or kidnap him, then fight their way out if they must. The password is the way into the BBEG's lair, where the BBEG is building a Doomsday device.
The Paladin is trying to figure out where he can involve himself here, he says it sounds Chaotic Evil.
Non-lethal weapons, man. Bring a sap and conk the guards over the head, or convince them to stand down (via diplomacy or 'diplomacy'). If need be, find a local authority and ask for their permission to do so. If infiltrating this home will literally save the world, then I'd say he's obligated to go along and ensure as many lives are spared as possible.
Lawful doesn't always mean legal
Well couple questions, is the wizard a bad guy as well or directly working for the BBEG? If so then there isn't really an issue grabbing the guy, however he'll have to be careful on the interrogate because if it starts going down torture lane he needs to stop it. He could easily play the good cop in a good cop bad cop situation, even going so far as stepping out of the room "to let him and the bad cop talk" then coming in and patching him up because "well that's just not right but I can't be everywhere at once."
Yeah, the wizard is the bad guy's lieutenant and basically guarding a storehouse filled with secrets the BBEG has.
The party is planning on torture if necessary, and using poison to first KO the wizard and get him out of the tower when the wizard is asleep at night. If they get interrupted somehow then they fight their way out.
As for your idea, it sounds interesting, but isn't it kind of metagamey? Like the Paladin is rules lawyering? "Oh I know it's evil, but I'm not here, oops!"
Go. Wait for the DM to justify it. If you get any bullshit, turn in your character sheet and leave.
A paladin is not Mother Theresa of Calcutta. His job is (presumably, I don't know your setting) to fight evil and to win.
Does he have a better option to stop the doomsday device than to go along with the plan? Because as far as PC plans go, this sounds remarkably fine.
It he did his best (tried to solve the matter lawfully, get a warrant, collaborate with the authorities and town guard, etc) and is now left with just the option to take part in a heist, I'd say that it's alright.
He probably wouldn't enjoy what he's doing, or be proud of it, but he'd probably accept it.
That's how I'd run it, though.
Paladins prioritize good over law
Their full and complete fall constraint is literally "never perform an evil act"
Also; Paladins, as Gygax intended, are judge, jury, and executioner
There are maybe steps worth taking ahead of time, but it's totally within his bounds to investigate this
Most importantly though:
YOU ALWAYS FIND A WAY TO MAKE YOUR CHARACTER WORK WITHOUT CREATING INTER-PLAYER ISSUES
>fighting a bunch of guards who are just doing their job.
There are rules for non-lethal subdual. I am amazed you've never needed those before.
>breaking into a home
Not much of a problem, especially if the paladin knows that it's the home of the bad guy. It's more important to uphold the law of his deity, and preserve the law of the land from said bad guy who threatens said law, than worry about getting arrested for breaking and entering.
>fighting a bunch of guards
This is a much bigger issue, a LG paladin wouldn't fight and injure/kill a bunch of dudes who are just doing their job. Sneaking past, tricking them, or bribing them would make more sense than fighting them. If caught, it would make more sense to try and run away or surrender then fight the city guard for doing their job.
Breaking into a bad guy's house/keep/dungeon is generally alright, as you're stopping his plans to hurt more people. It's not a moral question, it's a legal one, and paladins will always do the good thing over the legal thing.
Same applies to torture. Torture is typically considered an evil act, so a paladin won't do it, even if it is legal in the setting.
No true good will ever come from doing an evil act.
And yeah, I'd argue the paladin isn't just metagaming if they look away when the party does evil, they're violating their code, standing by idling as evil takes place. Doesn't mean they'd kill the other players or anything, but he wouldn't take part, and would try to find a better way, and show them the path of goodness. Zone of Truth is a better spell for getting info than torture anyway, and I think most paladins can prepare it pretty early on
>BBEG
*cringe*
This. It's not like the paladin has to crucify the guards or loot the house.
Being there to keep the others from looting and/or crucifying is actually the most responsible choice he could make.
This "complaining about BBEG" meme is even cringier than Rick and Morty's fandom
>oh man there's an evil entity that looms over the campaign
>cringe amirite
>please validate me
>"hey, that's the villain, right?"
>"no, I want to call him the big bad evil guy, lolsorandom spork penguin XD!"
The question to really ask is "does he lean more toward the lawful aspect, or the good aspect"? You can be lawful good, but have a preference for one or the other - its nuanced, not black and white.
If he leans more toward the lawful aspect, than he probably should not break into the house without a warrant. If he leans toward the good aspect more, he can justify it if he knows the guy is actually evil.
>Term has been used in RPGs for decades
>Suddenly autist comes to Veeky Forums and tries to convince everyone it's cringy cause "I-It implies the guy is evil, and evil is edgy, REEEEEEEEEE"
Good luck with that chum.
"BBEG" is a four-letter term that is so commonly used in rpg discussions that i think pretty much anyone in the hobby knows it by now. It's a serviceable term and is more specific than "villain" which does not imply that you're talking about the MAIN antagonist of the campaign and the cause of all bad things happening.
If you don't like the term don't take part in the discussion and get lost.
All paladin alignment threads are bait
A paladin answears to his Cleric or his Church.
So if any of those parties approve, then bust down the door and get chopping!
And if you're a fucking Paladin of St.Cuthbert THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THAT GOD DOES AND EXPECTS YOU, SO DON'T EVEN MAKE ANY KIND OF FUCKING EXCUSE.