Paladins have taken to the grander-scope battle for law and good by trading in their plate armor for business suits...

WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN?!

The issue is that not all evil people are necessarily breaking the law and therefore do not necessarily deserve to be put on trial. Ebenezer Scrooge would be a great example of Lawful Evil, for example. Nothing he did was illegal, or even questionable. He was just an ornery and unpleasant fellow who hated Christmas and was unforgiving when people didn't pay their mortgages.

That's what most Evil people are like in the world. They're unpleasant or greedy but they're not necessarily doing anything *wrong*, they just only care about themselves. The town's baker might be Evil but that Evil probably only expresses itself as charging a lot for his product because he knows he has a monopoly on it - does he deserve to go to Hell for this, though?

According to dumb smitefags? Yes.

God. The fact that a paladin loses their powers if they fail to meet the standards is proof that their are using their authority in good faith.

It inherently limits the amount of ambiguity there can be in the intentions of the judicator.

WHO WATCHES THE GODMAN?!

>"My client is Lawful Evil, your honor. Emphasis on the Lawful."

No, clerics are there for condemning the paladin orders who seem to succeed in this task.

>Like, the fact that Smite Evil only works on evil can be easily demonstrated.
I can imagine that under certain legal circumstances and loopholes, even a confirmed detecting of evil wouldn't be deemed legal. Especially if we go full ham with a legalese dystopia.

Here's a weird example from the Dutch equivalent of the Supreme Court, a famous piece of case law called... Running Colored (yeah... it's a case from the 70s). Here's the facts:
>Two police officers were patrolling the streets
>In a certain street they saw a colored person (hence the name of the case) running out of a shop and towards the police (this is important)
>The police detained him, checked his pockets and found that he was in the possession of illegal drugs
>The Supreme Court dictated that the evidence (namely the fucking drugs themselves!) was acquired illegally because running towards the police is not suspicious behavior in and of itself (running away from the police on the other hand is)
>Because the only available evidence was gained unlawfully, the suspect was declared not guilty. Despite the drugs he clearly had in his pockets being on the table.

I imagine that if a fantasy world becomes a legal-corporate dystopia, detecting alignment could be considered a breach of privacy that requires a warrant and unlawful smitings would be deemed a serious offense even if the act of smiting itself confirms whether or not someone is evil. Paladin would therefore have to be very well versed in the mythical language of Legalese and be able to defend every smiting they perform. Hence smiting evil one lawsuit at a time.

I'm confused as to why you seem to think that court case is some weird, byzantine system that makes no sense.
It's pretty straightforward. The only evidence you can use is evidence acquired legally. The drugs exist, but you cannot prove that he had them without first admitting you broke the law to get them.
Two wrongs don't make a right, so you have to establish the wrong without committing a wrong yourself.

this isn't complicated.

GUYS LISTEN, THIS SHIT JUST BLEW MY FUCKING MIND.
WHO WATCHES THE GODMAN? NOBODY. BECAUSE HE'S THE ULTIMATE SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY.
WHO WATCHES THE STATE? NOBODY. BECAUSE IT'S THE ULTIMATE TEMPORAL AUTHORITY.
HOW DO WE PREVENT THE ULTIMATE TEMPORAL AUTHORITY FROM GROWING TYRANNICAL? WE SPLIT IT INTO THREE COUNTERBALANCING PARTS.
GOD CONSISTS OF THREE EQUALLY VALID EQUALLY POWERFUL PARTS THAT ARE UNEQUAL TO EACHOTHER BUT ARE ALL EQUALLY GOD.
GOD THE FATHER IS THE EXECUTIVE, AS HE'S THE ONE HANDING OUT JUDGEMENT.
GOD THE SON IS THE LEGISLATIVE, AS HE BROKERED THE NEW COVENANT.
GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT IS THE EXECUTIVE, AS IT IS THE MOST PASSIVE PART OF THE TRINITY (THE ONLY PART THAT IS EXPLICITLY NON-PERSONAL).

SOMEBODY CALL THE FUCKING VATICAN.

>SOMEBODY CALL THE FUCKING VATICAN.
and tell then you're some kind of retarded Modalist heretic?

To Aru Onna Senshi no Shuudan Mensetsu -Onna Senshi to Shite Orc ya Hydra to Tatakatta Keiken o Onsha de Ikaseru to Omoi Shibou Itashimashita-

>google it
>that's really the name
I thought you were just taking the piss.

Except of course that even occasionally in 3rd Edition, and certainly in 4th and 5th edition, a paladin's powers come from the strength of their conviction, not a divine source. Paladins don't even have to be Lawful Good anymore.

He's probably European. Americans have the 4th amendment.

I don't mean to imply that, I'm just saying that this was a very noteworthy (and in the common sphere very controversial) case where someone was deemed innocent despite the evidence being on the table. I simply meant to argue that being able to detect and smite evil would not be enough to replace criminal law, depending on pre-existing laws limiting the paladin. Thus OP's scenario of lawyer-paladin could be viable.

If you didn't have 56% eyesight, you'd see that I'm mentioning a Dutch case that didn't get much traction abroad. That only leaves one (or if we're being generous two) possible countries.

I thought modalism was God as one person taking on three forms, masks, or personalities, instead of being three persons.

My point was that to any American, the case you described isn't unusual. That's a very typical 4th amendment conundrum.

So to bring up a Dutch case, as though it's something unusual, or hard to understand, (indeed even using a Dutch case at all) implies European. That's all.

>My point was that to any American, the case you described isn't unusual.
>to any American
That's a fat load of shit and you know it. To any American with legal knowledge perhaps, but if in America a police officer shooting an armed robber in self defense and then being cleared of all guilt in court can lead to riots, you can bet your ass that someone being cleared of all charges despite evidence of his involvement being in the table would at least raise some eyebrows among laymen.

>Ebenezer Scrooge would be a great example of Lawful Evil,
WRONG. Scrooge was a perfect example of Lawful Neutral, and was a grouchy bastard besides. All it took for him to change his tune was to be shown the consequences and context of his actions on the personal lives of others, and how he would be remembered for them. An Evil person would see Tiny Tim's lonesome crutch and say "So what? A cripple deserves to die regardless."

Scrooge possessed empathy and compassion, but at the beginning of the story he had never paid enough attention to see the things he ought to have been compassionate about. He only knew that the poor go to the poorhouse, and it runs on his tax money; for all he could see, it amounts to "poor people steal my taxes, so I shouldn't give them more." He never thought of the shame that those poor men felt in being reduced to a leech, that they would deprive themselves of that aid by pride and in so doing need personal charity all the more. Once Scrooge saw all of this, he was happy to donate. An Evil man wouldn't care.

Nope. "Fruit of the poison tree" and the fact that cops require a warrant are common knowledge.

The people rioting were black. If you were American, you'd understand I wasn't including them. One can't include them as an example for anything but their own behavior. You have Americans, and then others who live here.

>Everyone knows X
>Let me arbitrarily exclude 44% of the country from "everyone"

>Modern Paladins go full circle.

Cant wait for a sequel

He's right though.

>Blacks consider themselves "African American."
>Latinos are "Latinos."
>Asians are whatever flavor of Asain they are.
>Only white people consider themselves American.

America never has, nor will be a "melting pot." It's always been a collection of distinct cultural groups vying for control. With only white people having the audacity to give up their cultural identities for the sake of patriotism.

African American is an american culture, it's a term for Americans of uncertain African heritage. I mean, if you scrapped the African american parts of the american cultural landscape, a lot of your music would be a barren wasteland with nashville still there.

The sheer number of Americans who are incredibly proud of being Irish also rather puts a lie to 'White people give up cultural identity'.

They would be very angry and on the verge of burnout

>trading in their plate armor for business suits
Why would they trade in one of their cooler points for a piece of shit?

>unjust bureaucracies
Tautology.

It is the duty of those with power to maintain their power and not let it fall to the hands of the peasants and those would use their misguided morals to do "good" with that power. Power belongs to the strong, and the weak should be crushed. This is justice.

>lawful evil governments actually believe this

>African American is an american culture
It's a culture within America, yes, but its interactions are incestuous. Only blacks are permitted to engage in black culture. Music is surface-level shit and bringing it, along with the once-a-year Irish, up as though it matters exposes you as someone who thinks culture consists of food, music, and funny clothes.

Culture is a collection of views and attitudes on all aspects of life. The black view of things is that they are a group unto themselves. The white (liberal middle-class) view of things is that Americans are Americans, regardless of color. The upshot is that whites make concessions for social unity which the black community applauds, embraces, and completely fails to reciprocate, because they simply don't consider the whites to be "their people."

>Music is surface-level shit and bringing it, along with the once-a-year Irish, up as though it matters exposes you as someone who thinks culture consists of food, music, and funny clothes.

That is a pretty big part of culture, yes.

>Culture is a collection of views and attitudes on all aspects of life.

But not even all 'White' people are part of the same culture by that logic. People in Georgia have very little culturally with people in California for example.

>African American is an american culture

No it isn't. It's an African American culture. While geopraphically in America, it is its own distinct culture. It has some exchange between American culture, like music, but isn't really apart of it. By their own choice mind you.

>Irish
When push comes to shove, every group steps in line with their ethnic group.
Blacks with Blacks.
Latinos with Latinos.
Whites with Whites.

The Irish have been pushed into the fold with every other white ethnic group. Because that's how the other cultures see them, as white rather than Irish. Also just because St. Patriks day exists doesn't mean there is a large Irish cultural presence anymore.

>Also just because St. Patriks day exists doesn't mean there is a large Irish cultural presence anymore.

The sheer amount of cash flowing to the IRA a couple of decades ago was a pretty big indication that there was a large irish cultural presence.

>By their own choice mind you.

I'm pretty sure a lot of it is the result of all that time you guys spent keeping white people and black people separated by law too. Doing that kinda causes groups to develop individually.

>People in Georgia have very little culturally with people in California for example.
They both have in common the only thing that's important. Every other cultural group excludes them and considers them white. Everyone has drawn lines in the sand, leaving whites on the outskirts, as the "other" to be feared and shamed.

>you guys
This is my point exactly. You are never an individual, you are lumped into a group.

>That is a pretty big part of culture, yes.
It is literally negligible.

I wasn't alive then, don't lump me in with those old and dead assholes.

>You are never an individual, you are lumped into a group.

Yeah but the point was that you were saying it was due the choices of the black community and discounting the significant amount of time when it was literally law to keep the two groups separated as a major contributing factor.

This reminds me of the time some chick at college tried to use the "your ancestors kept people like them as slaves, don't you think you owe them something?" line on me, and was completely dumbfounded when I informed her that my family came over in 1910, no one in my family tree has ever owned slaves, and that assuming they had based on the color of my skin was racist.

Somehow I still ended up being the racist one, in her view.

There has been two to three generations since then,and Blacks still hold it against the Whites. This is by their own choice to hold grudges. They judge all Whites, regardless of ethnicity, by the sins of *some* of their fathers.

>You are never an individual, you are lumped into a group.
Only if you allow similarities to define you. We are not what makes us similar, but what makes us different. Those who cling to being like others as a form of self are weak and inhuman.

Mind you in this case it's kinda relevant, as it's a serious societal factor contributing to the development of separate cultures within america. As when two groups are separated, they develop separately and it makes later integration rather difficult. It's just in this case someone is going 'I wasn't personally involved in that!' to 'White Americans contributed to the societal divide'.

>There has been two to three generations since then

It's not about blame, it's about cultures developing separately to each other. They are growing closer (the crosspollination of music is an example of it) but it's not a quick process and will likely take more generations.

You're confusing a couple different issues. Segregation didn't do anything to culture because at no point now or then did the black community want to become part of the white community. They simply wanted to use the same facilities and amenities that everybody else did, while remaining their own group. The blacks who actually were in favor of integration were labeled Uncle Toms and thrown out of the black community, because the black community considers itself exclusive to other cultures.

>music is negligible
user, music is a direct product of culture, and varies due to it.
Saying it is minor is foolishness of magnitude.

You can not define yourself to the group, the group defines you.

>then did the black community want to become part of the white community

Shouldn't both cultures want to become part of a hypothetical third culture that includes both of them? 'White American' culture is a mix of a whole heap of groups that settled there.

>user, music is a direct product of culture, and varies due to it.

I mean, to go to one of the goofiest examples: Rap and Country Music are starting to overlap these days despite one being 'black music' and one being 'white music' due to shared loves. You know, the theoretical love of speaking about the experiences of the poor and the more accurate love of sexy women, fast cars and alcohol.

Heck, Johnny Cash was originally seen as 'Too black' for Country music.

>They are growing closer

You say this while there are riots in the streets and police are being murdered in cold blood. The divide has never been larger since the time of slavery. Entire towns are being divided into spheres of influence and culture. All one has to do is look at Detroit or Chicago to see the cultural warfare taking place in America.

>Shouldn't both cultures want to become part of a hypothetical third culture that includes both of them?

Whites actively seek this out, Blacks do not. Black culture views integration as treason, and members as "Uncle Toms" or "Oreos." It is similar with Latino and Asian cultures as well, but only Black culture really enforces this today.

Country music and rockabilly have always had elements of soul, gospel, r&b and rock in them, most of which is attributed to black culture.

Exactly. Music is the product of culture; culture is not the product of music. Music is a mirror, and it's always better to ignore the mirror in favor of direct examination.

Which is interesting since black culture has always held whites as an ideal (Good hair and eyes for example) but publicly disparages them.

>culture is not the product of music.

Music popularizes culture. It is the disease vector by which it spreads.

>Music popularizes culture
Only really applies to music that is exported, such as hip hop, k/jpop and the like.
Did jazz popularize culture? Classical?

>the group defines you.
Not possible. I am only myself, no matter what similarities I have to others. I see myself relatively and not objectively.

>Did jazz popularize culture?

Jazz helped popularize the drug, club, and social drinking cultures in America.

How you see yourself doesn't matter. You will be treated as others see you, and you treat others as you see them.

I always see others as individuals. If I like someone personally, they are good. If not, they are neutral to me. If they go out of their way to bother me, they are bad. Nothing else matters. I am aware that people are treated according to groups, thus I make sure to always be aware if my own actions toward others. I question whether I treat someone as an individual or a placeholder for a group, and whether I act because I dislike others like them or because they are actually, individually, against my own personal liking. I can't control what other people do, but what they see and believe does not determine reality.

Yet it is your relative image towards others that is truely important. Social competency is built on social proof, and social proof is built upon social approval. Thereby competency is needed for self esteem, self worth, and self image.

But I don't base my self image upon society, in fact, society and I are completely estranged.

>I don't base my self image upon society
>society and I are completely estranged.

This is related I assure you.

You are all a bunch of gringos splitting hairs, is not like the ghetto nigga, the ancap cletus or the new york thug are any nicer with strangers than each other.

But I agree, compared to latin america you guys up north don't really get to be called a melting pot. Except the big cities, those are quite cosmopolitan.

Is not that latinos see embracing american culture as a bad thing, it is that we see our children LOSING their cultural ties with latin america as a bad thing. As did the irish back in the day, as did the germans back in the day, as did the italians back in the day...

It's funny you mention that because Latinos are integrating more than ever. Just like the Irish, etc.

>another thread derailed by /pol/shit
I came for office ladies dammit, not some 14 year old's rants about how minorities ruin everything.

Black people will integrate too, and the simple truth to it is called wealth. Get wealthy enough, send your children to a good school, get out of the neighborhood more often, and integration begins to happen just like that. The problem of this is that the ones who don't make it will be the poorest and possibly the more disfunctional; they will form their own ghettos and make a bad name for everyone else.

The latinos integrate so well because they know the american dream, and go there fully expecting to embrace it. Marrying an american, buying a house there, and learning to live? All acceptable (and even cherished) goals.

In contrasts, groups of people who go to a country expecting to make their little town there, and only want to marry with people from the old country, those last longer to integrate.

This.

>Look ladies, it's another naïve little boy that doesn't realize business and politics are two sides of the same coin
>How cute, I bet he actually thinks we can build a wall!
>What will you do when cheap labor from abroad crashes wages and makes you unemployable?
>Don't fret, I can always offer you an unpaid internship. Look at it from the bright side: you'll get to practice your oral expression a lot.

>[ACCEPT UNPAID INTERNSHIP (Bad End)]
>[VISIT THE TINFOIL HAT WEARING BLONDE GIRL WHO LIVES ON THE EDGE OF TOWN]
>[YELL "Fake News!"]

Actually the Germans integrated exceptionally quickly. They're the largest ethnic group in the nation, but you'd never guess it from people's behavior.

If you're going to run a guerilla quest, at least try to make it entertaining.

You mean sexy CEO villains and a tinfoil hat wearing companion who's actually right about a global conspiracy for once aren't entertaining?

Alright, I'll listen. How would you make it more entertaining? What would you change about the set-up?

I wasn't even trying to run a quest just a one post joke with VN-like options to progress the story, don't ban me.

[X] >[VISIT THE TINFOIL HAT WEARING BLONDE GIRL WHO LIVES ON THE EDGE OF TOWN]

Everytime you post, you keep demonstrating that you're not American, which wasy first point. First, blacks are only around 13% of the population.

And while they live here, they aren't really Americans. They live here. They take our tax dollars. That's about it. On a cultural level, they do their own thing and to day the average American doesn't understand the 4th amendment it consider it a fairly common legal issue because the black population doesn't get it is laughable.

Right, because Obama and La Raza demonstrate how well rich blacks and average Latinos integrate instead of advocating their own interests at the expense of the country. Damn, you morons are blind.

You sir are despicable, and part of me wishes that you get everything you want and more, at a national level. But real people would suffer for it, so I'll keep trying to make your people understand that there's no quarter given to neo-fascism instead.

Or maybe I should stop helping you derail a thread. Yes, let's go with that.

Any idea wether being "pure, unending, abominable evil" is a punishable offense? Because what's the point of detecting evil if the morality of the acused is not being judged in the court?

Likewise, a good person can be perfectly guilty of a crime, and it would be the paladin's job to see that justice is being carried regardless.

I hope there is eventually a sequel or a good series, I took my dad who was a massive fan of the comics when he was younger to go see it and we had a blast

>you sir
>nationalist=facist

Not him, but back to plebbit, faggot

Smite Evil -> Smite Red Tape
Immunity to fear -> Immunity to Boredom
Lay on Hands -> Sign Paperwork With a Touch
Immunity to Disease and Poison -> Immunity to Euphemisms
Cha Bonus to Saving Throws -> Cha Bonus to Skills Keyed to Int (reading paperwork, knowledge (law), etc).

Class Skills:
Intimidate, Diplomacy, Knowledge (Law), Profession (Lawyer), Performace (Rhetoric), Ride (Car), Sense Motive, Bluff.

>[ACCEPT UNPAID INTERNSHIP (Bad End)]
>[VISIT THE TINFOIL HAT WEARING BLONDE GIRL WHO LIVES ON THE EDGE OF TOWN]
These are both really tempting. How can I honestly choose between my fetish for christmas cake office ladies, and my fetish for /pol/ aryan qts?

>no Cha bonus to Will
You just want them to get mindbroken, don't you?

Those are not 3.X skills, you goober.

...

>Immunity to Euphemisms
Does this means they don't hear euphemisms or see right through them? It makes a big difference for flirting.
It means the difference between "wanna come in for some coffee?" and "I'd like to stick my penis inside your vagina with your consent to cause mutual pleasure through friction of our most sensitive organs, potentially as a prelude to a long lasting relationship".

Business suits fit magic users way better than paladins.

>One of the OL in my Christmas Cake folder is a magic user
Please elaborate.

I was thinking of the latter