Posted by Pendragon_Surtr on December 17, 1999 at 19:06:49:
In Reply to: However... posted by Proud Blade on December 17, 1999 at 19:00:03:
> The Paladin was forced into a choice between two mutually exclusive options... > 1) Loot the bastard. He is clearly committed to evil, and allowing him armor and weapons only promotes his ability to bring further pain and suffering to the innocent. The "Good" action is to prevent this. > 2) Respect the Law and stand aside. While it is undesirable for him to get all that nice stuff, one must respect society's laws in order for it to function. Stooping to looting compromises this faith in the justice of a system of laws. > The Paladin is Lawful Good. Here is a situation where (in my opinion) you cannot do both. The paladin was forced to choose, and (in my view) as a Maran he did what he had to do to stop the flow of evil into Thera. He chose Good over Lawful in this particular situation. Does that make him Neutral Good? I don't think so, but the basic problem is that there are only nine alignments, and this guy's tendencies (lawful GOOD) aren't possible in the current code. So long as he is consistent about it, and can explain himself when asked about it, more power to him. Looting would be the "good" thing to do, but is allowing him to keep his things an "evil" act? I don't believe it is. Where letting him keep his things is "lawful" and taking his things is "unlawful".
The difference being, leaving the eq would not be in direct opposition of his alignment, but taking it is in direct opposition of his ethos.