Narrated D&D Story: Assassin Makes The Paladin Question His Morals With A Single Phrase
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 08. 2024
- So who is right according to you?
Thumbnail Art: bit.ly/Paladin...
Story Source (by Ben, ATD Reddit): bit.ly/Paladin...
Feel free to send us your stories here: team@allthingsdnd.com or post it directly on our website or on our subreddit r/AllThingsDND.
Make sure to subscribe to our channel for more amazing Dungeons & Dragons content! Also, follow us on internet on other channels here:-
Website: www.allthingsd...
Facebook Page: / ytallthingsdnd
Facebook Group: / allthingsdnd
Discord: / discord
Watch how I performed a murderhoboectomy on my dnd party here:
• Narrated D&D Story: Ho...
Meet Grunkalina, 1st of her name, hater of ideas & mother of destroying games here:
• Narrated D&D Story: Me...
Credits-
Video Editor: Murtaza Bohari (msurtaza77@gmail.com)
Editors: Lonny Foran (written4reddit@gmail.com)
Narration: MyLo (Twitter/VoMylo)
Thumbnail Art & Channel Artwork: CJ Downing (carljdown@gmail.com)
Background Music: 'Sleep' by Stephen Keech (Licensed with Soundstripe)
Stay tuned for more awesome D&D content!
#DnDStories #DnD #DungeonsAndDragons
"Would you kill us for the right price?"
"I don't know, would you kill us for the right deity?"
god is god lol
But Gods are real and have an actual purpose 🤷♂️
McGreyjoy same for money lol
@@pianoanime3462 Money doesn't protect your soul does it? The nine hells aren't that fun
McGreyjoy lmao 😂 money can buy you something that could protect your soul though at least in dnd and if the dm allows it. Plus, who’s to say the god cares enough to even protect your soul? You’re either a tool or a toy to them unless you’re an aasimar and even then. Money won’t stab you in the back and with money you can always say no. A god might not give you an option to choose.
Title: “Assassin makes Paladin question his morals with ONE phrase...”
Me: (10 minutes in)...
The phrase was probably something along the lines of "We're not so different, you and I." This picks up right after the phrase is said.
@@lincalmighty I think the Paladin didn't question her morals until the very end. Good story, but I feel a little click-baited by the title :D
@@lincalmighty The title could also be referring to what the assassin said at 12:56 when he pulled the gold coin out. "For this."
I think it’s worth it to hear the story
yeah but we dont know what was in the letter....soooooooo.... and..reaaaally???
It's those last words:
"Goodnight.... Valeria."
They resonate like crazy. It shows where exactly his loyalties lie, and the fact he is attached to the party members. It's like he said, while they are part of a team, trust is paramount. He may have miffed her off, but he spared her feelings, her beliefs.
I wouldnt have had the restraint. i would have handed her the letter
it also shows he likes her, earlier he says something like i don't use names in case i get attached, the fact that he did means hes gonna stick around.
@@tzimiscelord8483 she would most likely presume that the letter is fake, and that the assassin wrote it to mess with her.
Me, too.
Juan Rivera that’s probably one of the few reasons he isn’t going to show it to them
My heart dropped when I heard the bit about him hiding a crudely written letter in his pocket.
Just... damn...
The Goblins: 🥺
I don't understand. Can I get backup?
@@lorrainei i think its implying that Inanis was apart of the group of people who killed the goblins.
@@fuckinhateryan oh noooooooo
@@lorrainei Because it was his party that killed the Goblins, who cut their ears and stuffed them into a bloody sack, As prooved by the Paladin becoming defensive. And he found the letter that was for an alliance, the one that was going to be delivered just before they were murdered.
An assassin that feels guilt when killing innocents, even if they’re goblins. Inanis seems interesting.
You presume much. He never said he felt guilt.
He at least gave them consideration. Paladins most likely will never. Not even consideration.
Basic recognition is miles above what most players give. An assassin kills people, which means he at least knows those he kills are people.
I think I'd enjoy playing with that kind of player
He reminds me of Durzo Blint
I personally find it interesting how the Assassin hid something from the party in order to spare their feelings, since they'd be devastated if they found the note while he would be able to shoulder the revelation.
He may not let it on but it is obvious to me that the Assassin does care for them.
Hence why he said her name at the end.
Might also be used as leverage next time the paladin decides to try preaching about her moral high ground. He can just refresh her memory on telling her this story, then pull out the note and drop a bombshell on her ego.
The only response as a paladin of a good god to that would be to repent, remember, and try not to repeat it.
Perhaps but it is as he said before. The party have roles to fulfill. The current party has just not fulfilled those roles yet.
@@mjr8888 This comment hit me like a fist. Didn't even notice.
For some reason, this reminds me of a line from Rurouni Kenshin.
"The art of swordsmanship is the art of murder. No amount of ornamental words will change that."
-Seijuro Hiko
Kenshin said somerthing similar in the first episode or so. "A sword is a weapon. The art of swordsmanship is learning how to kill."
The lie of the murderer is calling all killing 'murder'.
But to tell you the truth, I much prefer Miss Kouru's sweet and innocent talk to the truth, Indeed I do.
“Single phrase”
“14 minutes long”
*Something ain’t adding up chief*
You presume much, Jack.
Yeah,tittle kinda misleading,even IF the phrase was a specific one some 5 minutes into the video
its not misleading they just left the phrase out of the beginning
it probably went something like
Paladin: "We did a great job killing those goblins we did something that actually helped people instead of stabbing someone in the back for coin"
Rogue: "Y'know, we're not so different you and I"
Video start
@@SkyBoxGaming Sure,I can see that.
Context is a lovely thing.
It's very dangerous to assume that just because you're righteous, that you're always right.
Yup, a real paladin must be aware they will mess up at some point, and that everything isn't black and white, they must remember to repent, remember, and try not to repeat, otherwise they will become just as bad as the things they seek to destroy.
I agree it's very dangerous and blinding.
"The closer you get to the light, the greater your shadow becomes.
There is a reason that he keeps saying 'you presume much' so often.
@@catandrobbyflores That is the only line I remember from Kingdom Hearts.
The edgelord who sits in the dark corner of the tavern vs the "Lawful Good Paladin means I can do no wrong".
Lmao yes
Except this time its an edgelord who knows how to talk back decently.
And is far more caring for the mental health of others than is healthy for him.
Does this guy even count as an edge Lord when he’s not even trying to do this shit to be “cool” or “different” ?
Nah, he's playing an assassin. Him being hardened isn't edge, it's practical. Now it is a fine line to toe, but this guy didn't seem like he was doing it to try and come off as "cool".
"How can you sleep soundly at night with all of the terrible things you have done?"
"Because, Paladin, we've done them together."
Alternatively:
“Because, Paladin, it rustles your jimmies.”
This is so dumb. It's tiresome when edgelord assassins try to insist on having the moral high ground in scenarios which boil down to "This is just a game, and the DM set us up to fight goblins. You're going to pretend to care NOW, with this one goblin, and not the 100 innocent shopkeeps you murdered just to wear their underwear on your head?"
"How can you sleep soundly at night with all of the terrible things you have done?"
"Don't act like you wouldn't do horrible things if you were simply given the right excuse. I'm just more honest about it."
Not necessarily. She and the party was working under the information that the town was being terrorized by these goblins, and it was clear that lives were lost. Clearly they were on both sides, but for the people they didn't know why. Goblins have a reputation of being very combative but the reason they were competitive is something that is explained in this story, but the townspeople wouldn't know. They did not know that the goblin was surrendering. The difference here is the motive she went with the intention of defending the town and ending a long-standing threat that is the goblins from attacking the town. The Assassin went after the goblins with a coin that was offered as a reward. And therein lies the distinct difference in their nature that ended in the same result. They are very similar, but at the same time it's different. The Assassin is looking on the outcome of the action, while the Palatine is focused on the intention of the action. These are two different branches of philosophy
@@Red_Devil_2011you're kind of not smart enough to get the nuance, and that's okay. This isn't the edge of Lord trying to have a moral high ground, this was the edge Lord putting them on the same playing field. They have different philosophies on life that result in the same outcome. And regardless of their intention he is right and that they are very similar despite their very different motives for doing what they do.
The assassin seems morally better off since he at least admits that he's done evil things and almost sounds like he's trying to atone for it with his story.
Meanwhile the paladin comes from privilege and is in denial about who they are and even their own actions.
How do you know that the Paladin is priveliged?
@@pn2294 they outright mention that she comes from a well off family…
@@marcialhd Exactly. Inanis outright stated that Valeria *chose* the life of a Paladin when her privileged upbringing gave her many other options that didn't involve killing as part of the profession. Inanis at least understands what he is and doesn't shy away from it, while the Paladin zealotry leaves her blind to her own hypocrisy. Inanis does what he must in order to survive, Valeria does what she does out of blind faith and zealotry. Inanis may not be some paragon or morality, but at least he's not a hypocrite like Valeria.
"Be it battle swinging steel and spells flying, or a silent blade in the rib-cage while he sleeps. Dead is Dead." .......He's not wrong
A knife in the dark is worth a hundred swords at dawn.
I'd rather die in my sleep, unaware of the threat.
Less stressful that way.
@@thefracturedbutwhole5475 Very true and can save alot of lives.........or make it worse depending
@@thefracturedbutwhole5475 Damn, nice quote :D
real-life warriors tend to agree.
Here's a quote. "Many who live deserve death. Many who die deserve life. Can you give them that?" Gandalf
*"can you give it to them"
the high level cleric looks up, quirking an eyebrow, "Yes, I can."
@@ramspite "So can i..." Says the necromancer who got too drunk to realise he's not talking to himself.
"Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement." said Gandalf
For those who have died are kept alive in the minds and souls they left behind.
"It's funny. Every crook I meet wants to tell me how much I'm just like them."
- Edward Elric to Psiren, Fullmetal Alchemist
Just a simple human, one who couldn't save a little girl, not even with alchemy.....
@@crimsonwizahd2358 Believe me, Edward is NOTHING like Psiren, nor is he like any of the crooks he has met.
Seriously, why do bad guys always make the dumb speeches?
Because writers think it makes their story deep
@@briancorvello3620 It's because such villains can only see themselves and think that everyone else is just as twisted, warped and amoral as they are and so they think they can appeal to a "common intest" that isn't them: because such ilk legitimately can't conceive of anything outside of themselves and their paradigm. Some might even think those who may even rebuke them are either merely playing games and are really the same monsters as they are or alternatively they think others may be monsters in denial.
@@brano13177 Uhm... True.
this reminds me of two characters I'm currently playing, so here's a quote from both of them:
"One of the things mercenary life taught me, is that it doesn't care who you are. When you accept a job, the only thing that matters is integrity, morality is off the table. I've been in sieges, exterminations, escort jobs... and in all of these I fought and killed people that could have easily been fighting alongside me if they hadn't taken a job from the other side. people like me... hell maybe that had it even worse than me. You want morality to be a factor in your career? Do that before you say yes."
- Varnael, elven mercenary (NG Fighter), talking to her new recruits.
"You knife-ears are all alike, claiming to be righteously defending your lands from 'the invading outsiders' but let me tell you something, I live on the roads and you know what I see? caravans, mercenaries, refugees... dead with arrows on their throats, their bodies strung up as warnings. I don't live a proud life, I scavenge whatever I can from scenes like these to make a living, but you're no better than me. In fact, you may be worse, seeing as you're not aware of what you are."
- Snandor Grimhide, dwarf scanvenger (LN Ranger), to his wild elf captors.
What self-righteous cringe.
For the first one: how is callous murder-for-hire the moral high ground? Just sounds like another lazy nihilist.
For the second one: "Um, no, mr dwarf, I don't think you heard us. We 'knife ears' just wanted you invaders to fark off, but you came anyway. So we fought you off with our big meanie arrows. Your scavenging is not the same as our national defense, to the degree where this point you're trying to make is trite and useless. ...Now we're going to deport you, unless you want to bitch again about arrows, to which you will get them."
“The greatest sin of all kind is the sin of ignorance. To ignorantly rush in to a battle without preparation; to ignorantly slaughter with regards to nothing but the kill; to ignorantly proclaim yourself a champion of your chosen path; and finally, upon learning a horrid truth, to ignorantly proclaim oneself innocent of their deeds. Truly, no sin can be greater than this, no truth to cut as deep as these words: be not ignorant, be mindful and vigilant”
A line my rogue learned years ago and follows to this very day
Suddenly everyone is all philosophical. "I kill people for money." Is good enough for me.
@@ShiningDarknes their point is precisely this: people (namely Valeria, the Paladin) are acting full of shit and honestly but ignorantly believing there is not a single piece of shit to be acting full of.
The goblins were already hostile. They hadn't offered peace yet and their rep was too late.
Shining Darkness that’s more or less something that all rogues who follow sehanine follow my guy.
Hugo Fontes So what?
What good is guilt if it doesn’t deter your actions?
I like that "as long as it is effective" assassin type so much. One reason why blade to the sleeping target from shadows would be morally superior would be that it doesn't need to involve others. Say you are going against evil leader of country. It is unlikely that all the people of that country would be evil. So neither would all who fight for the evil leaders behalf be evil. So why kill thousands, some evil, some not, just to face the evil when you could take the not honorable route and kill just the one behind the problems and be done with it. Isn't the assassination well done the option that minimizes the suffering of unrelated and because of that, also the most moral option, even if you have to sacrifice your personal morals to be effective with your means?
Wouldn't it be nice if Wars could be fought by the assholes who start them
Additionally, you may also consider the pain of death. Which is more correct: quick, or prolonged?
Indeed, the one thing people often forget and some seem clearly incapable of grasping is that sometimes sacrificing personal morality is the only moral thing to do
Merlin has both of those depending on the situation and what would be more effective in either execution or end results or secrecy
Should give it a go
Morality vs Ethics. At its core, a paladin exists on account of a code of behavior designed to support a system of behavior which they are meant to be champions of. The demonstration of the limitations is meant to be something which others can trust; war to follow rules for the good of all, and law to prevent everyone from murdering others whenever something "seems moral". The idea is that if you allow paladins and their hierarchies to impose order then the world can be civilized and authorities are to be trusted with judgments and punishments.
Something similar happened to me on my second DnD character, coincidentally also with Paladin named Valeria. Bandits, having raided and pillaged a nearby town. We were hired to find them and exact justice. We found them camped nearby, about a day's journey from the town. We stole upon them in their sleep. They never stood a chance. Only after did we learn that they're leader, who'd been orchestrating the raids, was prepping some manner of ritual, with the raids intended to collect material components. These poor sods had grown disenchanted with their cultish leader and were trying to return the stolen goods to the town and warn of the impending danger. Always investigate, and always use the pen before resorting to the sword.
If i was playing the Assassin and the Paladin asked me how i can sleep at night with all the terrible things that i've done, i would have probably thrown the letter on the table and walked away, saying "Good night Paladin. Sleep tight"...
The paladin then returns the next day handing the letter back to the rogue "You don't understand the difference between murder and manslaughter."
Paladin: "How can you sleep without a problem after everything you have done?!"
Assasin: "I don't.... I never did"
Yo, that feeling of the assasin having more humanity than the paladin just makes me want to reedo all my paladins.
to be fair this paladin sucked quite a bit.
"I don't need to justify my actions to myself in order to sleep at night.... That is what my drinks are for."
I always thought one should like a Paladin as if he was "The Man called Paladin" from _Have Gun, Will Travel_
A man who tries words before using Weapons
A man willing to admit to a mistake or being wrong
A man willing to kill one man so another may have his day in court
@@railbaron1 playing a paladin is tricky. You should always proffer your hand before your sword. Sometimes that isnt an option, usually with bandits or demons or undead.
But against a sentient speaking species, you should strive some way to communicate to them that what they are doing is wrong and that they should attempt to seek redemption, otherwise they should be ready to defend themselves.
Obviously this often conflicts with characters like Rogues/assassins and et-cetera in your party because they are stealthy, and prefer not to have eyes on them. But thats why you as the paladin must work with the party. Maybe convince them to fight nonlethally if your goal is to kill as little as possible.
Alternatively pick a deity that is a little more lax and allows you to be fast and loose when it comes to dolling out justice. Personally I prefer Bah'mut, he's a very clear straight forward Deity of protection
@@rubyeyes1664 I disagree. Even if it's stereotypical, it can be a lot of fun for characters of dubious morality to have a Naive paladin to play off of. Hell, this whole exchange only got to play out BECAUSE the paladin is such a stick in the mud. As long as everyone's enjoying the rp, I say go whole hog.
“You’re a warrior, a professional soldier and killer, no matter who’s banner you march under or for what cause you claim to justify your deeds. You say you kill for honor, justice and glory, yet in practice you are no different than I. Just another killer for hire. All knights, no matter how shining and well polished the armor, no matter the airs and pageantry, no matter how seemingly pure and just, are ultimately no more than murderers with a fancy title and good press. The only real difference between us is that I am honest about what I am and what I do, both to myself and to others.”
-Amon Zehirim, my oddly philosophical and warrior-poet style NE assassin speaking to our group’s stereotypical, zealotous and miopic LG paladin.
An amazing quote to remember
Wow this is good.
Intent is nine tenths of the law ;)
Yeah I dont think it absolutely works in this case
Wow that's one hellova quote. Almost Heath Ledger Joker levels of good.
Inanis is awesome. Well developed character, and in this case correct.
My main character is a Chaotic neutral ( good) ranger rogue. He would definitely prefer Inanis over the paladin. Results are results after all.
“We are not the same, I’m a soldier, and you’re a serial killer who takes credit cards!”
Thought this quote fit well but I gotta say I side with the rogue on this one
I feel like a good response would probably be.
"Why does it matter how they die if we're both getting paid to kill people?"
Counterargument: “You are right. You are a showboating nonce who galavants and wades through conscripts and young men who had no choice but to join the enemy and do nothing to end the war, I down key targets and commanders, potentially ending wars faster. We aren’t the same, indeed.”
"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things."
-Winston Churchill, British statesman
Well, that's an ironic statement coming from him.
Story: *about two party members fighting*
Me: *favorite character is the story within the story character which is Hechik the Goblin*
I kinda want to make Hechik and play him. Or use him as an NPC. Amazing!
Jig Dragonslayer is best Gobin
Reminds me of Nojheim.
The sad part is he does not sleep at night. The dam knight just blind
Then you should check out the tale of Drizzt Do'Urden if you haven't already. Similar circumstance, much different outcome.
I somehow thought the end of the story would be something like this:
P: “how can you sleep at night...”
R: “I can’t because I consider the possibility that I have done many wrong things. Things that haunt me each day.”
After a pause he continues turning around at the doorstep
R: “Maybe you should think about why you can sleep like an angel, Paladin.”
O,ay this one was a fucking banger.
I think the single phrase comes at the end, when he uses Valeria's name. Especially after saying he doesn't use names for a reason.
I also believe, at least from this brief view of a campaign, that this is a healthy explanation and introduction to motives, morality, and character direction. Which is important.
My second belief I'm drawing from this, which could be accidental in accomplishment, is reinforcing the 'pcs don't kill pcs' gentle people's rule.
I can already picture him revealing the letter, and her potential, and slightly passable justification
P: "You hid this?! I should kill you where you stand! You had the choice to act upon what you knew, and did nothing! I would never have done this, had I had reason to reconsider."
R: "Reason to reconsider? We were not paid to thin a group of warriors. We were not paid to kill an ambitious chieftain or a shaman under the sway of a fiend. We were paid for an extermination, isn't that reason enough for the righteous to reconsider?"
HA! The problem with this logic is you are attempting to use IRL human logic in a game where there are LITERALLY OTHER RACES, some of which are by their very nature a danger to the other races. Orcs and Goblins are maybe not races that are inherently evil, but their cultures involve the slaughter and pillaging of all (including members of their own race) they do not fight you because you slighted them, they fight you because that is what they do. Who are you to deny them their culture? If they want a fight, fight them. If they didn't they'd have put a sign up.
Also the letter is preposterous, goblins don't read it goes against their beliefs, they think that written words steal your soul so they stick to nice safe pictures. As I said, if the goblins really wanted peace, they would have put up signs. Sure one goblin was trying to make peace, but who is to say the chieftain was not just being clever and allowing the strange goblin in his tribe to try to make "peace" with the humans so they might have an easier time raiding them when their guard. Just as one evil member of a race does not make the entire race evil, one good member does not make the entire race good. When there are decades, centuries, of conflict if one side does not react with peace when the other is violent the violence will only continue. Would the adventurers hired to slay the entire goblin village have done so had they been met with unarmed goblins that were not even trying to defend themselves? Would that have given them pause? Maybe. But they chose to instead behave the way they have always behaved, by fighting. It is all they know. That one good goblin would normally have been exiled or killed especially after he started writing. That one good goblin is how you get goblin adventurers. Good goblins are not part of goblin tribes, just as good orcs are not part of orc tribes. Same goes for Drow. Members of races that go against the cultural norms leave their cultures behind.
I feel it would have been more
R: "Reason to reconsider? The deed was done, Paladin. Once the blood is on your hands there is no taking it back without paying for it, and even if you could. There's no taking back the pain you put them through. After the slaughter, do you really believe that that one's plans would work, or that they would even be interested in them anymore? We killed them, we killed them for money. Could you forgive a person like that, even if they brought you back?"
The man has a point.
I assume he found the letter AFTER the goblin died, otherwise he probably wouldn't claim that they were alike :)
@@Micras08 most likely
"Assassin Tries To Make The Paladin Question His Morals During A 14 Minute Debate"
Yeah, I didn’t see where the “question of conscience” moment came to the Paladin from the Assassins words.
Yet, the Assassin could have saved himself the trouble by just simply saying:
“We are one in the same by both being ‘bounty hunters’ or ‘contract killers’... but where we differ greatly on are our morals, values, and perceived rewards.”
Gary Homanick The rule of cool required it to be spoken that way
"Her" morals. Yeah it was really more of a mic drop than anything.
... and fails miserably
@@dainslatton9877 why the quotes on "her"?
8:42 "We had to trust each other. To do otherwise, would be fatal."
And trust me, you don't want to play F.A.T.A.L
The reveal of the letter at the end definitely makes this “argument” feel a little one sided. I get the need for the Paladin’s Righteous personality, that kind of goes with the character. But in this scenario the Assassin is taking the role of someone who has hidden a great pain from someone who needs to believe she is without flaw. It’s also conflicting with the title of the video. Should say Assassin spares Paladin her beliefs or something to that effect. The argument is less of an argument and more of a stance on character morals. The Paladin never wavers in my opinion. This was a good vid though! Thoroughly enjoyed and I am definitely going to subscribe and watch the rest lol
Paladins are hard to waver. They kind of have to be. Their work is all about being unshakable in their resolve. Any weakness in their resolve may complicate their oath. It’s the main issue with Paladins that their greatest strength is almost always their greatest weakness as well. Perhaps Valeria seeing the grays without violating her resolve is part of her own journey.
I don’t expect Inanis’ talk to get through to Valeria in the first real talk, or possibly even the next five ones, but like the good person talking down an evil person from giving up their wicked ways, it takes effort, and in time, understanding.
“I’m gonna get a drink now, bye” most valid of responses to That
yeah i'll drink to that
"Cheers, I'll drink to that bro"
drinks on me all around
"You presume so much" has so much meaning behind it o.o Inanis feels like a rich character to develop, and see developing :3
I went through this trying to find the 'single phrase' that caused this to happen, but I couldn't find it. I was waiting for it at the end and the buildup was there but then it just kinda ended on implication than an actual phrase, which confused me.
While going through this I was expecting the assassin to eventually say something along the lines of, "The only difference between you and I is that I feel remorse for those that I kill." as that's what this whole thing seemed to be leading up to.
going into the link from the original story, it would seem the "single phrase" is that: "You presume much, paladin..."
Kinda misleading title if you ask me, but still a great story!
@@akannibrasil6633 honestly, the feeling I got from the story is the phrase was "we're not that different, Paladin." It was never outright stated, but from the initial reaction the Paladin had that phrase makes the most sense.
He said it at the end
He even reiterated by saying "like I said"
I think it might've been showing that gold coin, the reason as to why they killed the goblins in the mines. She claims she did it for the good of all. But she still got payed for it. He knew the truth, Ala the poorly written letter, didn't reveal it, and accepted the gold. They are more alike then she realizes.
> Everyone "Yes, the world is shades of grey!"
> Also Everyone: sides with the assassin.
Kind of pointless to ask who's right if this video does silently taking one side over the other.
I know he's cool and he has his reason, but pretend that a paladin is a witless asshole and potential murder just because she (or he) believes in something, is still believing in a black and white world, it is just our personal idea of black and white.
I prefere to listen to this and understand both of them, not just the coolest one.
Bruh why doesn't this have more likes
@@koikat3708 Because in the real world understanding both sides forces nobody to learn from their mistakes and leads to a zero sum gain towards a solution to the problem at hand. If two(or more) diametrically opposed sides are equal then there's deadlock. You either have to create a third(or more) option, or pick a side to achieve forward momentum once again. It's why we have leadership roles to prevent deadlock. It's why we have judges to make court rulings. The only way forward is to pick a side...for better or worse. Virtue signaling doesn't solve problems.
Goblins: let's make peace with humans
Also goblins: but we keep terrorizing human villages
Edgelords: Shadows of gray!
@@Kalakcha Human villages, you mean the guys that show up everywhere and take all the land and resources blathering about order and civilization? Gee, I wonder why anyone might rob those self-righteous bastards to live where their people were probably already living...
@@Endoptic i don't know, maybe a wandering goblin clan nested near a centuries old human city/village and they didn't even noticed untill cattle start disappearing, maybe terrorized settlers requested help from adventurers when the first child got eaten.
Even better, who said that that was a human only settlement? Maybe some elven families lived there since the gods of old walked the lands among mortals.
The point isn't who got there first, the point is that adventurers are fucking expensive and no one whould ever think about call adventurers when there's no real threat.
It's funny. Most of my characters have been paladins. And there have been cases of taking up bounties to clear out traditional "monsters" from an area. But the big thing is, my paladins almost always stop to consider accepting a sign of surrender. Even if the monster isn't speaking Common, you can tell by body language whether or not they want to continue fighting or were even aggressive to begin with.
There is more to being a paladin than just going around smiting enemies. Paladins are supposed to be diplomats, healers, and all around symbols of peace and comfort. It's a shame that so many people don't stop to think of the other roles a Paladin can fill outside of combat. A good paladin would welcome the chance to redeem someone who wishes to genuinely better their life. A good paladin would recognize the dichotomy between the noble savage and the savage noble.
True, but not everyone wants to play a good Paladin, in part because most people think of there being some kind of Objective morality, when in reality it's all down to circumstance, who wins and who looses, justification is merely motivation with a veneer of self-rightousness. It is the Hero's choice whether to value the lives of the victims or the Villains more, for equality of life would result in fighting for no one, or just playing the numbers game, which has it's own flaws (is it better for a group of bullies to kill a single person, than for that person to kill a group of bullies).
@@Neion8 That's more a condemnation of reality and maybe player mentality than anything else. The real world is a horrible place, as the George Floyd protests have shown. However, we still desire that we have this perfect world. One where there are genuine heroes that will save the day and prevent disaster.
And that is what the paladin class should be. The champions that show up in the darkest hour and give hope to the masses. Now, obviously paladins have their flaws, because they are mortal beings. The whole point of mortality is that we are imperfect. But learning to become better than what we were before is how we grow, how progress is made and how we make steps forward to an ideal world.
So when players try to bring reality into a fantasy game and how "there are no heroes", then what is the point of playing a fantasy game at that point? So we can fantasize about killing people with impunity and get away with it? Because honestly, that is a very depressing notion to me. I play fantasy games to be a genuine hero, the ones that we wish existed in real life. Even if there is grey and gray morality at play, that doesn't mean we have to forsake actually trying to be better than the world around us.
If anything, in a world of grey and gray morality, we should strive to be as good as we can. Because only then can a positive change be made. We see it in reality as well. We see acts of corruption and evil, hoping that someone will do something. And when somebody does do something about the wrongdoing of others, we have nothing but applause for these true heroes.
Granted, there will be those who criticize those heroes. Most likely because of politics or personal beliefs. But those types of people tend to be the ones who enable or even encourage the vile behaviour of bad apples of society. And those kinds of people are part of the problem, not the solution.
@@Neion8 The point of a paladin is that they choose to make their own objective morality through their oaths and attempt to force the world into that mold. They choose an oath and then conciously choose to say "this is my definition of right from now on" before going and being enforcers of those oaths. This is why the oaths are so important and why breaking them is such a big deal. A paladin would know that others might view slaughtering thousands of orcs who cant really fight back or allowing a lich a chance at redemption as wrong, but the orcs arent surrendering and the lich is, so, according to that paladins oath, it is 100% the right thing to do.
A paladin that ever questions their beliefs is on a very short, sharp slope down to Oathbreaker really, because theres nothing in the rules that says they have to get their powers from a god so they actually get their powers from the oath itself, and laws of reality tend to be more black and white than deities that have enough humanity for concepts like forgiveness.
Also not every paladin follows the same tenants, their is the Oath of Vengeance, Oath of Conquest. Not every paladin is made to be a symbol of peace some are of fear and death.
@@Small_Panda Those sound more like Antipaladins than Paladins. I very much prefer Pathfinder 1e, where alignment restrictions matter and the gods act as a restraining bolt against reckless behaviour. Pathfinder 1e also has their Oathbound Paladins, but they are archetypes and not what the base class is supposed to be. I particularly loathe the Oath Against the Wyrm. It's just an excuse to be racist against dragons and those with draconic heritage.
But if I continue down that train of thought, we'll just get another edition war. Suffice it to say, I believe in the more ideal and traditional depictions of Paladins than the more recent interpretations.
Assassin’s Patron: “Kill this man and I’ll reward you handsomely.”
Town’s Mayor; “Kill these creatures and I’ll reward you handsomely.”
Both operate under the impetus of removing an obstacle to their own aggrandizement and personal gain.
The Patron from having a business competitor removed.
The Mayor from having a goblin settlement that uses resources that “should belong to his own people”, regardless of right or true entitlement.
The Paladin allows the Assassin, the Bard, the Mage, to use their crafts to further her own goals without thought of consequence.
The Assassin accompanies the group for their collective talents and strengths and knows that though they may not share his motivations, they kill and loot the dead and claim bounties just as eagerly.
He does it with eyes open, seeing what is; She paints herself a pretty pretty princess of a picture and only calls things by names that do not evoke an imagery of the horror and violence that she creates by actions and inactions of her own two hands.
Truth. Is the same from both sides of the looking-glass.
Well, Technically the goblins have killed a lot of people before being killed. The noble could be setting policies to help the people in detrimental of the nobles. I think that neither as a rogue, a paladin or a druid, you shouldn't kill anybody who from your point of view doesnt deserve it. Sure, a thief can be a bad person, but he may not deserve death. Even if I were an assasin I wouldn't kill a 9 years old girl to help a noble to have sex with her corpse.
@@thefallendeathlord7690 An assassin can do just as much "good" as the paladin, the only difference is how they get there. The paladin will raise and army and go on a crusade to kill a tyrant, the assassin will observe, plot, plan, and then strike to kill the same tyrant and perhaps his family to ensure it doesn't happen again. Is the assassin good in this case in that fewer people had to die to kill the tyrant while the paladin raised and army of men who fight and died to do the same?
@@thefallendeathlord7690 A paladin does not get kill to based on the hearsay of others. They are required to instigate the situation and determine what justice demands just like they are forbidden from slaughtering a clan of goblins as this is not just or honorable. A paladin is required to obey their code/oath which usually demands justice, honor, mercy, and truth.
The paladin in this story was not acting as a paladin and should have fallen. A paladin does not slaughter the weak, shows mercy, and fights for justice through truth. This paladin demonstrated none of these qualities and acted as a paid killer committing genocide based on someones else's word. Then they show no respect for that they have slaughtered and defile their bodies by cutting off or allowing others to cut off the ears of their victims. This paladin acted as a mercenary and should consequently lose their status as they are no longer the pinnacle of virtue they are supposed to embody.
@@Nyghtking oh, I didnt mean that. I was just saying that your character should ever has a moral compass more important to him that the money, that acting entirely of the money without thinking if the thing you are doing is correct is worse than act as you thing you should act. As the example I gave, my character (Depends on the character but normally) wouldnt accept a contract that means setting fire to a orphanate even if the reward is astronomically high. I personally dont care about the class, and I even prefer to being a rogue than a paladin, I like the concept of killing without being noticed. I was talking about the motivations.
"you sleep rather soundly....for a murderer." -lucien lachance
"That's good; you'll need a clear conscience for what I am about to propose."
Assassin: gets paid in gold by someone more powerful to kill someone.
Paladin: gets paid in faith by something more powerful to kill something.
Paladins are just a more generic version of assassins.
A cheaper Assassin. You don't even have to pay them, just convince them someone is evil.
Soldiers: get paid in money by something more powerful to kill someone
Welp, guess the military's just full of assassins :O
@@mrmcawesome9746 Are you serious? It's hard to tell over the internet.
Tbf, Assassination doesn’t mean stealth ops, it is merely the act of killing with political reasoning and undertones.
Paladins get paid in holy magic and a good afterlife. Paladins are way more expensive than assassins.
Reminds me of a character I played once: a Paladin who was so fanatically devoted to his religion that he would often behave in surprisingly cruel ways and justify it with “God wills it”. Like jamming a dagger into a captured NPC’s hand to interrogate him. Spanish Inquisition much? The funny thing is, despite inflicting such evils upon his enemies, he truly believed that he was doing the right thing.
Yes, I played him mostly for the shock value. Not everyone who claims to be “lawful good” really is... Even if they believe they are. That’s a point I wanted to make.
I'd love to see a fanatical paladin with some curse that corrupted and brake it's faith everytime he kills and does 'bad' things, ending in the paladin's despair
It's lawful good, not lawful nice. I enjoy playing paladins that aren't an entirely paper-thin doll of armor and religious devotion. My most recent is a 5e Redemption of Sune who's already flirted with 1/2 the tavern they're staying at "in the name of spreading the warmth of love and acceptance both in outward appearance and action."
The thing about lawful good paladins is that they generally obey the letter of the law, but their piety often means they care very little for the laws of man when the laws of god are so readily available to them, I once knew a paladin who would always do the interrogations because "I do this to show you mercy, for the others will not be so kind"
Fanatics usually do.
Yeah, my guy was the “marching into hell while singing songs by Triarii” kind of fanatic. He did manage to convert every heretic he came across tho... at least, the ones he didn’t smite.
The paladin is much more dangerous than the assassin if you convince/deceive the paladin he will exterminate a village for no gold at all but the assasin will need gold for each person
Heck, he may just kill you because you clearly are an easier target and have lots of money.
@@doombybbr That's a bandit not an Assassin at that point
It would be easier to pay an assassin than it would be to convince a Paladin killing innocents was the right thing to do.
@@doombybbr it is isn't about how easy a target someone is, an assassin is hired to kill a specific target regardless of difficulty level because that is where the amount of gold comes in, a more powerful and hard to kill target requires more gold for the assassin.
Also, there is the matter of reputation, an assassin wouldn't get hired if they don't get results, like, for instance, ignoring their target and killing a random just for their gold.
you could convice a paladin that a village is evil
I want to know the full story of these characters' adventures. I want to know how the Paladin reacts when she finds out the truth, how she discovers it, see the relationship between the two of them grow. Also I love how he admitted his attachment to her with the use of her name, that was so sweet
as Slushi the blue fox has said before, "...Romance."
This whole interaction is stupid and ghae, despite being played off as some sort of big "own."
The assassin said that (religious) morals mean nothing if you're both playing mercenaries in a DnD game. Totally ignoring two contexts: one, maybe there ARE jobs which the paladin will refuse based on her code of honor, and this goblin case was just not one of them. Disproves nothing. And if the Paladin does not roleplay her code, then that is the player's fault, not the "religious morals" fault.
Secondly, goblin-killing for money is standard DnD fare. If you're going to subvert the genre like this, then why even play the game? Might as well subvert everything, like how a morally-conflicted knife-for-hire could even exist in a world where every single living goddamn creature could *potentially* be the *one exception* to wanting to live a no-strings-attached peaceful coexistence? Is this pretentious assassin questioning every ooze and drider that they encounter?
...Or can the party just play a game and kill some farking goblins without some empty moral posturing against the vaguely religious character?
For everyone asking what the single phrase mentioned in the title is, its "We are the same." Inanis said it about 5 seconds before the story starts.
honestly, I would've dropped the letter as I walked away. An amazing story like always can't wait for more.
Same here, but I honestly doubt the Paladian would believe it. That's what blind fanaticism and absolute faith in ideals gets you (that and magical SMITE powers in dnd)
Edit
How did this get 27 likes in 2 freaking days! Thank you to everyone who liked making this the most likes i've ever gotten.
I wonder if the assassin could find a way to have to have either the paladin or wizard use detect lie or something to prove the validity of his story
Yes, and as I walked away I would've said in a high class manner with a regal bow " you tell me palidan?"
@@thegrimstreaker4669 a true Tautological Templar if that's the case,she cannot comprehend something she does being unjust or evil because she is just and good or so she thinks, being indoctrinated to a cause for so long she finds it impossible to find any fault in it, and the same goes for actions done in it's name, even when presented with definitive proof otherwise because it's for her good and just cause
@@ranger3576 Can't Paladins prepare Zone of Truth?
"How do I know you're not going to accept a contract to kill us?"
"...How do I know you're not going to decide I'm too selfish and hateful for your opinion on what is 'good' and 'honorable' enough and 'righteously' kill me for the greater good?"
“I think you would know the answer to that question better than I would.”
My thoughts exactly! "How do I know you will not suddenly SMITE me For Teh Great Justice?"
Because they would probably challenge them to a duel rather than stabbing them in their sleep
@@timetraveler_from_2012 You... do realize you can *still be killed* in a duel even though you weren't stabbed in your sleep, right?
@@timetraveler_from_2012 Like, how can a duel of a 17+ Str, lots of HP character and 10-11 Str (heavily backstab-reliant for damage), few HP character be anything BUT a cold-blooded murder set up as a fair challenge?
Who's right aside, can we just take a minute to talk about how good was that RPing of the players ? Like wow, those punchlines and all, i would loooove to DM a party like that ^^
You're literaly me lmao
@@ventom13 Well, you're literaly my pocket account, so...
@@ventom672 lmaoooo you're literaly right
I LOVE this sort of moral questioning. Had something similar happen when I played an assassin. Ended up turning the paladin to the "mercenaries guild" but only for causes he agreed with. Was a great use of his skills :) hehehe.
His player was a good friend of mine and we both enjoyed how everything played out. We still laugh about it to this day :)
I think, it's not a question of who is in the right or wrong. Rather, it's an endearing tale of how the assassin is a better person than he wants to admit. The paladin's motivation was just; she had no way to know that the goblins were trying to change. And, assuming there isn't an absurd chain of lies going on, there was reason to kill goblins as they had been terrorizing the nearby village for years. A sudden, late, hidden change of heart doesn't make up for past crimes. Regardless of that though; knowing that they had killed someone trying to convert goblins and make progress in society would have sent the party into depression. The assassin could have shown them the letter and won his argument instantly; but he didn't. And this revealed that he actually did have some form of honor and kindness, even if the paladin couldn't see it.
underrated comment among the "cold-blooded assassin" and "killer in armor" type comments
Yes, This was less about who was (more) right than a demonstration they need each other in order to grow into better people.
The assassin sees the world with less clouded eyes, but lacks the drive and 'faith' that the world can be made to become different, better.
The Paladin has absolute faith in her 'righteous' path and does not doubt she makes the world 'better' every day, but she also blinded by this faith and so fails to see the blood she spills or consider the views of those who oppose her 'path'.
But he did rob the group of a growing moment, that would have likely made the Paladin more likely to seek out peacefull solutions in the future. Of course he would not have won the argument, as he'd still be wrong. maybe your right, or maybe the Paladins reaction would have shown him the truth he did not want to admit to himself, the he and her likely are more different than he'd like to admit.
@Rookmations Because she'd likely try to act differently in the future after learning this, while he likely won't, the fact that he hid the note is proof enough that he won't. Because she is motivated by trying to make it the world a better place, that means she will be more likely to try and act better in the future. Where as he is motivated by self gold, so why should it matter to him? That's the difference. Maybe I am wrong, maybe she is just a self rightious prick, but we'll never know that will we? That's the point I am making. Everyone is so quick to assume the worst of the Paladin, and quick to ascribe humanity to the Assassin, yet seen though the lens of my life experience I can't help but see the Assassin as the one being obstinant and self-rightious in this situation.
I will point out that it's normally the knife in the dark who spends all theri time justifying all the evil they have done, it's the people who accept the notion that morality is just a numbers game, and who abandon principle at a moment's notice who will commit atrocities in the name of the greater good. Don't you understand that his base argument is the very same argument that leads men to bomb civilians? Whatever get's the job done. The difference is principles, and trying to live better and act rightiously, rather than jumping at every excuse to take a moral shortcut to get what you want. The Assassin is every bit as blinded by his world view as the Paladin would be in the worst possible scenario, if not more so. He's the one making excuses.
I guess that’s why the assassin’s repeated comment was that the paladin keeps assuming and assuming and assuming. It may have been understandable for the paladin to be part of the party that killed the goblins, but to lack all humility whatsoever about her choices is the real character flaw.
This reminds me of a conversation between two paladins, one was mine and the other was another player who was my squire. I don't remember the exact words but I said something like this. "We can fight for honor, faith and justice ... but in the end we all fight and kill as assassins of our gods and ideals. Don't judge too hastily, because in the end we are all the same when our hands are forced. Pray to the gods that they show the way that does not lead to bloodshed and make their sword always the last option, since we are guardians of peace, not heralds of death."
Sorry if something sounds wrong, English is not my native language, but I think I show my point as a paladin player. xD
Well, the ideas of extending mercy and being a beacon of light or hope tend to be stark contrasts to assassins. If a Paladin is fulfilling their role-- granted that it's dependent in part on the Oath taken-- their primary purpose is to show a better path forward and pull people back from the brink of despair or destructive behavior. Assassins as a group tend to deny the chance for their victims to change paths in life.
Excuse me while I memorise that word for word and bring it up next time someone questions my own Paladin morals. This perfectly sums up how I play a Paladin.
@@Snugglequine you are wellcome ;)
I feel that both are very similar. The biggest reason why is that Valeria had a lot of pride in herself. Her argument against Inanis was that she would never stoop down to his level, which in fact she was already doing so when she believed that all of her actions are morally justified.
"Assassin makes paladin question his morals with a single statement". 14 minutes later, paladin still paladinning.
Should've ended with "You don't speak Goblin."
Everyone seems to be missing something here. Nobody is in the right here. The assassin is just trying to convey to the Paladin things aren't always black and white.
They were hired to clear out a marauding goblin village, which is pretty typical. Goblins as a race do not really do diplomacy beyond the "shotgun diplomacy" route. This is a common occurance. The goblin wanting to reach out and work with the village their tribe had been raiding for years is INCREDIBLY UNUSUAL for their species. The party and village was fully justified in clearing them out, especially if there had been a raid recently. They just happened to get there in the midst of changing tides.
The assassin found this out after the fact. They will likely not assault a goblin tribe without discretion after this, for the first time finding evidence that they are capable of diplomacy. The assassin wanted to teach the Paladin that same lesson....without breaking their resolve. Why not just be blunt with the paladin? Cause a Paladin draws their power from their faith and resolve in their oath. If the assassin just revealed the letter, that paladin would be shaken. Would probably lose levels, it would actively hurt them. The assassin knows this, and as we see at the end, they truly care for the paladin. And you don't hurt your friends.
No, one good goblin does not make all goblins good. Destroy them all. Same goes for orcs.
And no, in character there are no "levels," having a crisis of character does not cause you to lose power since you have to KNOWINGLY go against your oaths for that to happen.
@@ShiningDarknes Largely depends on the system and table. Paladins who have a crisis of faith could very well lose power for a time.
@@ShiningDarknes As stated by Zach. There is also the possibility that it could cause the character to have an alignment shift, and in certain editions that did come with penalties, big ones.
@@LazyZR12 No. This is not about just any system. This is about a D&D system. A crisis of faith happens AFTER a realization that they did something that violates their oath that at the time it not seem to. The rules are not there to be a dick to players and just let GMs strip players of hard-earned abilities. If it was so important then the GM should have been sending them "signals from their god" that maybe they shouldn't be doing what they were doing.
Don't be a dick yo players just because one player decides to employ some psych 101 to his character's views on how the world works. By the rules a paladin has to KNOWINGLY violate their oath. If they realize later that they did something they should not have a crisis of character should be rewarded, not punished. It shows character development, next time they will have to think more about what they are doing since now they DO know that maybe everything is not as it seems and since that thought is there they can no longer just "kill the evil thing."
NEVER remove a character's abilities for extended periods without telling the player that "hey I think it might be a cool plot point if this happened to your character give recent events." If they just want to play and have a good time and don't want that, you need to just not do that or as I said give "divine hints" that they are straying from the path and risk losing their power. A lot of GMs forget they can totally talk with the party about some events that might happen out-of-character while still being vague. Story crafting can be difficult and you should not be afraid to ask for people's opinions BEFORE you put things into motion.
@@ShiningDarknes They were talking about how an actual RP perspective could affect the game itself, not that that would definitely happen.
"How can you sleep at night?!"
"... I can't."
“I am willing to sink to levels unfathomable to you…I am willing to sink to levels unfathomable to you in order to achieve my objectives.”
Me: Wait did he…. *goes back 5seconds* Yep.
This may fall on deaf ears by this point, but I thought I’d throw in my philosophical two cents. I’d agree that viewing the world as stark black-and-white isn’t the best idea, but viewing it as the other extreme: only grey-and-gray, is another arguably unhealthy view. Believing everyone is not-so-different from you blinds you to the fact that they may be not-so-similar.
No, you got a point. If you ask me: world is basically a varying amount of grey, with how bad of a person they are being a darker shade, so to speak. However, because some things can be easily forgiven (EX: like stealing a cookie because you're homeless and starving), it could be misinterpreted as a morally right action.
Perhaps, I can see your point and where you’re coming from, though I reject the idea that morality is only objective or subjective. I believe, as paradoxical as it sounds, that it is both, that there is one or two objective morals and the rest are subjective and defer to the objective. The two objectives being “try to love and accept others” and “try to do no harm”. I also view the world as a sliding scale of varying shade of not just grey, but black and white as well. Everyone is capable of devolving into something worse just as they are capable of bettering or redeeming themselves. How I measure what is “evil” I file under a trinity and all that springs from one or a mix: self-centeredness (that being those who only care about themselves, a very specific group of people, or a very warped ideology (such as Social Darwinism or perverting a generally benevolent religion)), hatred, and apathy. I’d like to think myself as open minded, though I could just be a hopeless idealist.
@@CybrThief My friend i'm afraid you have it all pretty much backwards. Morality at it's most basil core can only be subjective. This is, in part, because to even begin to consider morality or 'moral questions' one must first possess a sufficiently advanced mind. A subject in which such considerations can be contained, hence subjective.
Once a subjective goal has been agreed to (ex. Human flourishing, harm reduction) it can be objectively determined which actions will or have (best) served to further said goal.
This is such a well-crafted story! However, the Assassin was right to withhold the letter. You break a Paladin's morals, you lose their effectiveness as a role.
They lose their power wholesale, don't they? Since their power comes from their oath. In that moment he could have effectively killed her while leaving her with their life.
@@clayxros576 to be fair, for most Paladins that are Lawful, it would. However, not knowing the alignment of their deity nor how their half-angelic nature influences their powers, I am less than certain of that. I do think it would make them too weak to be of use though.
To be fair he only did it after she pissed him off, and at the end he calling her by name could be both he acepting her as a ally and/or he saying "now you know you broke your oath and are not a paladin anymore, what are you gonna do?"
@@albertonishiyama1980 that is all true and a really good point.
@Platypus
Ah you see it wouldnt be a punishment. According to lore, a Paladin doesmt technically need a god for their power, they simply draw on the strength and resolve of whatever oath they take. If something happens that shatters that resolve, they basically lose their levels. That's why Paladins are always so single minded, because they literally run on tunnel vision unless they are extremely confident in their oath and their ability to discern it in complex situations.
In this instance, the rogue doesn't want to risk their Paladin basically get neutered by just showing the letter, but still wants to help the Paladin broaden their mindset in case they run across it in the future.
Every story has a villain and a hero. Every mark in history has a perspective. The world is never black and white, but full of grey shades. In the end, all actions have a consequence to someone and it is you who have to live with them.
I also know deep down there's more than one side to every story.
I want more of Innanis. I really love and felt inspired by his perspective and how deep of a character he is.
Man, that didn't end how I thought it would.
If I was the Assassin, I would have slid the piece of parchment across the table. "I research my targets, because there is usually more than meets the eye." *Walks from table*
I was actually expecting the assassin to say something in goblin to the paladin when he looked over his shoulder, sort of a "You don't speak it, but I do." sort of thing.
@@Nyghtking That would have shown that he really was just a merc in it for the money, if he ignored the pleas of a friendly being begging for mercy and let it die anyway.
And showing the party that letter would have dropped them all in a pit of despair. By not doing so, he was proving that he does value the party more than they think.
While it would've been a nice twist of the ironic dagger. The Assassin knew well enough that doing this would hinder the party's effectiveness in their roles. The Assassin said it himself, he'll sink to those dark and unfathomably deep levels of evil willingly and without an excuse to justify the reason.
So for now, the Assassin needs his party to continue working effectively in their roles to complete whatever mission they are in. Till their usefulness is at an end, then maybe he might return to this little topic.
@@SapphireDragon357 By the sound of things he doesn't speak Goblin he read a letter in Human and put things together retrospectively.
Andrew This was the exact opposite of that. They exterminated the goblins, and then he found the letter while the others were collecting ears.
This reminds me of the story of chop having a chat with the groups fighter. Similar problem, just far more comical.
Chop was a Goblin cook who was once the assistant of a royal family. He was the cooks assistant, a thief who stole and gathered various herbs, items and whatever he was told.
The fighter Arinn was a tall noble human, who knew nothing but honor, and the service of those beneath him. As far as he was concerned, he was never doing wrong when he killed the less fortunate and the weak. Two entirely different backgrounds, as one was practically a slave, and the other a master.
Arinn was the to be lord of his hometown in a few years, and his father sent him away to explore and learn the surrounding area. Sent with him was a group of hired mercenary, most of which didn't even know each other. Along with them, they were sent with a newly acquired slave, a youngish goblin named Chop, as that was his favorite word in the very broken English he spoke. The Paladin Azimoth of the party was against the creature always being in shackles, and the Druid Rose didn't care too much. The ranger Valinna, being the only one who spoke goblin became his close friend early on, and the two grew a fantastic bond.
It had been several months of travel, and the goblin chop was always running from one side of the road to another, acting as a scout for the noble he served, learning new segments of English each passing day. He was kept under close watch by Arinn while the others always seemed to sit comfortably atop their slow walking horses, chatting about their past experiences with the nearby land, often laughing about the situation. It wasn't till chop vanished from view that the noble began to yell and get angry, a common thing for him.
Arinn: _"Chop! Get your ass back here now! This is no time for your damn sense of humour!"_
A few moments went by without a single response from the goblin, and the ranger party grew worried. It wasnt until they stopped did they discover why chop went silent. Valinna had found him keying unconscious, hear death, as he made attempts to disarm a trap and rolled a nat1. When he came to consciousness a few hours later, he came to with Valinna arguing with Arinn about the Chop's importance to the group. It was an argument chop made an attempt to settle.
Valinna: _"...Is essential. No one else here can deactivate those traps, and from what I saw, they could have pierced that armour of yours easily."_
Arinn: _"He clearly set the damn thing, you saw how crude it's design was. Their is no telling what he has in that bag, and how many more he may have. I say we kill him, after all, he's only worth a few silver."_
Valinna: _"Right, cause all you people care for is your damn money. You nobles view everything as coin, it's no wonder your people are on the verge of revolting."_
Arinn: _"They are on the verge of revolting because someone killed the royal family almost fifteen months ago. Not because of the noble houses."_
It was at this point, chop would chime in and begin to speak. It would not be in his favor however, as the conversation went from bad to worse.
Chop: _"Why we talk shiny in late sun? Sun is napping soon, we nap too?"_
Arinn: _"Oh good, the little green filth is conscious. Perhaps we could ask him if you want to know the truth, but there is no point in asking a goblin anything. They will always lie to save their own skins."_
Valinna: _"When has Chop lied to us? Since day one, he has been your loyal slave, cooking for you, gathering food and handing you every valuable he earns. Only things you permit him to carry is a rusty short sword, some clothes and a magical bag."_
Chop: _"Why chop in trouble? Did chop anger new master?"_
Arinn: _"Yes you angered me, you tried to have us killed. Come on you worthless green filth, show us what you have in your bag."_
Chop: _"I... Why does master want chop belongings? Chop no do notting wrong."_
Scared out of his mind, chop began to open his bag, removing from the bag of holding various items, such as spices, pots, pans, mushrooms, and a royal seal of the kingdoms chef. The revealing of this item startled everyone in the party, and it was here that Arinn went into a blind rage.
Arinn: _"You worthless filth, you stole that from the royal palace after they were all killed, didn't you? I..."_
Azimoth: _"Knock it off Arinn, let chop explain. Do not forget that all creatures serve a purpose."_
Arinn: _"Purpose my ass, this filth likely killed the royal family."_
Chop sat in silence as he drew two final things from his bag of holding, one being a letter, and the other, a medallion off the prince. By this point Arinn was held by Valinna and Azimoth, to keep him from attacking chop who was hiding behind rose.
Chop: _"Chop no do it purpose, chop obey master. Master have chop find speckled shrooms and add it to stew. Hide say so, read, read."_
Rose being the only other member of the party who could read goblin had red the letter a loud, translating it word for word so Arinn could hear everything.
Rose: _"Chop, find the speckled mushrooms beneath the willow tree, and bring me back seven stems. As promised, I will give you the shiny neck accessory I was given by the prince. I will also show you what the stems makes afterwords. Signed Agro T. Harbor."_
Arinn: _"Harbor, the man who stole the crowns of the royal family. What the hell was he doing in the royal palace?"_
Chop: _"He wa..."_
Arinn: _"As your new master, I demand you say nothing or I will remove your head."_
Valinna: _"It's obvious, Harbor was disguised as the royal cook, it also explains why chop is good at stealing, killing, and picking locks."_
Arinn: _"It means chop willingly collaborated with a known criminal. He should be condemned for what he's done."_
Valinna: _"How about an alternative. You hand chop over to me or Azimoth, and we'll handle what happens to him. I'll even pay you double what your father payed."_
Arinn: _"Fine, take the damn thing. However, don't be surprised if he manages to run off."_
After handing over the gold, the contract binding chop to service was changed to say Valinna, and chop immediately hid behind her. After night began to fall, Valinna and chop stayed up to chat, about what happened the night of the murder. Unknowing to them, that Arinn was listening.
Valinna: _"How did it go down, how long has he been present in the castle?"_
Chop: _"Thirteen seasons, all it was. Chop not mean to harm, chop cook, chop chop. Master bought chop from slaver, and chop live in many bad places. Chop lose finger, toe, get bit by food. Master get mad at chop when chop no cook, so chop learn fastest. After time chop and master move into big shiny place, wall blind chop and cooking area be best and help chop. Master act kind, and beat chop when chop disobey. In time he have chop steal, and teach chop best way to kill. When people poisoned, chop get framed and sold as slave, and now chop get serve you."_
Valinna: _"You were taught nothing but how to harm. Your old master taught you horrible things, lots of it."_
Chop: _"Master shiny armour not bad, he tell but never hit. Chop like master, but now chop serve you. Chop ask no hit."_
Valinna: _"Don't worry chop, I won't hit you. Just don't harm any of us, ok?"_
Chop: _"Chop no betray, chop like you, all you."_
---
---
---
This is the story of chop. It doesn't have a good or bad ending, just an ending. The end of the campaign was great, and chop is free. ^^
Chop's story is a good one.
That is all.
Have a splendid day.
I just hope they see this!
Actual chills from that story, holy shit those players played beautifully.
Assassin makes a paladin question her morales with a simple phrase...after many, many, many words. There, fixed your headline.
How old are you?
@@Glory_be_to_Christ Questioning my age is the perfect counter to my comment.
If I am young, then I lack experience.
If I am old, then I am old-fashioned and out of touch with "modern morality".
If I am wrong and you are just interested in who I am...
I was created in 1940, born the son of a lighthouse keeper and a mysterious woman he found in the ocean.
My adventures have been many. Some you may have read, others you may have seen... 😎
Context is a lovely thing.
*morals. Morales is the same word, but in Spanish.
@@harveywest2890
Based.
“Righteous and Justice” can often cloud one’s judgement and blind them to what could be right before their very eyes. This was a good story and fantastic RP among this group’s players
That is by far the best roleplayed Assassin I've ever heard of.
Assassin: (holds up the coin used in the story) “morality is never black and white. (Turns coin over) “there are two sides to every story.”
Here is a good quote from my group.
"The name of the game is justified killing, no matter who or what you are."
What if when Valeria asked Inanis what's stopping him from accepting a contract on them. He responded with "What's stopping you from killing us under your gods command" or when she says she fights Honorably he says "while you'd rather fight in wars honorably and let men die id rather kill their king or general and let those men go home to their families"
This right here, this would have been so good to say. The only reason I can think of as to why it wasn't, aside from not having thought of it, would be so as to not anger the paladin to the point of physical confrontation.
Also, I thought when he started saying "you come from wealth, you had opportunities", he was going to follow up with "you chose to be a killer, under whatever name you fly your flag, death follows in your wake. That's why we're similar, but here's why we're different; I didn't have those opportunities. I couldn't have become a politician, a scholar or a general just by asking pretty please. I had to kill to survive, not for your truth or justice but for my own life, so don't tell me I chose to be a killer, because where I'm from, my other option was death. You, on the other hand, you chose to kill. That's why we're different".
"while you'd rather fight in wars honorably and let men die id rather kill their king or general and let those men go home to their families" ... For the right price.
Because one implies that the party would incur the paladin's god's wrath to begin with and the second would be the rogue claiming that his ideology is superior. Neither of those things were his goal, his only goal was to humble the paladin.
@@souffrantdepine3762 I dunno, man, Gods can be assholes sometimes. The party might not MEAN to incur the paladin's god's wrath, but that doesnt mean it won't happen out of pettyness on the God's part.
Duuuuude.
That ending hit hard.
And serves as a good reminder to play an evil character, so you don't care about the squishy feelings.
Or just stick to 40k...
@@seand.g423 there are no feelings in 40k?
Hugo Fontes there are but everything sucks anyway so it doesn't matter
Besides that, a lot of strong emotions are tied to Chaos, so...
Wouldn't it be like a million times better if the character who had the letter was an objectively good character? That could be a defining moment for them, something that muddies their world a bit.
But what does it matter for an assassin? Just another pile of bodies. The fact that he actually told this story to anyone just makes him a dick because there was no reason for him to bring it up, and he did it in such a pretentious way.
@@hugofontes5708 Everyone's evil in 40K
RIP Hechik, you will not be forgotten.
I made a god of death die by breaking the fourth wall and showing him that he is not real
"I have broken the fifth wall, now my audience knows they are fictional"
"Two weeks ago, I freed a Kobold tribe from enslavement by drow. I helped defeat a cult dedicated to the destruction of the world without permanent injury to the cultists. I took the blows intended for innocents without striking back, helping stop a riot. And you?" (My NG Fighter's response) ... I should also note, the Paladin in this story is a horrible strawman. It is the most ridiculous, exaggerated, cliche Paladin. In other words, it's a ridiculous victory against a hollow opponant.
(My LE whisper bard/assassin) I have never presumed to be just. Only effective. I have started wars, and stopped them, but in my experience, it is rarely the saint who ends up with a bounty on his head
@@davidc4983 A bounty of 30 silver pieces, received by some Judas guy, is looking at you with disappointment
@@lorigulfnoldor2162 *shrugs* shouldn't have went around destroying property in the temple and whipping those innocent moneylenders. 30 silver is a little low for my usual fee, but a jobs a job
Yeah agreed. Was honestly hoping for something more from this exchange.
@@davidc4983 miss the days when bards could not be Lawful ***
“Paladins see corruption everywhere, except within...” - Rogue saying.
This story has so many phrases, even lapidary ones :o
My party says the Paladin sees nothing, I am the paladin player. My Paladin may have a slightly bad perception score and I some how often gets nat 1s or low rolls for any perception check. One time, the party was making a deal with a Banshee for information, My Paladin somehow never even noticed that there was a Banshee there, another time the party rescued a character (who was actually a new PC), it was only about mid-way into conversation that the party had to redirect my Paladin's attention to the fact that this new person was there. It also makes things very convenient for the mainly chaotic party who have stolen things on several occasions. The only time the Paladin noticed somebody steal something was the rogue just stealing some herbs from somebody else's kitchen. So yeah, ain't see corruption anywhere when you're basically blind.
I can get behind the Assassin's reasoning as I've been wanting to play a necromancer haunted by the slaughter of her village by a necromancer. She has sworn justice and revenge exacted through the same fate as her people.
Assassin players: *angsty edgelord noises*
Paladin players: "haha divine smite go brrrr"
Chadladin players
@@shamusson Yes
Paladin players: *Karen noises*
"There is a difference between a mercenary and an murderer. Murderers make no qualm what flag you fly, what rules you play by. Mercenaries on the other hand...good ones, anyway,...." - Vanik, Dwarf Rogue, LN
" He Who Fights Monsters, should to it that He Himself does not become a Monster Himself "
Pretty much sums up what he was trying to teach the Paladin, it's an easy thing to forget for any hero, blinded by there faith or quest for revenge. Lives are Lives, be they goblins, humans or Drow and often things are not so black and white as they seem.
Except drow. They are definitely black and white.
So what should the town have done then? Remember, the goblins had been raiding and KILLING people for decades. Goblins had NEVER shown any form of diplomacy and would kill anyone who would attempt it? So when is enough? When do you finally stop sending diplomats to their death in the pretty much impossible hope they might finally get the goblins to even talk? How many more people would the goblins have killed before Hechik (or however you spell it) convinced the other goblins to stop murdering?
@@shadowscall7758 he isn't saying that it was an purely evil act he is simply stating that you are still ending a life, be it a goblin or otherwise. It isn't directly evil for them to go kill the goblins to stop the raids on the human town but it's important to know you still took the life of a living breathing creature who has a family who did what it takes to survive. They had a job to do and they performed it but to take some moral high ground because you killed goblins and the assassin kills a corrupt official both are lives both of probably done evil things.
@@Small_Panda Yes, but the assassin was basically trying to say that taking a life in protection of others who were being attacked through no fault of their own is comparable to being hired to kill people who may have done nothing to deserve it and was trying to say they are the same thing. They are not. Both are killing, but one IS more morally bankrupt than the other.
@@shadowscall7758 I will tell you most assassinations dont occur on people who have done nothing at least not in d&d. There is nothing to gain from killing some joe smoh most assassinations will be on other criminals or nobles for some gain.
Beautiful, I'd love to see an animated scene if this, it could totally stand on it's own as a morality paradigm.
"How do you aleep at night after the terrible things you've done?!"
"On a bed, under a blanket, in a room, right next to *yours."*
I honestly thought that Inanis actually spoke the goblin tongue and heard all he was trying to say.
Maybe he did.
Now you are convicing me that the assassin is a idiot, that feel guilt about it and is trying project his problems into the party. So munch for bearing the problems alone to not disturb the group...
He can at least read it, so he probably could understand it spoken. Either that, or he's bullshitting about what the goblin was saying in his final moments. I find the former more likely.
I figured out he had the letter in his pocket and was talking about his own party some ways before that was brought up in the story.
Paladin: a bad person working to become a better person
Rogue: a bad person content with being bad.
The rogue has perspective, and the paladin has vision. Together they might make something of themselves.
That's one way to jutify shipping two people that don't get along at all.
"Just because you're bad guy, does not mean YOU ARE a bad guy?
I think the Paladin is more "a bad person that thinks they are a good person".
@@PsykotikDragon "Just because I am a bad person doesn't mean I'm a bad guy."
@@locustzedicus2437 "One winter a Farmer found a Viper frozen and numb with cold, and out of pity picked it up and placed it in his bosom. The Viper was no sooner revived by the warmth than it turned upon its benefactor and inflicted a fatal bite upon him; and as the poor man lay dying, he cried, 'I have only got what I deserved, for taking compassion on so villainous a creature.'"
Like the Fabled Great One once said “Is It Better To Be Born Good Or To Overcome Your Evil Nature Through Great Effort”
Great story involving two of my favorite classes, they are always great to have in a party together due to the parallels they draw...
I remember one of my longterm campaigns playing a paladin with a rogue in the party... We would constantly bicker like this on what was the right approach however very early in the campaign we synergized well together.
My paladin was very stoic, cool headed, and slightly brooding. He had some of the classic codes of honor, including that if an enemy surrendered he would show them mercy, no matter the race. He especially wouldn't tolerate any of his friends getting harmed.
The Rogue was passionate, hotheaded, and a bit of a loose canon. He would be the one who would rush off ahead to cause the most chaos to our enemies.
Regardless, some of my favorite moments between one another was when he would work directly with me laying out his plan of attack asking where he would need assistance from me. As for RP however, the best moments was when I took a page from his book and acted on impulse.
At one point in the campaign the rogue was targeted by a succubus as she tried to ruin his life, taunting him within his head, kidnapping his boyfriend, etc etc... In a tavern amongst the party, during the heat of his torment we both got an arguement and through a good insight roll I could tell something was off about him. In the middle of the arguement I simply got up and left without a word with the party assuming my character had enough... As soon as I get outside I use divine sense and low and behold the succubus was watching from the outside... I began to chase her with a zealous fury for tormenting my friend. The rogue cast message on my character mockingly asking if I was 'Running away from the Problem' I responded in kind 'No. I am solving yours.' (Which gave the rest of the party a good reason to help chase after the succubus)
But yea throughout that campaign I just remember moments in which the rogue or another party member had almost died and those were the moments I went for the rogues stratagy and just went by impulse.
Paladin/rogue dynamics are always fun. One campaign I was in had an aasimar paladin and half-elf rogue who basically grew up next door to each other and had a sort of one-sided rivalry from the time the rogue was a toddler. Pally gal was rogue gal's babysitter, and rogue gal often had pally gal held up as someone she should be more like... which led to her doing almost the opposite in her teen rebellion years. The rogue basically decided to start acting out and getting into mischief to get attention from her often (physically and emotionally) absent father and to differentiate herself from "Miss Perfect."
Anyway, the paladin was great at being a public role model, but was a little stiff-necked and incapable of understanding the flaws of mere mortals. She wasn't unkind or unforgiving but there was always a wall of awe surrounding her that was difficult to penetrate. She was always dramatic in her public proclamations of her god.
Rogue, meantime, grew out of her teen rebellion but never quite lost the common touch that made her easy for people to relate to. She became a cleric, but only after years of keeping her faith quiet. Even after she became a cleric, she preferred to perform deeds rather than proselytize. If she was ever held up as a shining example to anyone she would have vehemently denied it.
Often through the campaign, the paladin got big dramatic moments that would inspire awe and keep up morale. But it was the rogue cleric who could walk out among the people and have any number of friends call out to her.
In the end, the paladin ascended to godhood and the rogue cleric reluctantly became a saint.
Gentlemen. This is why you always research your targets beforehand.
Honestly the funny part is this scene usually plays out the other way around. The paladin wanting to see if they can resolve an issue without conflict. The Assassin choosing to kill instead of letting something get the chance to kill them. Good to see it work both ways.
This is why paladins should always take the approach of "I deal with greater evils, not petty squabbles." The oath of vengeance. Through this logic you enable your character to adventure with "evil" characters so long as they are less evil than whatever you are seeking to destroy.
Man do I love the narrative story's, the way you tell them and the story's themselves love every second of it.
He's exactly right and expresses something to many people miss, shining morals and good intentions don't change what the action you're preforming is, denying those actions to be the same due to the and sence of right or wrong/good or evil is what truly lowers those who claim themselves to be good below those who recognize themselves for what they truly are.
A thing I always told my Marines when I was Sergeant: None of you are ever going to be able to claim to be 'innocent' again, and you have more in common with the men trying to kill you than you will ever have with the men who ordered you here.
Oh please, these 'killers in shining armor' comments... There are plenty of paladins who are this way, but I've seen just as many paladins played good and just. The paladin in my party does everything he can to make sure those who deserve to live- and that includes criminals who deserve proper trial- do indeed live. He has cashed so many favours, spent so much money on transportation, spells and resources to see his foes captured and sent to the cities for trial rather than simple death.
That is the difference. It sounds to me that if this paladin knew of the goblin's intentions she would have changed her actions and sought peace, but there is blameless tragedy in what transpired. I imagine in situation where dialogue was possible this paladin would have declared the crimes of her foes before she struck, and the innocent would have time to state their case. If not every time, some times. Said assassin would never get that chance, and given the way they speak I doubt they would be as likely to show constraint if they did.
Two people who kill are not the same. It's not wise to say that's true; it's naive. Every nation kills. Were it not true, that would be swell, but alas it is. So we judge a nation's crimes by context, by justification, and by necessity. By these metrics we can conclude who is in the wrong. People are the same. Killing *is* wrong, but that doesn't mean our way of killing, our justification, do not matter.
Two soldiers meet on the field of battle. They have both been told since boot camp that the other is the “enemy” and if you don’t kill him, he will kill you. Both have families at home, both are reluctant draftees, both have dreams of living through this war and coming home to their loved ones, both are scared. One is German, the other is Russian. One of them must die or they both will. Who deserves to die?
Tom Sawyer Piper neither
Leonard Strong And neither did the goblins or at least neither did Hechik
@@tomsawyerpiper9412 The one who loses the fight
Pretty naive yourself. You even mention nations, which makes things doubly naive.
You mention justification, metrics, necessity. You say these things like they're universal. They're absolutely not. They're completely relative based on borders.
When one nation kills, let's say, America, it kills for reasons appropriate to America. When another nation kills, it does so for reasons appropriate to that nation.
One nation's morality is not equivalent to another's. The end result of the killing and violence is still death.
I had a similar conversation with my party member a Ranger. I am a Rogue.
I asked the Ranger if she would be inclined to go down the path of the Assassin, her skills were already in line with it. She said she would never murder in such a way, it was beneath her. She claimed she was a hero. I brought her back to a few sessions prior where she attacked the fish people in the town and was responsible for downing half a dozen of them single handedly. I said, you're already a murderer. Her response was no I'm a hero. My final response to her was, then I guess heroes are murderers, which would also make me a hero. She was stunned after that moment.
A very interesting story. I am reminded of this passage from a fantasy book where a character stated that at the heart of evil is a void that nothing can see into and at the heart of good is a brilliant light that nothing can see into. Different but more alike than either dare admit. It takes a rare character to see that and a brave one to speak it. Be careful when walking in the darkness or the light, you can become blinded by both.
The Assassin is very much correct here, holy shit I wanna give him a hug that’s datk
Anyone using an ideal to justify killing is wrong.
The assassin at least knows to do right he needs to get his hands dirty in wicked deeds and wholessome hugs I guess xD.
Pretty much the same debate the Paladin has with anyone who isn't willing to sacrifice the lives of others to uphold their moral code.
The Assassin takes one life that prevents the deaths of thousands, either from the machinations of the slain or the wars necessary to dethrone them; he does so for money, he does so for the contract, because he is a professional.
The Necromancer raises the dead to fight in place of the living, saving thousands, he does so for money, he does so for his research, because he can and others cannot.
And what does the Paladin do? She convinces peasants and and her companions to give their lives for her cause just so that she might stand victorious over those she looks down upon, she does so for money, she does so for honor, because her god wills it.
That's perhaps the one thing I agree with 5e, removing alignment from the game. Paladins are as evil as any other, they just can't see it through their dogma.
As apt as this is, I don't see it as a reason to remove alignment. I see it as a reason for the DM to choose your alignment. There can be good assassins or necromancers, just as there can be evil paladins.
for me paladins are by far the easiest class to make good or evil
Beautiful.
Not a D&D player yet, but removing alignment wouldn't make sense. However, one's alignment can shift if they do several consecutive actions that warrant an alignment shift. For Clerics, Paladins, and Warlocks staying close to your patron's alignment is important. Tick off your patron and your powers may be weakened or taken until you make amends with your patron or find a new one.
No, correction. Paladins *can* be as evil as any other. Like every single class ever, there's always good potential to play them as nuanced or straightforward as someone likes.
"Moral dilemna! Who's wrong? Who's..."
The paladin. The paladin is wrong.
"But you didn't even hear..."
"Doesn't matter. The paladin's wrong. That's pretty much the whole point of paladins."
Paladin: "How can you sleep without a problem after everything you have done?!"
Assasin: "How can you?"
On one hand, I understand the assassins reasoning from a philosophical perspective, they both kill, they both do it for sometimes similar and almost mundane reasons, the only thing setting them apart in this oversimplified analysis is their favored course of action.
On the other hand, I can see why the paladin would take offense to the comparison. It's easy to call your acts of cruelty justified, when everything is either good or bad and there're no in betweens.
The goblin story is something completely different and definitely worth exploring, the idea of throwing monstrous races with above average intelligence at the players is interesting and it reminds me of the Neutral necromancer story. To think that the players would pride themselves with their victory after killing an innocent being, only to learn that it was actually just seaking peace and understanding.
The Paladin thinks values are more important than the things those values were designed to protect, the Assassin thinks those things he cares about are more important than any set of values.
@@Neion8 You mean money, right?
Paladin: is female
Video Title: Assassin Makes The Paladin Question HIS Morals With A Single Phrase
the title refers to the player not the character, at least its what im guessing, considering that the numbers of lady rpg players is rather low. in all my 17 years of player/DM in rpgs... ive seen like 3 and i run with new players every settings i run
it's 2020 bro IoI
While I agree with you that it was most likely a mistake in the title itself, there is a solid argument to be made that the title *is* correct in that the *his* is referring to the assassin instead.
At the start, she (The paladin) assumes that his (The assassin's) morals or rather, the lack there of, would lead him to rob and murder the party while they sleep. Through their conversation and his stories, she comes to understand that there is much more to him then she initially thought.
He and his can be used as a gender neutral term. Like how in the army you say “sir” towards your commanding officer, regardless of gender.
It's these kinds of moral dilemmas that makes roleplaying a paladin such a challenge some times. And they can straight up cost them their powers
Depends on the DM. Had the Paladin seen the note during the attack and not stopped everyone from killing the goblins who were surrendering, then sure. He would have lost his Paladinhood. Even if he saw the note in the tavern afterwards, he wouldn't have lost it.
I've had a Paladin that was forced to play politics, and play dirty, because various factions of politicians were trying to get each other killed, during a siege, and the Paladin needed a united front. he had the people to think of, and he had to consider removing authority from each one, through methods normally deemed questionable for a Paladin. The politicians were a threat, and he couldn't confront them like what some see as a Paladin.
Assuming killing the goblins was actually secretly bad, the Paladin would have lost their powers without even having to see the note. Doing evil acts unwittingly still costs Paladins their powers. They then need to figure out what it was they did wrong and atone before they get their powers back. It's why Paladins can be so sure their acts are righteous, because if they weren't, their god would have made their displeasure very clear.
The difference between Inanis and Valeria is that Inanis is honest with himself.