I want to make a mentally ill Paladin (Need help with alignment).


Advice

51 to 100 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While a paladin does not have to have a god, some greater power or group of such powers do indeed grant make him a paladin. He does not decide when he falls , some greater power does, a paladin who got to choose if he fell never would. There would be no point of the code or the LG requirement. A paladin is a paragon of LG, he is the super boy scout. Something holds him to that standard and judges him when he falls to meet his obligation to his oath. Be it a god, group of gods or some kind of divine agent, he is a divine class and something does grant him that power.

The OP's "paladin, may not think he is evil, but she does not get to make the call. No paladin gets to make that call. Fallen paladins are made by those who often thought whatever made them fall was "justified". They would have never fell if they got to pick what was a "real" violation. They do not get to pick, they have a strict,standard to live up t that most LG people can't manage.

If she was always nuts she could not have been a paladin. She could have thought she was, but that does not make it so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

He's definitely a fallen paladin. Still lawful and with the same dedication as ever to a code of conduct, but the actual code is now evil in nature.

In terms of character backgrounds, he should have lost his paladin powers at some point. He then thought: «Well, here's a challenge from my god, I always knew I'm not worthy anyway.» He then proceeds to be even more extreme in following his code of conduct (which is perverted in essence). Later, when say Asmodeus passes as his god and give him the equivalent powers he had as a paladin (only a little bit different, say: Smite Chaos and Detect Chaos; lay on hand only works on self... a non evil non good mount), he tells to himself «Finally, I've been worthy!» He then proceeds to gain levels in some other class as a lawful evil character (say Iconoclast Inquisitor with detect magic instead of detect alignment; say with the Persistence inquisition as a domain). He is eventually going to understand that he's on the wrong side of the fence; but way too late. By that time, he will have become a convinced disciple of lawful evil ideals.

Seriously, the whole idea is story-telling gold. It can also help a lot your players to understand what alignments are about around your table.


The hellknight PRC makes a from the inner sea world guide makes a lawful not good paladin


You could have him as a Paladin who keeps going above and beyond his code. The original God forsakes him, and yet another realizes his greatness and comes to him and says that he is his chosen, a Paragon of Virtue, to cleanse the world of filth and the fourth rate.

In 3.0/3.5 Paladins who were Lawful Evil and upheld that code were called Paladins of Tyranny.

"Additionally, a paladin of tyranny's code requires that he respect authority figures as long as they have the strength to rule over the weak, act with discipline (not engaging in random slaughter, keeping firm control over those beneath his station, and so forth), help only those who help him maintain or improve his status, and punish those who challenge authority (unless, of course, such challengers prove more worthy to hold that authority)."

Reskin him as that, someone who is getting his power through a being that would support that code.

The Exchange

TheFace wrote:


My question is this: if someone uses Detect Evil or Smite Evil, should she be considered evil?

Firstly - ignore the rules as much as you have to in the quest to make this fantastic idea work.

That said, a subtle and corrupting god could quite easily use Undetectable Alignment on his victim.

On the concept as a whole... A formerly good and true Paladin becomes ill and her illness causes her actions to become morally dubious. I believe that she would fall and that the evil god would have to intervene to keep her powers unchanged. Does this change her alignment? Unsure - would her alignment change if she were forced to do these things while under magical compulsion? I think that Neutral is a good choice. Her former deity would certainly expend considerable effort to cure and redeem her if he knew the truth.

In any case, you have the kernel of an epic story there. Good luck.


I have an idea for a religion/divine magic system that I think would be cool. Under this system, the insane Paladin would make perfect sense, especially if the PCs were the agents sent to deal with her violations of the code of conduct.


My recommendation (if I may be so bold) is to either convert the grey guard (complete scoundrel) or convert the blackguard prestige class. As a GM if a player came to me with that character concept I would use that approach and change the way smite good worked so that it would work on neutral creatures under special circumstances, and would inform evil creatures that have an INT score what's going on.

A good conversion I found was this.

My personal opinion is that alignment should be gone. Unfortunately the fact that so much of the RPG relies on it makes it hard to get away from.

Above all it is important to remember that this is a GAME and that rule 0 exists for your enjoyment of said game. If a player wants to have a concept and wants to use the mechanics of a class, an arbitrary system of morality shouldn't get in their way.

edit- grammar


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alignment is the only thing constraining some of the worst excesses and cheezemonkeyness of the socially retarded carrying on like complete pork chops at the gaming table.


Shifty wrote:
Alignment is the only thing constraining some of the worst excesses and cheezemonkeyness of the socially retarded carrying on like complete pork chops at the gaming table.

I respectfully disagree. If a player is a cheesemonkey, who wishes to dominate the playing field, the role of the GM is to talk to them about it and ask why they are doing it. You must remind the players that there is no "winning" or "losing" in pathfinder. A TPK can be undone by a good GM with no break in reality. Likewise, if they defeat the monsters you send at them without any problems, up the CR and use their tactics against them. As a GM you are in charge of being the controller of the universe, a player cannot exert more control than you.

That said, you shouldn't be afraid to say yes to some of their requests and see where it goes. Constraints such as alignments pidgionhole classes into being a specific flavor, when realistically (again this is opinion) they are just a set of mechanics that can mean something else.

Anywho that's what I think, you're free to think differently

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
SPCDRI wrote:

Paladins are sociopaths who go around all day wielding 15 pound weapons and wearing 50 pound armor looking for things to kill. I don't see why they must even be good, much less Lawful. The alignment should be like the Barbarians no Lawful restriction, just no Evil.

This would allow people to play the Travis Bickles and the Judge Dredds and the Batmans and the Punishers that they just wind up being anyhow. That they ought to be, honestly.

The idea of people being monstrously powerful demigods with tens to hundreds of thousands of gold pieces in wealth, more wealth than major cities, arming themselves and traipsing around looking for things to kill doesn't sound too mentally healthy to me.

The typical adventurer is likely "suffering" under half of the DSM-IV. I don't think you can take real world, 21st century views on mental health and graft them onto a Very High Fantasy medieval play-world.

No... that's not a Paladin, that's a player suffering from what they used to call "Lightsaber Syndrome" back in the days of Stars Wars D20.

A Paladin trains to protect what is good and lawful from what would destroy it. He doesn't seek to kill any more than a policeman should. He's just ready to do so if evil forces his hand.


It does allow the GM to say what sort of campaign the campaign is going to be and give some sort of codification or mutual understanding of what that is supposed to entail.

As it is we see enough attempts on this board to try cheezle around whats clearly written (Why can't my Paladin eat babies? Creating undead henchlings with bodies I stole from a graveyard isn't evil!!!) so I think it does have a place.

On a grown up table I agree its someothing we can all be mature enough to play without, however there's not always grownups at the table.

From Emo kids trying to play their Dark-Elf/Dhampir N3c20m4nc32, who is Evil, but don't judge, he's STATTED as CN by the way... through to holier than though Paladin man who would be considered 'a bit much' by the local extremist Taliban/Fred Phelps crew.

Alignment tends to keep these kids in check.


Shifty wrote:

It does allow the GM to say what sort of campaign the campaign is going to be and give some sort of codification or mutual understanding of what that is supposed to entail.

As it is we see enough attempts on this board to try cheezle around whats clearly written (Why can't my Paladin eat babies? Creating undead henchlings with bodies I stole from a graveyard isn't evil!!!) so I think it does have a place.

On a grown up table I agree its someothing we can all be mature enough to play without, however there's not always grownups at the table.

From Emo kids trying to play their Dark-Elf/Dhampir N3c20m4nc32, who is Evil, but don't judge, he's STATTED as CN by the way... through to holier than though Paladin man who would be considered 'a bit much' by the local extremist Taliban/Fred Phelps crew.

Alignment tends to keep these kids in check.

I suppose it is useful for less mature players, and pathfinder has the problem of having to appeal to a wide audience. I've always played with mature GMs/players and haven't had that problem. Your given example could have some bad side effects, but the closest I've come to that is the rogue trying to steal every thing the paladin had, which ended being more funny than malicious.


My take is this,

You keep talking about conditions of ‘sane’ or ‘insane’ from a real world perspective, a real world, that I might add, has a great deal of trouble explain those conditions in the first place.

And then you juxtapose this discussion with one about alignment, a purely mechanical game attribute that, for some, has lost any real usefulness, but for others still has merit.

Do you see where I am going with this?

As a Dungeon Master it is within your prerogative to apply the rules any way they work to make your game fun for all of the players (and that includes you).

But in my opinion, as a Dungeon Master for 35 years, I would abandon all talk of sanity, or insanity, because, quite frankly unless you import rules from first edition, or other source, the argument as to what role sanity (responsibility, guilt, remorse) play in alignment is moot.


AH nice, one of these. Personal Interpretations of an alignment a character might have does not change their alignments. Alignments are based on a universal standing in terms of mechanics. Even though a chaotic evil character can give you a reason that if twisted enough sound lawful good, he is still, on a mechanical universal standard, still doing something chaotic evil.

At least that how this game was explained to me. To avoid players playing chaotic neutral characters and saying "No its lawful in my characters culture" or "no, that is good in my characters culture."

So in real life, good and evil are perspectives, but in pathfinder and 3.5 rules, Good and Evil are like saying that colors. You know what to expect from that color, that color means this.

Which indeed, could create characters that, even though are lawful good, and completely villainous towards the player. I don't like the mentally ill card to escape that, but your the GM, a number of things can be effecting that paladin. :p

The real question is, how do you do more damage if someone is evil with smite evil or evil bane attacks? That something that will always gets me. I guess the universe says that its magnetically attracted to evil so it hits harder and faster?


core rulebook wrote:

Through a select, worthy few shines the power of the divine. Called paladins, these noble souls dedicate their swords and lives to the battle against evil. Knights, crusaders, and lawbringers, paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve. In pursuit of their lofty goals, they adhere to ironclad laws of morality and discipline. As reward for their righteousness, these holy champions are blessed with boons to aid them in their quests: powers to banish evil, heal the innocent, and inspire the faithful. Although their convictions might lead them into conf lict with the very souls they would save, paladins weather endless challenges of faith and dark temptations, risking their lives to do right and fighting to bring about a brighter future.

Role: Paladins serve as beacons for their allies within the chaos of battle. While deadly opponents of evil, they can also empower goodly souls to aid in their crusades. Their magic and martial skills also make them well suited to defending others and blessing the fallen with the strength to continue fighting.

Paladins are pure fighters with a god backing them, they aren't police, they are military. They help those in need, but bring swift justice (aka DEATH) to evil everywhere, and they go out looking for it. The description calls them noble, then says what makes them noble is dedicating their lives to battle... it says they adhere to an ironclad morality and code, but the most base moral wrong is killing... the idea that killing things is the highest aspiration of a good aligned character is seriously flawed. I think the reason so many play paladins "wrong" (referencing Shifty's comments) is because the class description and build is contradictory to its ideas/ideals.

As to insanity, IMO anyone truly insane should register as chaotic neutral but with violent swirls and pulses of whatever their common behavior would normally dictate(always looks like a roiling storm, easily distinguishable from a reasoned and healthy creature). If the insane person hides in a corner and cries all the time, they are just CN with grey swirls, if they are legitimately crazy and believe all small creatures (humanoid or otherwise) are their children, and try to nurture them/protect them (often causing conflict with the owners/parents of little things, sometimes even violent) there would be swirls of CG/NG, etc etc.
This can be a blessing and a curse for the character detecting... they can tell the person is crazy right off, but won't know if they are dangerous no matter what the swirls suggest.

Personally I really like the idea of complex characters, and a once-Paladin (someone who stepped into the class coherent) who is now warped and driven by things unknown is a great concept. A level or more of inquisitor would probably be well justified, even though the character thinks he/she is still a paladin, and I would suggest either;

a) empowering the normal paladin abilities that are now being given from a different source to be similar in power to total character level, so no more paladin levels are necessary, but those abilities are still effective, or,
b) creating a prestige class that would function only for him/her (to satisfy those who boo hoo the idea of a non-LG paladin still using a facsimile of his/her powers) that would count past paladin levels towards the abilities the PRC gives, to which there have already been some great suggestions, and i would include the following alternate to smite evil:
Smite Perceived Evil This ability functions as Smite Evil except works on those the character believes is evil, as opposed to only Evil alignments. If the character uses this ability and is then led to believe the target is not evil, the current Smite use ends immediately, and the (insert PRC name here) is stunned for 1 round.

If there is an evil god powering the whole mess, hiding the paladin's alignment would be the first thing it would do. If there isn't a god behind it, and just force of will on the NPCs part.. then crazy shows bright.


Technically mentally ill people are not responsible for their actions. This Paladin could be 100% lawful Good in their own little world only it impacts reality in a very evil way.

As for the alignment contradiction here they should lose their powers if they do evil even if mentally ill. If cured of their affliction they'd have a lot atoning to do.


While I disagree with most of your post, this...

Stubs McKenzie wrote:

b) creating a prestige class that would function only for him/her (to satisfy those who boo hoo the idea of a non-LG paladin still using a facsimile of his/her powers) that would count past paladin levels towards the abilities the PRC gives, to which there have already been some great suggestions, and i would include the following alternate to smite evil:

Smite Perceived Evil This ability functions as Smite Evil except works on those the character believes is evil, as opposed to only Evil alignments. If the character uses this ability and is then led to believe the target is not evil, the current Smite use ends immediately, and the (insert PRC name here) is stunned for 1 round.

... already exists. It's called Shadowbane Inquisitor, found in the complete adventurer, and it's a paladin PrC from 3.5 that basically allows the character to fall, but to fail to recognize that they've fallen, as their PrC abilities (though not it's paladin ones) continue to function due to zealotry. It requires a level dip into something with a sneak attack, but that's a really easy get-around, especially if the GM cheats a bit. Effectively, let them into the paladin prestige, let the fall happen, take levels of blackguard to replace the paladin levels (levels in the PrC count as total levels of paladin; this means you don't have to give up the PrC [as you can choose which levels to replace] and you don't have to be a super-high base paladin level [Paladin 6/Shadowbane Inquisitor 5 would satisfy] when trading paladin levels); once you replace your paladin levels, you've got your sneak attack from blackguard. The wording of the "zeal" or "zealotry" whatever-it's-called feature of the PrC specifically states that it's very easy to never realize that you've fallen, as you believe you're doing the right thing... because, you know, you're a zealot.

Also, it's smite ability allows you to choose someone you believe is guilty, and it works just like a smite of your paladin (or blackguard) level, except the target's alignment doesn't matter. And you can use your other class' smites as this class' smites instead.

Anyway, while I don't enjoy most of your idea, TheFace, this is one way to get it to function by RAW - you get pretty much everything you want out of that set-up right there. I believe it could have a lot of merit, but only if handled very carefully. One way to make it work as well, is have the evil god create what amounts to a minor, cursed, but useful item, similar to a useful Idol of Apostacy (found in Dragons of Faerun), or a Helm of Opposite Alignment. The item (evil, but with permanent undetectable alignment applied to itself and the wielder) basically corrupts whoever puts it on unless they fail a will save. With a cursed effect that the bearer also undergoes a Modify Memory, they don't even remember they've been corrupted by the item, but instead believe they've been given a divine vision from some source that sets them on the "true" path... all the while they've succumbed to an evil god's will, and have accepted the mantle of blackguard without knowing it. The fact that it looks like a holy symbol or holy item only cements the deception.

The mental illness came later, as she continued to justify her own, evil urgings that originated in an item that had manipulated her. By now, the item is no longer necessary... she's completely sick on her own, and it's only function is undetectable alignment on itself and her (and an inability to shed it, as most cursed items do) so people don't realize it.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Paladin, Cleric, Oracle, doesn't matter, if a character receives it's powers from an evil god, she will detect as evil regardless of what she 'thinks' she is.

As far as I'm concerned unless you are actively under the control (dominance), your deeds are what makes you good/ evil, whether you are deluded or not.


So if i mislead your character into thinking the town just over the hill is a bunch of rapists and murderers with the bluff skill + a couple well placed "clues", and you act on that as a paladin, you would be ok with me not only having you fall, but having your alignment shift from LG to Evil?

EDIT: oops, i left out the f in shift!


You could also try these variants from d20srd. This is more for 3.5, but basically, just change anything that said good to evil, or anything that said lawful to chaotic. If you are just going to go chaotic evil, just go anti-paladin, but I you want the character to stay lawful good? If they are blatantly being evil, that makes them evil. Ignorance is not an excuse. The insanity where "they didn't have controls of their action" is a tricky slope, but then you would probably have to make the person have split personalities.

Mechanically, if a mentally-ill person is being evil, as hard as d20 rules would go, I would have to say they are evil. If they are ever "cured" they would no longer be evil and may have much regret, but as far as what my bane or smite evil says, they are probably evil.

On a moral rp level thats a trickery slope.

Paladin Variants: Freedom, Slaughter, And Tyranny

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Stubs McKenzie wrote:

So if i mislead your character into thinking the town just over the hill is a bunch of rapists and murderers with the bluff skill + a couple well placed "clues", and you act on that as a paladin, you would be ok with me not only having you fall, but having your alignment shift from LG to Evil?

EDIT: oops, i left out the f in shift!

If the paladin went in swinging, damn right he would fall. Just because something pings evil does not mean you can just kill it.

Paladins are not mindless zelots. If a paladin does something that violates the code they fall, if they star acting non-lawful, they fall, if they stop acting good, they fall.

In the case above it would be the paladins duty to see if this was true, and to help bring them to justice, and that does not always mean a sword though the gut.


I don't think one must be aware of the alignment of a particular deed to find great satisfaction in doing it and seeking to do it more and more. Thus, I would not agree that those that are not consciously aware of the evilness of certain acts would be true neutral. From what it sounds like, the character would do evil acts, be deluded enough to consider them good, and be empowered by evil entities to keep the show going. I would not attempt to shirk the ability of others to smite his evil butt or detect it or whatnot, he would just under no circumstances allow any evidence to the contrary to shake his delusion.

Paladin PC smites him and holds that as proof of his own villiany, which he of course takes instead as evidence that said Paladin is himself evil and trying to fool him. Clearly the insane NPC thinks he has been ensorcelled and failed his will save, but in his heart he KNOWS he is good and the satisfaction he derives from doing "good" encourages him to continue on. Anyone who disagrees is obviously mistaken. You can get a lot of good RP out of the PC's as they have to painstakingly prove beyond a reasonable doubt the immorality of his actions.


TheFace wrote:

Essentially, she is Lawful Stupid. Like a great many Lawful Stupid characters, she thinks she is Lawful Good. However, do to her obsessive-compulsive behavior and complete lack of mercy, she left Lawful Good territory a good while ago. Her patron deity has abandoned her and a Lawful Evil deity is now granting her the same powers she had as a Paladin to keep her from figuring this out (He is greatly entertained by her behavior). I intend her as an NPC that the party has to deal with.

My question is this: if someone uses Detect Evil or Smite Evil, should she be considered evil? She serves a Lawful Evil deity and her reactions to crimes are wholeheartedly (and usually violently) disproportionate, to the point where they definitely should be considered acts of evil in and of themselves. On the other hand, she thinks she serves a Lawful Good deity, thinks her brutal actions are for the good of others, and is delusional to the point where she is completely incapable of making a well reasoned morality decision. All she can do is kill anything that does something immoral. Does the fact that she mentally ill mean that she cannot have an evil alignment, do to the fact that she does not have the ability to form the intent to do evil? If so, what should be her alignment?

I love the concept. I have done some similar things in the past in WFRP witch hunters.

I would consider allowing detect evil and smite evil to effect her, but writing an ability that effectively works like spell resistance against alignment based effects. Call the power "self delusion"


Stubs McKenzie wrote:
Smite Perceived Evil

Oh, I like that!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Stubs McKenzie wrote:

So if i mislead your character into thinking the town just over the hill is a bunch of rapists and murderers with the bluff skill + a couple well placed "clues", and you act on that as a paladin, you would be ok with me not only having you fall, but having your alignment shift from LG to Evil?

EDIT: oops, i left out the f in shift!

Yes.

So beware when building the Quasi Retard(tm) Paladin (Now featuring a 7 wisdom!) or the Semi-Retard(tm) (Now with 30%% less mental calories as they dump Int to 7 as well!).

A Paladin with no brain wont have to worry about his Paladinhood for long.


Ask your GM. It is the only answer that matters in a question like this, since the whole topic boils down to an aligment interpretation question and house rules.

And I think we all know that alignment questions are never answered, just debated, on forums.

RAW you cannot have a non lawful good paladin. As far as most of the settings go, you cannot have an evil power grant paladinly abilities. That is why they have the blackguard/antipaladin.


Gilfalas wrote:

Ask your GM. It is the only answer that matters in a question like this, since the whole topic boils down to an aligment interpretation question and house rules.

And I think we all know that alignment questions are never answered, just debated, on forums.

RAW you cannot have a non lawful good paladin. As far as most of the settings go, you cannot have an evil power grant paladinly abilities. That is why they have the blackguard/antipaladin.

I'm the GM. This Paladin is mean as an NPC that the PCs need to subdue or kill (preferably subdue), and I wanted advice on how to handle her.


'As just about anything other than a Paladin' has been the fairly resounding answer.

The class has enough PR issues and misunderstanding without a GM damaging the rep any further...

It is just one more table of players who shy away from Paladins as being a welcome addition to a table.


Yeah the concept is cool, the OP just has selected the incorrect class to pull off what he wants to do. Anti-paladin, fighter,inquisitor or cleric suit his needs far better.


TheFace wrote:
Can a character be evil if they are mentally ill, and cannot form the intent to do evil or understand that they are doing evil?

Yep. Routinely do evil sh*t = Evil. And why would any respectable good deity allow this lady among its chosen representatives? I’d go with fallen paladin that is so crazy she doesn’t realize her faith has been co-opted by an evil god.

Zon-Kuthon would be a good fit. He loves to torture followers of other faiths and also fell from goodness long ago. He is all about pain. This paladin could see pain as tool to cleanse others of their non-lawful ways. Her insanity has made it impossible for her to know when she has gone too far or to see the difference between self-discipline and self-sacrifice and tyrannically imposing those things on others.


TheFace wrote:

After some thought, I am instituting a new house rule. Any character who is mentally ill to the point where he or she is incapable of differentiating right from wrong or of making reasoned morality choices is of True Neutral alignment. I base this off the fact that animals are True Neutral do to their inability to make moral choices. I feel that the same should apply to those individuals too insane to make moral choices. As such, the Paladin, under this house rule, is True Neutral.

As to the issue of her alignment disqualifying her from Paladinhood, I decree that she is no longer a member of the Paladin class (she now levels up as a Cleric) do to the alignment change brought on by her insanity, but do to the evil deity's intervention her Paladin abilities from the Paladin levels she once possessed still function (though her Smite Evil is now Smite Anything).

Just a note about the hole in your argument.

The "paladin" is making a moral judgement, it's just out of proportion to the violation they observe. If they're punishing someone for stealing a penny with a death sentence, that's a moral judgement. Even if they're punishing people for imagined crimes, it's still a moral judgement. If she views the wearing of the color red to be a crime and killing people for it, that's a moral judgement. The moral judgement doesn't have to be right, they're insane after all.

Animals make no moral judgments. They do things for their own well-being and safety, or the well-being and safety of companions for social animals. They don't do it because they see it as right or wrong, they do it as a matter of survival.

Now if this person were being controlled and manipulated into doing these things out of a necessity of survival, that could be Neutral. For instance if a devil convinced them they would die at sunrise if they didn't kill someone, it's purely out of self-preservation. But if they devil convinces them to do it because the victim is evil, that is still a moral judgement.

If the devil/demon/deity was convincing them that the targets had committed serious crimes, I could see a possibility of Good. If they were only killing murders and rapists, they might be convinced that the local authorities were doing nothing, or possibly complicit, and the paladin would have to take matters into their own hand.

You could even have the character suffering from dissociative identity disorder, though more of the hollywood version. At night he goes out and kills someone, during the day, he hunts that killer, accusing and punishing suspects. All the time being controlled by a devil/demon.


I hope you mean in game animal type only acts on survival instincts and nothing else, because in the real world many animals have been shown to harbor grudges, attack and kill for pleasure, and make life and death choices based upon god knows what on a whim. Survival has nothing to do with many animal behaviors (crows, monkeys, elephants, dolphins, and other species the world over have shown this).

I don't play my animals as 100% instinct driven alone, because it doesn't make any sense. It is an outdated idea that animals are somehow unable to comprehend or reason out further than "eat, sleep, sex, protect"

/rant

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Stubs McKenzie wrote:

I hope you mean in game animal type only acts on survival instincts and nothing else, because in the real world many animals have been shown to harbor grudges, attack and kill for pleasure, and make life and death choices based upon god knows what on a whim. Survival has nothing to do with many animal behaviors (crows, monkeys, elephants, dolphins, and other species the world over have shown this).

I don't play my animals as 100% instinct driven alone, because it doesn't make any sense. It is an outdated idea that animals are somehow unable to comprehend or reason out further than "eat, sleep, sex, protect"

/rant

Only outdated for some animals. The vast majority, in particular insects, and lower life forms in general are only of the eat,sleep, and multiply modes of life. It's only in animals with higher developed neocortexes and almost all of them mammals do you see other motivations come into being, particurlarly emotive ones.


Stubs McKenzie wrote:

I hope you mean in game animal type only acts on survival instincts and nothing else, because in the real world many animals have been shown to harbor grudges, attack and kill for pleasure, and make life and death choices based upon god knows what on a whim. Survival has nothing to do with many animal behaviors (crows, monkeys, elephants, dolphins, and other species the world over have shown this).

I don't play my animals as 100% instinct driven alone, because it doesn't make any sense. It is an outdated idea that animals are somehow unable to comprehend or reason out further than "eat, sleep, sex, protect"

/rant

I don't disagree with you, but I think thats outside the scope of alignment and intelligence for the game. Moral judgments in the animal kingdom are still exceedingly rare. Trying to model everything in it's myriad complexity is neither useful nor helpful in the context of a pen and paper RPG. Standard animal alignment and intelligence is described for game purposes and I think it works well for the most part. Animals that stand outside of it are useful exceptions and can make for interesting opponents or story elements though.


Quote:
A Paladin with no brain wont have to worry about his Paladinhood for long.

I don't know about that. The Gods understand mortality, and its not the paladin's fault he's got the IQ of a can of spam (even if it is the player's)


LazarX wrote:
Stubs McKenzie wrote:

I hope you mean in game animal type only acts on survival instincts and nothing else, because in the real world many animals have been shown to harbor grudges, attack and kill for pleasure, and make life and death choices based upon god knows what on a whim. Survival has nothing to do with many animal behaviors (crows, monkeys, elephants, dolphins, and other species the world over have shown this).

I don't play my animals as 100% instinct driven alone, because it doesn't make any sense. It is an outdated idea that animals are somehow unable to comprehend or reason out further than "eat, sleep, sex, protect"

/rant

Only outdated for some animals. The vast majority, in particular insects, and lower life forms in general are only of the eat,sleep, and multiply modes of life. It's only in animals with higher developed neocortexes and almost all of them mammals do you see other motivations come into being, particurlarly emotive ones.

In pathfinder those are vermin. Vermin is mindless, but animals are not.

Looking at my GF's ferret right now: so much more than instinct comes to play (at least seemingly) :P.

EDIT: of course, I'm not arguing against your point here.


SinTheMoon wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Stubs McKenzie wrote:

I hope you mean in game animal type only acts on survival instincts and nothing else, because in the real world many animals have been shown to harbor grudges, attack and kill for pleasure, and make life and death choices based upon god knows what on a whim. Survival has nothing to do with many animal behaviors (crows, monkeys, elephants, dolphins, and other species the world over have shown this).

I don't play my animals as 100% instinct driven alone, because it doesn't make any sense. It is an outdated idea that animals are somehow unable to comprehend or reason out further than "eat, sleep, sex, protect"

/rant

Only outdated for some animals. The vast majority, in particular insects, and lower life forms in general are only of the eat,sleep, and multiply modes of life. It's only in animals with higher developed neocortexes and almost all of them mammals do you see other motivations come into being, particurlarly emotive ones.

In pathfinder those are vermin. Vermin is mindless, but animals are not.

Looking at my GF's ferret right now: so much more than instinct comes to play (at least seemingly) :P.

EDIT: of course, I'm not arguing against your point here.

Science is also showing us that a lot of behavior is paired with triggers and processes that we have little conscious control over. For example, when a woman breast-feeds a child, it releases a hormone in both of their brains that makes them feel "love". Also, when you pet a dog, both of your brains release the same hormone (oxytocin). We can control the triggers in these two examples, but that's it.

The Exchange

Just as a slight aside to the OP.

I've always enjoyed the role playing aspects, of the following situation.

The player encounter some random, usually fiercely evil monster. Perhaps a bonedevil.

Hopefully before they rush to kill it - they find that the bonedevil is in fact lawful good.

The backstory is that in a combat the bonedevil was knocked out and using the mental illness rules completely developed a new personality.
So much so that it it now a LG paladin.

Now, the interesting kicker / twist.. is that if the character ever gets healed.. his mental illness gets healed as well.

Making the players aware of it .. results in a bunch of very interesting dilemmas...

After a prolonged period of being good - would the bonedevil choose to become good.

If not getting healed - would the paladin suffer relapses, as the previous personality periodically surfaced?

What would a lawful good diety do in these circumstances....


The 'animals are instinct driven' isn't really supported by the evidence. Animals develop unique and awesome moral codes and enforce them against their own kind with vigor. Even overly simplistic creatures like fish will do this. More complex creatures like wolves or monkeys even engage in rudimentary politics to some extent. We've found several species of critters that name their young and mourn their dead even.

Any animal that functions in a group setting, even with so few as only one other of its type, begins to develop a code of conduct, with rewards or punishments for adherance/deviation. We humans just want to feel special and unique so we relegate all this wealth of complex animal behavior to instinct.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
A Paladin with no brain wont have to worry about his Paladinhood for long.
I don't know about that. The Gods understand mortality, and its not the paladin's fault he's got the IQ of a can of spam (even if it is the player's)

It does not matter. You took the oath, you are held to a standard few mortals can ever hope to meet. If your poor mental state lends to your fall, so be it. You simply were not worthy of the challenge.

A paladin walks a hard, rigid road not many can travel. And this road is littered with those who failed to live up to it. A dumb paladin or one with little mind or wisdom does not travel that road long.


TheFace wrote:

I intend her as an NPC that the party has to deal with.

Amazing how many people are missing that one very important line in the original post. There's really no need to jump on TheFace for trying to create some kind of munchkin character, because this is NOT A PC.

I say do whatever you want with it, it's part of your story. You could even have the "paladin's" new evil patron concealing her alignment, that would be a great way to confuse your players and have them really rethink what's going on. "Wait, she's -not- detecting as evil? But we just saw her..."


Voharius wrote:


Amazing how many people are missing that one very important line in the original post. There's really no need to jump on TheFace for trying to create some kind of munchkin character, because this is NOT A PC.

We did not miss it being an NPC, but that does not factor into it. The actions make it a non-paladin. Be it anti-paladin, cleric, inquisitor or just a fighter.

The concept is neat, but its not a paladin any more then a fighter yelling "Magic missile" before shooting his bow is a wizard. There are tons of options for pulling this off, a paladin is not among them.


Quote:
It does not matter. You took the oath, you are held to a standard few mortals can ever hope to meet. If your poor mental state lends to your fall, so be it. You simply were not worthy of the challenge.

Dumb paladin ---> ???????------> Paladin falls

I mean one with a 7 int and wis, not the non paladin the OP is looking for.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
It does not matter. You took the oath, you are held to a standard few mortals can ever hope to meet. If your poor mental state lends to your fall, so be it. You simply were not worthy of the challenge.

Dumb paladin ---> ???????------> Paladin falls

I mean one with a 7 int and wis, not the non paladin the OP is looking for.

If "dumb" or "Unwise" is a used as an excuse to break the code, then yes. All paladins are held to the same standard. It does not matter why you break the code, it does not matter it was the lesser of two evils,if your too dumb to understand or your on a holy crusade.

There is no "Well I didn't know" clause. If the paladin is to dumb to uphold his oath then yes he falls. And as one that dumb is easily fooled , they would fall more then ones with a normal level of intelligence.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
We did not miss it being an NPC, but that does not factor into it. The actions make it a non-paladin.

The fact that this is an NPC is the -most- important factor here. It's a story character, it doesn't have to follow the rules. The original question was about how to handle the character's alignment.

So how do you handle a plot character's alignment? However is best for the plot. Plus you've got the direct intervention of an evil god here, so go nuts with it I say. Evil god powers the "paladin's" abilities to mimic what would be expected of a paladin, while masking alignment. Detect magic might see something strange going on, but detect evil won't.

Or maybe a perception check with alignment detection? A high roll and they might catch a glimpse of something there.

Anyway, no need to bend over backwards with multiclass scenarios. The character can still function as a paladin as far as game mechanics go. Finding out what is really the source of her power could make for a very interesting storyline.


Voharius wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
We did not miss it being an NPC, but that does not factor into it. The actions make it a non-paladin.

The fact that this is an NPC is the -most- important factor here. It's a story character, it doesn't have to follow the rules. The original question was about how to handle the character's alignment.

So how do you handle a plot character's alignment? However is best for the plot. Plus you've got the direct intervention of an evil god here, so go nuts with it I say. Evil god powers the "paladin's" abilities to mimic what would be expected of a paladin, while masking alignment. Detect magic might see something strange going on, but detect evil won't.

Or maybe a perception check with alignment detection? A high roll and they might catch a glimpse of something there.

Anyway, no need to bend over backwards with multiclass scenarios. The character can still function as a paladin as far as game mechanics go. Finding out what is really the source of her power could make for a very interesting storyline.

It's also a slippery slope to be tread with utmost care.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Voharius wrote:

The fact that this is an NPC is the -most- important factor here.

A factor that does not change the fact it is not a paladin.Nor does it effect the question " Am I evil if I eat babies but think I am saving their souls?" Or something of the like.

It simply does not matter why she commits evil. The fact shes an NPC simply is not relevant to whats being asked.

And no Mechanically she can not. She broke the code. She can function as an anti-paladin by the rules ( she seems CE), but not a paladin. Mechanically shes an Ex-paladin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Mechanically" was in terms of abilities and rolls. The oath aspect of the class means nothing in this case, because the character -isn't- a paladin. She has fallen, but is being propped up by another deity. The mechanics of the class are all that are being applied.

It could go even further: The character thinks she can still heal with Lay on Hands, but perhaps is only granting temporary hitpoints. The recipient even thinks they are being healed, but really just doesn't feel as badly hurt anymore.

There is no point shackling yourself to the rules when a plot character is concerned. Imagination is the heart of role-playing games, and the GM's is especially important.

Or do you object every time the bad guys use powers not available to players?


Voharius wrote:


Or do you object every time the bad guys use powers not available to players?

A lot of players do actually. Hence the slippery slope.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

why "mentally ill paladin?" Why not just say "Paladin." and avoid the redundancy. ;-)

51 to 100 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / I want to make a mentally ill Paladin (Need help with alignment). All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.