Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Fall or Not - Opinions on the actions of a Paladin


Advice

201 to 250 of 283 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Roberta Yang wrote:
If your standard for the class requires the player to die in order to avoid falling, your standard might be a bit too high. I like playing characters more when they survive longer than one session.

I wouldnt expect them to just kill themseleves no, but i feel in a postion like this paladin was he theres no excuss for not putting all on the line.


Roberta Yang wrote:
If your standard for the class requires the player to die in order to avoid falling, your standard might be a bit too high. I like playing characters more when they survive longer than one session.

I reward all players at my table for proper role playing, and they understand its a sliding scale if you choose something difficult like paladin vs something less difficult ie fighter then the rewards are slightly better.


Stubs McKenzie wrote:

More importantly, after having stated several times now how you believe paladins should act, and to what standards they should be held, what are you adding to the ongoing conversation. You (and I) and others believe the paladin should fall, maybe for different reasons, but we all get that... why do you continually try and hammer home the point? You arent bringing anything else to the conversation or helping the OP any more than you were 4? 5? Posts ago?

Im NOT telling you to abandon thread, but please for the sake of the discussion move on from your original point.

I'm sorry if I upset you thats not my intention. I just grow tried of people wnating to play paladin for thier abilties, but not wanting to actully playa paladin if you understand what I'm saying. I have played paladins since 2nd ed trough alot of changes to the class and its powers, but the one thing that should stay constant his selfless devoution to what is good and just seems to be taking a huge hit lately. Thats way I set standards high and feel that the class should be taken seriously or not played.


Nether wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Paladin should be more pious then any cleric, braver then any fighter, an more honor bound then any monk that's the standard I hold them to.

I gotta ask then, do you compensate the pally in any way because of such strict req?

Because the class isnt balanced with that aspect in mind, so sounds like you put the class to high req, but do you give them anything because of that? Greater rp benefits in game? Bonuses to social actions at all times? Free room and board, repair, basic equipment free, leaders always taking their word as gospel? ext.

I am just trying to see how you make it fair, as they dont get any power advantage over any other class design because of this.

Debateable. I think Paladin class design does give them an advantage. Particularly if they fight primarily evil things. Paladins have a larger effective health pool than anyone else in the game, extremely high saves and do par damage with a fighter while also getting moderate spell utility.

Plus, a properly RPed paladin will get advantages in social interactions. When people see a paladin, they will know this is a good guy. Otherwise, he couldn't be a paladin.


Nether wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Paladin should be more pious then any cleric, braver then any fighter, an more honor bound then any monk that's the standard I hold them to.

I gotta ask then, do you compensate the pally in any way because of such strict req?

Because the class isnt balanced with that aspect in mind, so sounds like you put the class to high req, but do you give them anything because of that? Greater rp benefits in game? Bonuses to social actions at all times? Free room and board, repair, basic equipment free, leaders always taking their word as gospel? ext.

I am just trying to see how you make it fair, as they dont get any power advantage over any other class design because of this.

SMITE EVIL. Huge boni to AC and hit and damage and completely ignore all DR. The class is in fact balanced with the paladin code in mind.-

Roberta Yang wrote:
If your standard for the class requires the player to die in order to avoid falling, your standard might be a bit too high. I like playing characters more when they survive longer than one session.

With a church full of innocents behind you? I expect a paladin to go into the fight while shouting for the villagers to flee. You don't have to play Stupid Good, nor Lawful Stupid, but when you're the only thing between a bunch of innocents and a vampire willing to dominate them and send them to die against a prismatic wall? You have to at least try. If the enemy is too powerful and you're going to die, THEN you can run away swearing vengeance, but you have to at least trade a couple of rounds before it.


johnlocke90 wrote:
Plus, a properly RPed paladin will get advantages in social interactions. When people see a paladin, they will know this is a good guy. Otherwise, he couldn't be a paladin.

How do they know he's a paladin and not merely, say, an oracle in heavy armor adorned with holy symbols? Do they look at his character sheet?


Roberta Yang wrote:
johnlocke90 wrote:
Plus, a properly RPed paladin will get advantages in social interactions. When people see a paladin, they will know this is a good guy. Otherwise, he couldn't be a paladin.
How do they know he's a paladin and not merely, say, an oracle in heavy armor adorned with holy symbols? Do they look at his character sheet?

His divine bond is a giveaway. Plus they will have symbols of their order. Granted, if you are in a grimdark setting the paladin won't do to well, but your GM should let you know going in if the setting will be like that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
johnlocke90 wrote:
His divine bond is a giveaway.

Perhaps if it's a horse. Not so much if it's a magic weapon. Everyone has magic weapons.

johnlocke90 wrote:
Plus they will have symbols of their order.

Anyone can wear symbols.


They use that same inant knowledge we all do at the table. Hey theres someone in moon and star covered robes and a pointy hat he must me a wizard lol.


Roberta Yang wrote:
johnlocke90 wrote:
His divine bond is a giveaway.

Perhaps if it's a horse. Not so much if it's a magic weapon. Everyone has magic weapons.

johnlocke90 wrote:
Plus they will have symbols of their order.
Anyone can wear symbols.

Vampire's can't.


seto83 wrote:
They use that same inant knowledge we all do at the table. Hey theres someone in moon and star covered robes and a pointy hat he must me a wizard lol.

So all I need is a glowing weapon, heavy armor, and a holy symbol, and I can walk into town and gain massive social benefits because everyone will assume I'm a paladin and therefore must be good, when in reality I am an Evil Oracle? And all my rogue needs is a pointy hat and everyone will cower before her arcane might?

johnlocke90 wrote:
Vampire's can't.

Congratulations, you've proven you're not a vampire. Woohoo.


Roberta Yang wrote:
seto83 wrote:
They use that same inant knowledge we all do at the table. Hey theres someone in moon and star covered robes and a pointy hat he must me a wizard lol.

So all I need is a glowing weapon, heavy armor, and a holy symbol, and I can walk into town and gain massive social benefits because everyone will assume I'm a paladin and therefore must be good, when in reality I am an Evil Oracle? And all my rogue needs is a pointy hat and everyone will cower before her arcane might?

johnlocke90 wrote:
Vampire's can't.
Congratulations, you've proven you're not a vampire. Woohoo.

It was a joking but i did once play a monk that traveled looking like a wizard intentionally. Rush the caster fob wtf? It was awesome.


Honestly, I think we're all saying the same thing over and over again. It's all moot now. The point is that the "standard" is all about perspective...even though I agree with Seto83. <.<

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
seto83 wrote:
Thats way I set standards high and feel that the class should be taken seriously or not played.

This is why I ban the base class and use the prestige paladin in my games. So players can prove they are one before they gain the powers of one.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Thats way I set standards high and feel that the class should be taken seriously or not played.
This is why I ban the base class and use the prestige paladin in my games. So players can prove they are one before they gain the powers of one.

With all the feel of AD&D, right? TriOmegaZero has probably come up with the best solution.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Thats way I set standards high and feel that the class should be taken seriously or not played.
This is why I ban the base class and use the prestige paladin in my games. So players can prove they are one before they gain the powers of one.

I dont mind someone playing a pally form lvl one. I just demand it be played properly. To the op the paladin falls theres no way around that but do give him a chance at redemption and a stren lecture form the handmaidan of his deity, and he would only keep with that party if they were willing to admit their wrong doings and atone for them ie atonement spell. If that style of behavour continues he falls and is never to be a paladin again. This would for me extend to up coming aps as well until he can handle rp required.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
seto83 wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Thats way I set standards high and feel that the class should be taken seriously or not played.
This is why I ban the base class and use the prestige paladin in my games. So players can prove they are one before they gain the powers of one.
I dont mind someone playing a pally form lvl one. I just demand it be played properly. To the op the paladin falls theres no way around that but do give him a chance at redemption and a stren lecture form the handmaidan of his deity, and he would only keep with that party if they were willing to admit their wrong doings and atone for them ie atonement spell. If that style of behavour continues he falls and is never to be a paladin again. This would for me extend to up coming aps as well until he can handle rp required.

Sorry, but you aren't demanding the paladin be played properly. You're demanding the paladin be played the way you want paladins to be played. If you're GMing, and your player can suck it up, then fine. Just don't go into another group's game and tell them that they're playing wrong.


Serum wrote:
seto83 wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Thats way I set standards high and feel that the class should be taken seriously or not played.
This is why I ban the base class and use the prestige paladin in my games. So players can prove they are one before they gain the powers of one.
I dont mind someone playing a pally form lvl one. I just demand it be played properly. To the op the paladin falls theres no way around that but do give him a chance at redemption and a stren lecture form the handmaidan of his deity, and he would only keep with that party if they were willing to admit their wrong doings and atone for them ie atonement spell. If that style of behavour continues he falls and is never to be a paladin again. This would for me extend to up coming aps as well until he can handle rp required.
Sorry, but you aren't demanding the paladin be played properly. You're demanding the paladin be played the way you want paladins to be played. If you're GMing, and your player can suck it up, then fine. Just don't go into another group's game and tell them that they're playing wrong.

I let players in my group know before hand what the standards are so its thier choice. I'm not trying to say others are wrong for not holding their pallys to any tangable standard, just giving my opinion.


I'm confused, you said the paladin didn't do anything but if I'm not mistaken he tried to stop them from running into the wall?

He didn't stop the people from burning but he did vote against it?

You say you wouldn't will your paladin to die but to lay it all on the line. Given the two situations you mentioned you just wished the paladin to die. A solo paladin against a vampire and a minion (and possibly the other villagers causing interference), or.. versus the 4 or 5 party members he literally just saved the town with?

I think the paladin was set up. It really was a good story though. I dislike the idea of crippling a character because they made otherwise wise choices. It's not like he ducked behind the villagers putting them between him and the vampire.

Eh, I like the idea of no direct punishment, but deep story elements to tie it to them. A vision at night re-living the situation and feeling the distress the villagers suffered. Spirits remaining sort of haunting them until justice is served.


First of all if he would have acted promptly the villagers would have never been domanatied. It is a rough situation for a paladin but with the options in front of him there should be no real choice. I'm paladin this is what I what i sign up for when i took the oath. If it was my campaign I most likely wouldn't have killed the paladin had he tried maybe render him helpless and still kill some villagers so he can live with his failure and fuel to drive his vengence vs said vampire. The point is he made minamal if in effort besides pleding like a child that the big mean vampire please dont put the blood of these inocents on my soul since i care not to raise a finger to help them in their hour of need. Then simply voting not to burn them really? He should be stand in front of said fire screaming and brandishing a weapon to get his point across. I hope when they run into that vampire he rechants the tale of how he dispelled his domanite as each person was tossed on the pyre so they could enjoy being burnt to death for no reason the way it was meant to be enjoyed.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
seto83 wrote:
I'm not trying to say others are wrong for not holding their pallys to any tangable standard, just giving my opinion.

Well that is good, since no one is doing that.


Maybe it was an opposed intimidate check that was never rolled? lol.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
seto83 wrote:
I'm not trying to say others are wrong for not holding their pallys to any tangable standard, just giving my opinion.
Well that is good, since no one is doing that.

Right cause a paladin that doesn't intervine to save innocent lives form evil and then sits by and lets the remaining villgers be burnt to death for nothing, while people are like I see no reason for him to fall. Your !00% right that paladin is being held to certin standards.

Hell whats next on this paladins list take advantage of a women against her will and then murder her so she can't rat him out, but I suppose you allow them to do that in your world too.


Seto83, First, the Pally is a woman. Secondly, Calm down dude.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
seto83 wrote:
...but I suppose you allow them to do that in your world too.

Oh look, more baseless assumptions.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
seto83 wrote:
...but I suppose you allow them to do that in your world too.
Oh look, more baseless assumptions.

Guys, this is getting out of hand. Are we all seriously gonna fight over this? While I love this thread, I think it should be closed before someone says something stupid. I love Pathfinder with all my heart, but in the end, it's just a game. There is no need for such abrasiveness.


Sorry maybe this is one of the things that really irk me. Then tri omega please enlighten me as to where you would draw a line?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The Paladin should Fall here. 1st being cowardly and second bring justice for the murdered villagers. Now I'd take this as opportunity to roleplay, not punish. Take the Paladin player aside and talk him about turning to the darkside, ANTIPALADIN. Don't tell the others and don't have this occur instantly. Have it occur slowly and painfully over time. Make the Falling Paladin mirror the rest of the parties own souls.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I'd definitely draw the line at actively hurting an innocent.

I'd draw the line at a paladin failing to protect an innocent in a situation where they can reasonably expect to make a difference, or in which the penalties for attempting and failing will not impede the paladin's general ability to fight evil and protect the innocent.

I'd draw the line at a paladin failing to try to do the right thing.

I'm inclined to be lenient if there's a good faith effort to do right, or if doing right requires PVP action. The latter is a bit of metagaming, but PVP is risky at table and I don't want a player to feel like he has to fight the other players or fall.

Roberta Yang wrote:
So all I need is a glowing weapon, heavy armor, and a holy symbol, and I can walk into town and gain massive social benefits because everyone will assume I'm a paladin and therefore must be good, when in reality I am an Evil Oracle? And all my rogue needs is a pointy hat and everyone will cower before her arcane might?

It's called headology. Never underestimate the power of a pointy hat.


To OP,

Sinse we are all bleeding in verbal jabs here trying to help you out, I think you should at least let us know what your solution to this is and what the players actually did after this in a update here.

Use a little more detail than the original post though pls.


@VM mercenario
@seto83

No one knew about the vampire until he knocked at the church door and one of the npcs let him in. The party knew 'something' was up when the wiz found one of his scrying eyes destroyed, but no one knew by what.

The pally's party fled the church minus one npc.

The pally did not run, and saw that she was up against something incredibly strong compared to her.

The vamp dominated villagers. Being holy, righteous and good pally does not mean you are required to just jump in and fight right away as a req. She held ground looking for another way to handle this. And even if she did jump in to fight the vamp right away, she would have died or dropped, then the vamp would still be free to dominate / suicide the villagers on the wall. The pally's sacrifice would have netted nothing at all except a pointless death/drop.

Then there is the vote for burning the villagers that the pally opposed.
Now the tricky part, which we still dont know the group policy on is pvp, it is allowed?

If pvp is allowed, the pally player is rolling a new character no matter the outcome, as in she is either dead or unconscious, but she cant adventure with that group anymore. Only possible way to adv with group is if she went anti paladin which doesnt fit how she handled this encounter.

If pvp isn't allowed, then she cant fight them and this would be the exact same thing that was described to happen, a vote but no combat.

The only way i see the pally staying with the group is by her understanding that they made some terrible judgment decisions under duress and acted cowardly, but she has been travelling with them and prolly knows them somewhat, so i could see her trying to redeem them, making sure they never forget this lesson in the future as the wrong thing to do.

You can look at the choices as only the in game ones matter, but i still think that some of the meta game has just as much say on what to do, and by that i mean the pvp and being able to play with the group. It would also destroy the gm's campaign, his time and effort creating it, as well as might break up the group depending if any hard feelings.

So taking all of that into consideration, i think the pally has managed to still stay on the good side of the line and hasn't crossed that line yet to falling.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nether wrote:

To OP,

Sinse we are all bleeding in verbal jabs here trying to help you out, I think you should at least let us know what your solution to this is and what the players actually did after this in a update here.

Use a little more detail than the original post though pls.

I know right? The details are great :) and the possibilities.. oh the story telling..

Scarab Sages

What's that whistling noise, getting louder and louder all the time?

*looks up*

Oh, verily, 'tis the paladin, still falling.


Ascalaphus wrote:
I wouldn't punish the wizard, rogue etc.; at least not by some power-stripping exercise or something like that. They're not classes with alignment restrictions; don't treat them like they are.

The Paladin and Cleric should clearly get the message from their gods that either the wizard and rogue have to atone, or else they simply can not adventure with them anymore. Assuming that the players want to keep the party together and good, they all need to atone after this. The wizard especially, assuming he's the one who actually burned the innocent people to death.

And that's in addition to whatever atoning the paladin and cleric have to do.


There should at the least be some diminished powers temporairly as their respect gods shown and possibly voice in some way their disdain for the disgusting acts. Also I agrre with Yosarian that their gods should demansd either atonement or the others or leave them. I personally feel this is to leaniant, but it seems if you properly punish anyone for their actions your a bully of a dm. This is a bad example and i apologize it advance for everyone this will piss off. In WWII the german soldiers either did horrible things or set back and watch horrible things happen to the prisoners in their camps. By these standards apparently thats no harm no foul because the were out voted by the superiours, and those men are prefectly good souls right?

Star Voter 2015

I only read the first page, but encounters of one big bad against a party of many low level chumps won't be a fair fight. Either the low level guys manage to pass some crowd control on the big bad and win by action economy, or they just get destroyed in droves.

The vampire is immune to a lot of status effects, has DR 10 that I'm guessing the PCs don't have the tools to bypass, and Fast Healing 5. Besides damage, it can bestow two negative levels a round, which means every two rounds a lvl 4 PC gets tapped out.


Nether wrote:

To OP,

Sinse we are all bleeding in verbal jabs here trying to help you out, I think you should at least let us know what your solution to this is and what the players actually did after this in a update here.

Use a little more detail than the original post though pls.

Planning on it. I really appreciate all the advice.

Since we ended things right after they burned the villagers, I thought that was a good place to end the session, we'll be picking up from there. Been talking things over with the Paladin's player on what he plans to do and you'll be interested to know he is planning to take action for the villagers deaths(as far as I can tell, turning the Party into the authorities when he can/redeeming those he can), but we'll see what exactly happens when we have game again. It should be interesting if nothing else.

And lol, don't worry I'll try to be more descriptive. If I knew how heated things were I would have gone into much greater detail intially.

Star Voter 2013

seto83 wrote:
There should at the least be some diminished powers temporairly as their respect gods shown and possibly voice in some way their disdain for the disgusting acts. Also I agrre with Yosarian that their gods should demansd either atonement or the others or leave them. I personally feel this is to leaniant, but it seems if you properly punish anyone for their actions your a bully of a dm. This is a bad example and i apologize it advance for everyone this will piss off. In WWII the german soldiers either did horrible things or set back and watch horrible things happen to the prisoners in their camps. By these standards apparently thats no harm no foul because the were out voted by the superiours, and those men are prefectly good souls right?

Yeah, that's a fairly awful example. Unless you believe all soldiers are evil, it just don't work. Most of the German troops would be no worse than the average British or American soldier fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan today. Despite the German Government creating a ton of anti-Jewish sentiment, they didn't actually publicly announce they were murdering them, oddly. There were rumours, but given there was also the Gestapo, most people didn't ask questions. Unless you were Jewish, Gay, the wrong colour or minority (there were a fair few) or had a disabled family member then it wasn't likely to affect you. The biggest sin of most of the Germans was simply being too afraid to ask questions like, 'What are they doing to all those people?' or 'Why have all the kids in wheelchairs vanished?'

The vast majority of the German soldiers were in the same boat. Desertion meant being killed, and I'm fairly sure there was a draft, so Germans didn't get a lot of choice but to fight or die (although they had a surprisingly high influx of Priests, who couldn't be drafted, at that time). Most weren't allowed near the Concentration camps anymore than anyone else. And if they were ordered to round up someone and send them for questioning...well, so do British and American troops during the whole War on Terror fiasco, despite the rumours those people would end up in dark little rooms with a wide array of unpleasant instruments and people with a distinct lack of morals. I wouldn't consider our troops evil for it.

As for the Paladin (end of history lesson, Captain Archaeology) maybe some would have charged the vampire. If you mistake 'I don't care about dying!' as bravery, anyway. I can't remember who said it but someone said something like, 'Dying for a cause is easy. It only takes a moment. Living for a cause, devoting every day, struggling every minute to achieve it? Now that is courage.' Any Paladin thinking about keeping people safe rather than 'Honour and my own big gloriousness!' would have twigged they couldn't kill the vamp - they probably couldn't even delay him a few rounds to give the NPC's time to escape. Instead, and still knowing that vampy could snuff her out pretty much at will (I hate Dominate Person with vampires) they tried to save people's lives.

Personally, I am of the opinion a Paladin should never fall for an act that was trying to save lives. Unless it's 'Ill go save my heavily armed pal while that orphanage burns' or some such. Even when they failed. And I'm usually harsh as hell on Paladins, even stating in another thread that if they're too drunk to, say, Guard a princess after being told to do so, then they should fall. The only area for punishment is, 'Did she try hard enough to stop her fellow PC's burning them?' which I don't think she did, but bar killing the others I dunno what she could have done. Hence the Wayward Paladin archetype I suggested (with the Haunted Oracle's Curse...guess whose haunting her?) to make sure she knows someone is watching, and not entirely approving.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Seto, you seem to have two consistent problems.

1.) You don't know how copy and paste/multiquoting works.

2.) You think everyone who doesn't play exactly how you want them to play is doing it wrong.

Please try to fix both of these things.

Sincerely,

A forum poster


Rynjin wrote:

Seto, you seem to have two consistent problems.

1.) You don't know how copy and paste/multiquoting works.

2.) You think everyone who doesn't play exactly how you want them to play is doing it wrong.

Please try to fix both of these things.

Sincerely,

A forum poster

1. You are 100% right idk how to do that.

2. Op asked for opinions I gave mine with detail as to whay I feel that why. I could care less how ya'll decide when a plaldin should or shouldn't be punished in your world. I told you the standards I hold them to in mine, if people choose not to hold them to any what so ever in theirs thats fine as I dont play with them.

It is possible I'm to strict on them though I really doubt that. Why don't some of ya'll give examples of the standards you make them up hold in your world.

Shadow Lodge Marathon Voter 2013, Marathon Voter 2014

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Why don't some of ya'll give examples of the standards you make them up hold in your world.

For starters, I don't force them into situations where their choices are "die or fall".


Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Why don't some of ya'll give examples of the standards you make them up hold in your world.
For starters, I don't force them into situations where their choices are "die or fall".

I try my best to avoid those situations as well, but i didnt create this situation the op did. So whats paladin to do up hold her code and ethics or cower like a field mouse in front of a cobra. This paladin apparently likes option 2.


seto83 wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Why don't some of ya'll give examples of the standards you make them up hold in your world.
For starters, I don't force them into situations where their choices are "die or fall".
I try my best to avoid those situations as well, but i didnt create this situation the op did. So whats paladin to do up hold her code and ethics or cower like a field mouse in front of a cobra. This paladin apparently likes option 2.

Well you know what they say, if the cr fits... :P

Star Voter 2013

seto83 wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Why don't some of ya'll give examples of the standards you make them up hold in your world.
For starters, I don't force them into situations where their choices are "die or fall".
I try my best to avoid those situations as well, but i didnt create this situation the op did. So whats paladin to do up hold her code and ethics or cower like a field mouse in front of a cobra. This paladin apparently likes option 2.

Perhaps you could have explained how a suicide attack on a vampire, rather than trying to save innocent lives, is more in line with the Paladin's Code?

The Paladin's Code wrote:

A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

I bolded the two most relevant sections. The simple truth is, the Paladin could not both punish the evil doer AND help those in need. She could get herself killed, allow the vamp to murder everyone and thus achieve nothing, or she could help the innocents while hoping to achieve the punishment game later.

Seriously, how many Good or Neutral Gods do you imagine are going to go, 'Really? You DIDN'T pointlessly hurl your life away and leave those innocents without a defender? You instead choose to be totally selfish and try and save there lives!? No more Paladin powers for you unless you hurl yourself off a building. At a draco-lich.' 'Cos if you can name one, I'm totally not using that as my deity when I try out Paladins.


@ Rynjin: I too, know not how to copy/paste the multiquote/previous posters comments in the pretty shades into my pithy posts. Please enlighten. (I always end up with 1.) You don't know how copy and paste/multiquoting works.)

Thank you
Grym

Shadow Lodge Marathon Voter 2013, Marathon Voter 2014

Use the "reply" button above their post.


JonGarrett wrote:
seto83 wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Why don't some of ya'll give examples of the standards you make them up hold in your world.
For starters, I don't force them into situations where their choices are "die or fall".
I try my best to avoid those situations as well, but i didnt create this situation the op did. So whats paladin to do up hold her code and ethics or cower like a field mouse in front of a cobra. This paladin apparently likes option 2.

Perhaps you could have explained how a suicide attack on a vampire, rather than trying to save innocent lives, is more in line with the Paladin's Code?

The Paladin's Code wrote:

A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

I bolded the two most relevant sections. The simple truth is, the Paladin could not both punish the evil doer AND help those in need. She could get herself killed, allow the vamp to murder everyone and thus achieve nothing, or she could help the innocents while hoping to achieve the punishment game later.

Seriously, how many Good or Neutral Gods do you imagine are going to go, 'Really? You DIDN'T pointlessly hurl your life away and leave those innocents without a defender? You instead choose to be totally selfish and try and save there lives!? No more Paladin powers for you unless you hurl yourself off a building. At a draco-lich.' 'Cos if you can name one, I'm totally not using that as my deity when I try out Paladins.

You answered your own question with the bolded parts, this paladin did neither of those things and only thought to save herself by not standing up to said vampire.

To the op if the sami had a +2 keen katana what kind of equipment did said paladin have?

201 to 250 of 283 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Advice / Fall or Not - Opinions on the actions of a Paladin All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.