|
So, this situation eventually didn't matter but I thought I'd calibrate my GM judgement with you folks.
After exploring an underground facility, the PC's decided they could take all the time in the world to go through the dungeon as the Monsters wouldn't dare come to town while they rested. After setting up some traps, the monsters waited patiently and then tried to lure them back to the caverns, with the PC's valiantly following. After a short battle, they were able to isolate the monsters via Wall of Forces, so that the monsters still had access to the cavern exits. The monsters literally went to town while the PC's decided to keep exploring. After a very challenging encounter, with resources drained the party decided to go back to town and rest. By the time they arrived back, the small fishing village was massacred and yet they were able to hear the monsters outside, chewing through the corpses. One party member is a paladin of Sarenrae and she decided it was time to flee and return later to "finish them through". They had no way of knowing if everyone was dead or not, all they saw was a pile of corpses and a huge polar bear-like thing chewing carcasses. In the end they defeated them, but my question to you is:
In your opinion, had the paladin fled (via teleport), would this action have been enough to lose her paladinhood?
The code of Sarenrae says to abide no evil and when words don't suffice, to bring swift justice, but the player insisted that since the code also says that "if you die you don't get to keep fighting evil " (in summary) she was entitled to possible abandon the remaining villagers and flee.
In the end I ruled she would and it don't matter cause the polar-bear-things spotted them and the PCs barely made it out alive.
Anyway, I'd appreciate your opinion, I wouldn't want to be making overtly "unbalanced" calls but I also think the paladin code should not give her such an easy out.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can see why people don't like playing Paladins.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"if you die you don't get to keep fighting evil "
If you die sometimes you need to stop playing your character. I guess you could tell her you expect her paladin to be suicidal and die, but that's not giving much incentive to be a paladin(opposite really).
What makes a paladin fall can be pretty subjective. Best talk between you and the player about expectations that way things like this aren't a shock or require intense thought. Remember, not everyone likes the idea of fall-die or fall-fall situations. Allowing lenience can go a long way to letting everyone have fun at the table.
The relevant phrases from the code in Faiths of Purity are
• The best battle is a battle I win. If I die, I can no longer
fight. I will fight fairly when the fight is fair, and I will
strike quickly and without mercy when it is not.
• I will not abide evil, and will combat it with steel when
words are not enough. I do not flinch from my faith,
and do not fear embarrassment. My soul cannot be
bought for all the stars in the sky.
The first one gives a license to using "unfair" tactics, which might include fleeing and returning with reinforcements. Simply running to save your own life is not part of it. I would say that the PCs choice of tactics, which left the town vulnerable, pushes it over into a violation of alignment if they then abandon it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with the player. If a battle is obviously suicidal I don't see why a paladin would have to fight. Honestly, if the paladin is not doing anything outright evil I would not treat them differently than any other good character.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, you are not required to be idiotic to play a paladin.
No, it says it right there in the Paladin's Handbook!
"A Paladin must strive to be stupid in all things, lest his independent thought lead down the path of impurity."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My answer to this question is always unquestionably, categorically NO. And it doesn't have anything to do with balance -- I just feel that I've got to place telling my players how to role play their own characters.
Further, this particular scenario is hardly even debatable -- you should feel absolutely no regret for not screwing your paladin player over.
|
|
I meant that they had no absolute certainty as they didn't see any alive villagers. But they did see the pile of corpses and it wasn't big enough to account for all villagers and so concluded that probably some were still alive. Still, they didn't have a way of knowing versus inferring.
Sorry if the writing confused things, English isn't my first language.
Anyway, from what you're saying I think it may have been an over-reaction to think about losing paladinhood, thanks for the feedback.
Also, By fleeing she would have abiding evil to go on without even attempting to do something about it.
Except the intent was to leave and come back when they had a shot of winning, not just saying "F%!! these b*+@~es, I'm out".
|
|
They were fairly certain other villagers were still alive, just not eyes on target 100% sure.
You don't have to do something evil to lose paladinhood, a clear violation to the specific code may not be evil of itself but be deviated enough to do so. I don't think he would have needed to act suicidal, an attempt to stealthily rescue them would have been enough. It's just the choice of fleeing and leaving them behind that I thought crossed the line.
You said initially "They had no way of knowing if everyone was dead or not, all they saw was a pile of corpses and a huge polar bear-like thing chewing carcasses."
So which is it?
You yourself said that the townsfolk were already massacred and saw that there were only corpses. Therefore, according to the player, the townsfolk were all massacred. And frankly, leading your tired and wounded teammates with depleted resources into their doom just to protect your honor and paladin powers is a much greater evil. His actions were pragmatic and sound. Don't make him fall.
Also I'm surprised you'd allow him to sneak, since he's a paladin. Wouldn't sneaking be "acting without honor"? ;)
|
|
You said initially "They had no way of knowing if everyone was dead or not, all they saw was a pile of corpses and a huge polar bear-like thing chewing carcasses."
So which is it?
What I meant is that they did not have an absolute certainty meaning they didn't see any live villagers, but also the pile of corpses was not large enough to account for all the villagers so they inferred there had to be some of them still out there somewhere.
Sorry if the writing confused you, English isn't my first language.Anyway, I think all your comments ring true and it was probably an over-reaction to think I losing paladinhood.
Thanks for your feedback
Also I'm surprised you'd allow him to sneak, since he's a paladin. Wouldn't sneaking be "acting without honor"? ;)Well, from the "abide no evil..." Section, I also took that it's sometimes OK to do things like this if the enemy she's facing is playing dirty to begin with.
I could name quiet a few people that have a problem with the idea of it being okay for a paladin to 'stoop down to your level' behavior. Your kind getting picky about what the code is and how to handle it, which is why I said it would probably be best to talk that out with the player.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope. As a paladin, just because the enemy plays dirty doesn't mean you get to. Paladins are put on a higher set of ideals than others.
Tactical retreat to regroup and face evil on your terms when all you see are corpses is about as worth of a fall as sneaking into an enemy encampment is.
Which to say, it isn't.
Going into the fray when your trusted allies are injured and can give little more aid, just to satiate your honor is pure foolishness and prideful. ie the greatest and easiest sin a paladin can fall for. What if they got caught while sneaking? What then? Do they run away and risk the paladin falling, or do they stand their ground and die?
Adding more corpses needlessly is definitely foolish. But glad you realize that you overthought it out.
|
|
I could name quiet a few people that have a problem with the idea of it being okay for a paladin to 'stoop down to your level' behavior. Your kind getting picky about what the code is and how to handle it, which is why I said it would probably be best to talk that out with the player.Also I'm surprised you'd allow him to sneak, since he's a paladin. Wouldn't sneaking be "acting without honor"? ;)Well, from the "abide no evil..." Section, I also took that it's sometimes OK to do things like this if the enemy she's facing is playing dirty to begin with.
We did talk about it and agreed the Sarenrae code quoted above would be the guideline, but this situation makes me think we need to go over how we interpret all of it so this doesn't become an issue.
Tell you what. Since you are clearly having issues with Paladin, give your Paladin a free slotless Phylactery of Faithfulness. Next time you have a issue, have the device warn him.
Only if he continues then do you have an issue.
But the answer to your Op is: Hell no.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The purpose of going in is to save the villagers.
If the villagers *can not be saved* and going in is clearly and absolutely suicide then it isn't Lawful, Good, Or Paladinlike to go in there and turn yourself into the monster's next supper.
Your DUTY is to go and rest up and find reinforcements so that you can TAKE OUT THE EVIL.
Now, if the player is just a chicken and says "we have a chance but.. nah lets run away"- that is one thing. but if they scout and realize they have a snowball's chance in hell of killing the baddies and that all they will accomplish is to add to the cookpot then its not bad evil or against their code to get the heck out of there.
It is NOT heroic to throw yourself on the sword of the enemy unless doing so serves some purpose. "Well gee now I'm dead too, hope these monsters eat me and go away instead of pwning the next village" isn't heroic. Its moronic.
Should the Paladin lose his/her powers for leaving to get reinforcements to thwart a clearly superior foe? Abso-freaking-lutely not.
Sarenrae wants the evil DESTROYED. She is NOT pleased to see her Paladin acting like they have a negative int score showing up on her doorstep in pieces saying "But i tried, even though I knew I had no hope.. I tried!".
Just. No.
Retreat. Get reinforcements. Go after the evil and DESTROY IT.
Be smart.
-S
Definitely not. Dying while not accomplishing anything is not required.
(Never mind that power-loss mechanics are lame anyway.)
To a paraphrase one of the dev comments on the Paladin's code: The Code is not a suicide pact. Withdrawing from an unwinnable battle is a reasonable course of action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope. When you are badly hurt, low on resources and unsure, you run away. You don't get to fight evil tomorrow if evil whumps you today because you weren't ready.
Don't get hung up on the paladin code. It's just a game after all.
Falling isn't fun. When in doubt, don't make them fall. The PC seems to be able to justify what they did on some moral grounds, so roll with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do people hate paladins so much?
No visible screaming villagers about to be immediately eaten or in mortal danger.
Allies will die if I rush into battle.
Is the creature evil no its a bear. Bears get hungry.
Withdrawing at this point seems like the best coarse of action. Even for a Paladin.
Tactical retreat is not against the Paladin's Code. I am not going to go through each item of the Sarenrae Paladin Code and explain why you can retreat. Yes, there is a lot of unknowns here. Yes, they may be leaving innocents behind. But if the Paladin is DEAD, she cannot help the innocents.
No. If you are going to punish someone for playing a paladin my going out of your way to nitpick every action, warn them up front.
Maybe we might consider this from a slightly different point of view.
The paladin's god. This entity is lawful good right? This includes good not just law. Good to me would mean understanding and compassionate and forgiving of minor slights against the code. As long as the problem gets fixed and the code is upheld in the end.
The paladin was going to leave the ravaged town with all townsfolk seemingly lost. Out of resources, this battle seemed lost before it began. Returning later ready for the battle to smite the evil and seek just vengence for the town. If I were playing this paladin I might even make reparations to the town (gold and time helping to rebuild) or any survivors/ next of kin.
IMHO an acceptable outcome.
I've read the original post, not the remainder of the posts.
I am in the "Don't make the paladin fall" camp. If every Paladin ran into certain death as often as some people seem to think they should, there would be no Paladins left. There is nothing wrong w/ retreating for reinforcements. I think an argument that a Paladin running into certain death is more inline w/ "abiding evil" by dying needlessly than retrieving reinforcements (which would return to kill said evil).
Paladin kills random person for no reason = fallen Paladin.
Paladin rushing into portal to Hell for no reason = stupid and dead Paladin.
Paladin making wise decisions to defeat evil in the end = successful Paladin.
Also, By fleeing she would have abiding evil to go on without even attempting to do something about it.
What's your point? By going to sleep any night a paladin knowingly rests while evil still exists in the world.
A paladin who wishes to end evil (and lawlessness) will assess a situation and act in whatever manner will render the greatest good. Sometimes that means stopping fighting to eat, sleep and defecate. Sometimes that means taking a week "off" to have a custom item crafted that will aid in the quest. Sometimes that means waiting for the bad guys to come to you. Sometimes that means going back to town for reinforcements.
Whatever gets the job done cleanly. Not necessarily quickly or suicidally.
A paladin will act to minimize collateral damage and will value the lives of those they protect above their own but doesn't need to ignore "the odds". They still have a brain, as many in this thread have pointed out.
Yeah, as I said above I think all the comments fall in the "no fall" camp and I now agree with that.
It's not that I hate paladins, I think the question was important because as a GM I'm supposed to arbitrate and wanted to get feedback or risk doing something overtly arbitrary and ultimately not justified.
I'm guessing this kind of questions come up a lot here?
Some people should never be allowed to play a paladin. this forum has taught me that most GMs cannot handle having them in the game.
By the same token, some people should never allow a paladin in their game, if they're going to take any lame excuse to point and laugh and say 'You lost your powers, you lost your powers, nanny-nanny-boo-boo'.
Overall, I find the class so ridiculous and arbitrary that I usually just ban it to avoid the headaches it causes.
Some people should never be allowed to play a paladin. this forum has taught me that most GMs cannot handle having them in the game.
You want the paladin? You can't handle the paladin!
That said, there's probably a way to phrase that without looking like the player is to blame.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eh, the Paladin is fine- it should have just been moved to the APG.
If you aren't an advanced player with an advanced DM then the Paladin doesn't really belong at the table anymore than a newbie should be toying with the Summoner and such.
The Paladin code isn't meant to be a crutch or a stick the DM is to beat him over the head with. It is meant to be a most awesome Rp opportunity for the DM, the Paladin Player and the group.
Sure the group is good- but are they Paladin good? Can they fight evil while shouldering the burden of being That Good in the process?
Can they handle the moral quandries and do the right thing even when its hard or difficult or makes their life a pain?
That is the life of a Paladin. It isn't easy. It isn't meant to be. And not all groups or DM's can handle it.
-S
Sure the group is good- but are they Paladin good? Can they fight evil while shouldering the burden of being That Good in the process?
This is one of the big problems with the paladin; they tend to impose their own morality on the rest of the party, instead of simply going 'Sorry, not my thing, but you guys can do your thing if you want. I don't have any business telling you how to live your lives'.
That is the life of a Paladin. It isn't easy. It isn't meant to be. And not all groups or DM's can handle it.
Talk like that is why its hard. "Its supposed to be hard!" infers your supposed to make the paladin's life hard. Its actually pretty easy in my games because I have houserules to create flexibility and be who you want to be. Not so much by RAW where they have an inflexible code that could easily be taken as an absolute and twisted to something not so fun.
This is one of the big problems with the paladin; they tend to impose their own morality on the rest of the party, instead of simply going 'Sorry, not my thing, but you guys can do your thing if you want. I don't have any business telling you how to live your lives'.
Sure the group is good- but are they Paladin good? Can they fight evil while shouldering the burden of being That Good in the process?
Letting rules and laws slide for your friends is more a chaotic good thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The paladin player should role play feeling guilty about cutting out. Then he should gear up and grimly make things right.
It's all about story.
Along the same vein - a fall should generally only happen when you and the player both agree to insert it into his story. It can make for great RP but you should both be on board when it happens.
Letting rules and laws slide for your friends is more a chaotic good thing.
Missed the point entirely. Its a real buzzkill when someone tells you how to play or what to do. Making that a mandate of your class is one of the reasons people don't like paladins. Anti-fun laws is a terrible class feature!