How to Handle a Fallen (Falling) Paladin


Advice


Hey guys, I have a situation that I'm trying to resolve as easily as possible. I'm running a game where one of the players is playing a Paladin. His character was introduced while the party was around level 5 or 6, but they just hit 9.

He is a Paladin of Iomedae, no archetypes I believe, and mechanically speaking he's very, very well built. He has a great damage out-put and his AC is the highest in the party at the moment, but outside of combat he's bland. He has little interactions with the rest of the party and his only motivation seems to be "grr kill bad guys," but to that degree he is entirely merciless to the point where I don't think he could be accurately described as Lawful Good. If anything, he's Lawful Evil - he has no care for who or what he kills, as long as it falls under the ___ Evil category. He describes himself as grim and angry, which I understand to mean that he can be harsh and sometimes toes the line between what's good and necessary, but he doesn't play that way. He plays like a blood-thirsty monster.

The problem with this is, I as a DM want to say that he needs to shape up or he's at risk of falling, but I know the player traditionally does not handle things well when they don't go positively for him. He's brought the mood down at our games on more than a few occasions when he's failed to perform (poor roles, or the enemy is just particularly potent against his character) and when his original character came close to death he all but abandoned him and started making a new one in the same session.

How would you suggest handling it?

Silver Crusade

well, tbf iomedea is pretty... "kill all evil" deity. So, to actually have him fall from doing what his goddess wants, use another aspect, redemption, he must start attempting to convice neer'do'wells to repent and redeem themselves from there evil ways. THEN he can kill them if they don't. Also, just because someone "pings" evil doesn't mean he has the right to walk up and gut them, thats a no-no

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

can you give examples of his merciless combat techniques I have to say unless he is dumping gasoline and lighting the match he should be fine as for his motivation what more than rid the world of evil do you need to be a paladin but nothing is stopping you from sending him a warning from his deity that he is deviating from her ways.


Iomedae, Sarenrae, and Erastil (if i'm correct) are the trinity of Gods whose paladins traditionally follow the philosophy of "No Mercy for the Wicked." a Philosophy based on the fact that "Redeeming a Villain is an Impractical Expenditure of Resources that may not work when you can simply smite them on the spot." so, a lot of these paladins "Don't Take Prisoners" "Don't Accept Surrender" and "Brutally Slay Evil." it's not that they are Sadists, but they can be, but paladins of this school of thought beleive, "Sparing a Horde of Demons because of the possibility of one Redeemable Succubus" is "something unlikely to work" and are built around the assumption that certain creatures are "inherently evil."

if you want the paladin to stop smiting evil people mercilessly, you need to start including neutral, and even good members of potentially evil races seeking a pleasant life. make them second guess the drow

this paladin, plays more like an Inquisitor, or like an Archon. they play like a true follower of Iomedae. i wouldn't punish them for following Ioemedae tenants.

i would however, punish them if they show bias or inconsistency in their punishment of evil. such as Sparing humans while smiting a Demon. despite both being the same form of evil.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you don't think it would go well, then don't do it. Running a good game is way more important that taking away a character's class abilities because you disagree about the meaning of Lawful Good. Should the Paladin Fall? No.

Silver Crusade

Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
Iomedae, Sarenrae, and Erastil (if i'm correct) are the trinity of Gods whose paladins traditionally follow the philosophy of "No Mercy for the Wicked." a Philosophy based on the fact that "Redeeming a Villain is an Impractical Expenditure of Resources that may not work when you can simply smite them on the spot."

wat

Quote:

Sarenrae

"No Mercy for the Wicked"

WAT

This is pretty far astray from what is actually written.

Iomedae comes down really hard on people who do evil in the name of "the greater good", especially when they do it in her name. And "blood-thirsty monster" is not someone she, Sarenrae, or Erastil are going to back up. And while Sarenrae might be the biggest on redemption among those three, Iomedae and Erastil are both big on it as well(see Iomedae's actions in her mortal life as well as Erastil's approach to bringing people around to serve their communtiy).

And that's all before we get into the non-hostile relations they've had with evil gods and Erastil's own shift from a bloodier, more brutal god of family to the one he is today.

But seconding Dead Horse, what is he actually doing specifically?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Should The Paladin Fall link actually proved to be very helpful and I think answered all my questions.

Thanks!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The first rule of paladins, the player tells you when he falls not the GM.

If they don't take near death very well, they won't take falling well. Work on this out of session, figure out if their image of the diety is different than yours, or maybe they just want to play a hack and slash and all the roleplaying is dragging them down. Sounds a lot like a player incompatibility issue, which are best resolved away from the table.


I would like to introduce you to Good Is Not Nice and Good Is Not Soft.


Every day someone shows up with...Should the paladin fall? No, stop harping on one characters alignment so harshly and enjoy the game. If he goes actually evil sure, but you dont need to nitpick every single thing.

Literally the fear of DMs like this is what keeps me from paladins even though they are one of the more interesting classes in my opinion

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Apparantly your player is convinced that he's the Frank Castle/Judge Dredd sort of Paladin.

The real problem is more serious. Your player may not be playing the game you're dming, otherwise known as GM/Player dissonance. You're running a roleplaying campaign. Your player sounds like he's playing a console game. You and the player should have a heart to heart to at least find out what respective pages you're bpth on and your mutual expectations for the game.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

whenever I play, or have someone play, a paladin, I always sit down and write out
1. His code. The laws of which he lives his life by, these are the laws he follows, and they must align with his chosen deity. IE if his code is against slavery, then he will not be punishied for breaking, or even fighting against a law that enforces slavery.
2. His goals. What he hopes to accomplish, is he an avenger? a healer? a protecter? or, does he want to defeat evil whereever it may rise by taking the fight to it? Does he seek to heal and aid those that have been beset by evil, or does he seek only to protect the goodly folk form evil when it finally shows its face?
3. Things he WILL NOT STAND.


rorek55 wrote:

whenever I play, or have someone play, a paladin, I always sit down and write out

1. His code. The laws of which he lives his life by, these are the laws he follows, and they must align with his chosen deity. IE if his code is against slavery, then he will not be punishied for breaking, or even fighting against a law that enforces slavery.
2. His goals. What he hopes to accomplish, is he an avenger? a healer? a protecter? or, does he want to defeat evil whereever it may rise by taking the fight to it? Does he seek to heal and aid those that have been beset by evil, or does he seek only to protect the goodly folk form evil when it finally shows its face?
3. Things he WILL NOT STAND.

i think the example paladin in the OP, may be an Avenger from a militant order devoted to "Permanently Stopping Evil from Doing Evil" "Proactively" and "With neither Mercy, Quarter, nor Surrender."

it's not evil if all he is slaying is evil foes, he just has a code focused on punishing the wicked by the sword.

he would be great for an Oath of Vengeance Build.

not all Religious orders devoted to Sarenrae, Erastil and Iomedae teach this philosophy, but there are a few militant orders that do. plus their favored weapons, are all weapons associated with War, well, Erastil's can be considered that of a Hunter, but they are all gods with a militant order or few.

Paladins are given those martial weapon proficiencies, that BAB, and smite for a reason.


The Paladin Code of Iomedae (from Faiths of Purity).

Quote:

Iomedae
The paladins of Iomedae are just and strong. Their mission is to right wrongs and eliminate evil at its root. They are crusaders and live for the joy of righteous battle. They serve as examples to others, and their code demands they protect the weak and innocent by eliminating sources of oppression, rather than the symptoms. They may back down or withdraw from a fight if they are overmatched, but if their lives will buy time for others to escape, they must give them. Their tenets include:

• I will learn the weight of my sword. Without my heart to guide it, it is worthless—my strength is not in my sword, but in my heart. If I lose my sword, I have lost a tool. If I betray my heart, I have died.

• I will have faith in the Inheritor. I will channel her strength through my body. I will shine in her legion, and I will not tarnish her glory through base actions.

• I am the first into battle, and the last to leave it.

• I will not be taken prisoner by my free will. I will not surrender those under my command.

• I will never abandon a companion, though I will honor
sacrifice freely given.

• I will guard the honor of my fellows, both in thought
and deed, and I will have faith in them.

• When in doubt, I may force my enemies to surrender,
but I am responsible for their lives.

• I will never refuse a challenge from an equal. I will give
honor to worthy enemies, and contempt to the rest.

• I will suffer death before dishonor.

• I will be temperate in my actions and moderate in my
behavior. I will strive to emulate Iomedae's perfection.

He may be a little bit off of it ("temperate in my actions and moderate in my behavior" especially) but he's pretty right on for a Paladin of Iomedae. First and foremost they are warriors of Good, emphasis on WARRIORS. They live for battle against the forces of evil and slay it wherever it lurks.

Nothing in the Code says you have to be cheerful, or show mercy to evil. Neither the actual Rules-Consequences Code in the book, nor this extra Code that can help to further flesh out his character.

At least he's not a Paladin of Torag, whose Code includes this snippet:

Quote:
Against my people's enemies I will show no mercy. I will not allow their surrender, except to extract information. I will defeat them, and I will scatter their families. Yet even in the struggle against our enemies, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag.


Even better, he could be a Paladin of Ragathiel.


First of all tell us if the paladin in question is a paladin of Iomidae or he is a paladin that happens to worship Iomidae (there is a dirrerence between the two) and secondly give us some examples of his behaviour.


From your post, I will assume that you are not running Grand Theft Murder Hobo, so I recommend having a good outsider show up and tell him he has gone too far, then offer a quest with a really juicy reward that would require some more compassionate play to succeed. Otherwise, there is always the old "let the party be captured, but one of the bad guys is impressed, which annoys his boss, and the paladin and the 'good' bad guy get stuck in an arena fighting two advanced chimera with mundane weapons" bit.


Sorry, and no offense intended, but you should disregard everything Umbriere said about the Trinity of Gods who show no mercy to evil and believe redemption is a waste of time. Especially Sarenrae, which specifically has in her portfolio REDEMPTION. Wow.

Killing is an unlawful action in most societies unless in self defense or defense of others. In combat (unprovoked, can't start a fight for an excuse to kill) or if an enemy poses an immediate or continual threat to the paladin or others, killing is forgiven. Really, a paladin should always be asking themselves if killing this enemy is the only option available to prevent immediate or unavoidable harm to themself or others. If the answer is yes, smite away without fear and (depending on their deity) without holding back any of their righteous fury. If the answer is no, the paladin should seek other lawful ways to accomplish the desired goal.

I would expect a paladin of Ragathiel to uphold this code, although I expect him to be even more ruthless and brutal in combat. I would expect a paladin of Sarenrae to uphold this code, although I would expect him to go out of his way to offer and accept terms of surrender from his enemies at the prospect of redeeming them.

For a paladin of Iomidae, I expect honor and righteousness above all.

A Paladin should never play as, "I detect evil, is it evil? I slay it." Imagine a law enforcement officer doing that because he knew the guy was bad but observed no criminal activity being committed. Purely a chaotic act.

People play paladin's a number of ways, but a paladin is sworn to be both lawful and good. Make sure he is playing both of those alignments.


The real question is, have you bothered once to tell the player that his actions are risking the character's alignment?

If the answer is no, then you certainly shouldn't make him fall. Your concept of paladin and the player's concept of paladin are probably vastly different based on the existence of this thread.

Try adding this house rule to your home games like I did:

Quote:
All religious classes gain at first level a Divine Connection. This Divine Connection does not allow talking directly to their god, but the character is aware of any action or item that could adversely affect his alignment and his standing with his deity, including magical effects. He acquires this information prior to performing such an action or becoming associated with such an item.

This is essentially the Phylactery of Faithfullness item made into a class feature.

Edit: Also, allow me to mention that as a player the last time I had a GM make my paladin fall because our ideas on paladin virtue didn't sync and he took away my powers my paladin proceeded to go to the middle of town at noon and yell out to everyone that his god had forsaken him for his transgressions and as an act of atonement he disembowled himself on the spot.

And then I rolled up a new character that the DM wouldn't be a dick about.


It would seem to me that the biggest problem you have is not how the player plays their paladin, but how they play in general. If they are throwing temper tantrums or pouting every time anything actually challenges their character you should talk to them about fixing that problem first. Making their paladin fall won't have any impact on them other than "DM is being a jerk and took all my powers away", Where falling is supposed to be a hugely major thing thing to happen to a paladin for doing something incredibly bad. It's usually either a last resort wake up call by their God or for someone beyond redeeming. It goes beyond the stats, but someone who doesn't care about roleplaying won't care about that.


Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:

Iomedae, Sarenrae, and Erastil (if i'm correct) are the trinity of Gods whose paladins traditionally follow the philosophy of "No Mercy for the Wicked." a Philosophy based on the fact that "Redeeming a Villain is an Impractical Expenditure of Resources that may not work when you can simply smite them on the spot." so, a lot of these paladins "Don't Take Prisoners" "Don't Accept Surrender" and "Brutally Slay Evil." it's not that they are Sadists, but they can be, but paladins of this school of thought beleive, "Sparing a Horde of Demons because of the possibility of one Redeemable Succubus" is "something unlikely to work" and are built around the assumption that certain creatures are "inherently evil."

if you want the paladin to stop smiting evil people mercilessly, you need to start including neutral, and even good members of potentially evil races seeking a pleasant life. make them second guess the drow

this paladin, plays more like an Inquisitor, or like an Archon. they play like a true follower of Iomedae. i wouldn't punish them for following Ioemedae tenants.

i would however, punish them if they show bias or inconsistency in their punishment of evil. such as Sparing humans while smiting a Demon. despite both being the same form of evil.

Pathfinder Wiki wrote:
Sarenrae (pronounced SAER-en-ray[1]) teaches temperance and patience in all things. Compassion and peace are her greatest virtues, and if enemies of the faith can be redeemed, they should be.

Sarenrae is touchy feely. Forgiving and redemption are her thing. Torag on the other hand rolls his eyes at such nonsense.

EDIT: Also I see nothing about Erastil being smitey. Iomedae and Torag lay down some hurt tho.


Beopere wrote:
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:

Iomedae, Sarenrae, and Erastil (if i'm correct) are the trinity of Gods whose paladins traditionally follow the philosophy of "No Mercy for the Wicked." a Philosophy based on the fact that "Redeeming a Villain is an Impractical Expenditure of Resources that may not work when you can simply smite them on the spot." so, a lot of these paladins "Don't Take Prisoners" "Don't Accept Surrender" and "Brutally Slay Evil." it's not that they are Sadists, but they can be, but paladins of this school of thought beleive, "Sparing a Horde of Demons because of the possibility of one Redeemable Succubus" is "something unlikely to work" and are built around the assumption that certain creatures are "inherently evil."

if you want the paladin to stop smiting evil people mercilessly, you need to start including neutral, and even good members of potentially evil races seeking a pleasant life. make them second guess the drow

this paladin, plays more like an Inquisitor, or like an Archon. they play like a true follower of Iomedae. i wouldn't punish them for following Ioemedae tenants.

i would however, punish them if they show bias or inconsistency in their punishment of evil. such as Sparing humans while smiting a Demon. despite both being the same form of evil.

Pathfinder Wiki wrote:
Sarenrae (pronounced SAER-en-ray[1]) teaches temperance and patience in all things. Compassion and peace are her greatest virtues, and if enemies of the faith can be redeemed, they should be.

Sarenrae is touchy feely. Forgiving and redemption are her thing. Torag on the other hand rolls his eyes at such nonsense.

EDIT: Also I see nothing about Erastil being smitey. Iomedae and Torag lay down some hurt tho.

Are we talking about the same Sarenrae?

(don't have book in front of me and don't have time to search)
I recall giving evil a chance at redemption, if they refuse EXECUTION.
That's not exactly touchy feely...more touchy feely than Torag, but that's like saying that a fire is cold because it's not as hot as the sun.


Rapthorn2ndform wrote:

Are we talking about the same Sarenrae?

(don't have book in front of me and don't have time to search)
I recall giving evil a chance at redemption, if they refuse EXECUTION.
That's not exactly touchy feely...more touchy feely than Torag, but...

I base my statements on the wiki and memories from modules and such. Temperance and Patience in all things seems pretty nice. But I could be wrong. She also tries to redeem the evil gods, except Rovagug.

Her herald also favors non-lethal tactics and brings people to appropriate authorities for punishment (based on pfsrd).


Beopere wrote:
Rapthorn2ndform wrote:

Are we talking about the same Sarenrae?

(don't have book in front of me and don't have time to search)
I recall giving evil a chance at redemption, if they refuse EXECUTION.
That's not exactly touchy feely...more touchy feely than Torag, but...

I base my statements on the wiki and memories from modules and such. Temperance and Patience in all things seems pretty nice. But I could be wrong. She also tries to redeem the evil gods, except Rovagug.

Her herald also favors non-lethal tactics and brings people to appropriate authorities for punishment (based on pfsrd).

The gave the codes in faiths of purity.

"I will redeem the ignorant with my words and my actions. If they will not turn toward the light, I will redeem them by the sword."


My general understanding of Sarenae's position on redemption is that she generally tries to tries to save her enemies, but isn't "Stupid Good" or "Lawful Stupid" about it, and doesn't put innocents at risk to redeem the evil.


That seems to be counter to "No mercy for the wicked" and "Redeeming a Villain is an Impractical Expenditure of Resources that may not work when you can simply smite them on the spot."


Chengar Qordath wrote:
My general understanding of Sarenae's position on redemption is that she generally tries to tries to save her enemies, but isn't "Stupid Good" or "Lawful Stupid" about it, and doesn't put innocents at risk to redeem the evil.
Beopere wrote:
That seems to be counter to "No mercy for the wicked" and "Redeeming a Villain is an Impractical Expenditure of Resources that may not work when you can simply smite them on the spot."

I was just arguing she wasn't exactly all "bubble gum and kittens". I neither agree or disagree with the Paladin in the opening.


I'd like to chime in here.

First off, the commentary about the player telling you when their paladin falls is rubbish. That's like saying, "All paladins can play chaotic evil all they want, and then they become antipaladins when they say they do. Otherwise, they remain paladins forever." This also tags along with the commentary about how if you're telling the paladin that they're going to fall, you're just being a jerk and punishing the player by taking all of the paladin's powers away.

The fact of the matter is, as a GM, you set the rules. The player does not. The player gets to choose how his character interacts within those rules (and a good GM is going to be fair, consistent and give consideration to player enjoyment when they set up and when they apply the rules). If the paladin is a walking killing-machine, and the code for their god does not encourage or permit this, then perhaps it's time for the paladin to have a little "divine visitation", where some minor being from the upper planes brings them a message saying, "Look, fella... You're treading a dangerous path here. You need to change your ways."

The Paladin's Fall should, ideally, be a major plot point in the character's overall exploration for both the GM and the player. However, not every player allows for this to happen. Some are going to fall and need to atone, and that will be that. Some will fall in a way that requires some sort of quest to redeem themselves, and that's fine, too. Others still will fall and never get back up again, and that's a perfectly valid story to tell. Ideally, the player and the GM will have planned this out so that the player doesn't feel railroaded into exploring the paladin's fall. However, sometimes players simply play "Lawful Stupid". If the player simply wants to play a character that has all of the restrictions of a normal martial-class, but has the specific power-set of the paladin, they should not be playing a paladin. Part of the entire point of playing a paladin is to play within that set of rules for behaviour.

Having said all of that, here is my best advise to you:

This player sounds like they're very self-centered. You mentioned that they bring the mood of the game down when things don't go well for them. If the sort of game that you and the others at your table want to play involves "everybody wins, always, no matter what, and none of the player characters ever die", then you might want to gently steer him in the direction of playing something that might be better suited to his desire to kill stuff. However, if you and your other players are not interested in playing games where "everybody wins, always, no matter what, and none of the player characters ever die", you need to talk to this player, privately, and let them know that you're not playing that type of game, and if that's not what he's looking for, then he needs to find another group to play with. There's nothing wrong with either style of play whatsoever, but you're going to continue to have conflict if you both think you're playing completely different types of games.

Furthermore, if I'm reading what I think I'm reading, and the player just wants to "kill stuff", it might not have been the wisest choice to let the player play a paladin in the first place, since it's the only class that has specific role-play guidelines.

Best wishes!


Bodhizen wrote:

I'd like to chime in here.

First off, the commentary about the player telling you when their paladin falls is rubbish.

Thank God someone said it. I was just so taken aback by that I didn't know how to respond without being a jerk.


Jaelithe wrote:
Bodhizen wrote:

I'd like to chime in here.

First off, the commentary about the player telling you when their paladin falls is rubbish.

Thank God someone said it. I was just so taken aback by that I didn't know how to respond without being a jerk.

It's really what motivated me to post in this thread. Much of the rest of the advise given is very helpful. I felt that particular advise was decidedly not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

First, thank you all for the advice. It's been (mostly) helpful. On the subject of whether or not I've warned him yet: no, I haven't. And I won't be forcing him to Fall until we've spoken about this at length and he's kept up his actions afterwards. I'm a GM looking for advice, not an a&&+#&+ looking for an excuse to ruin somebody's fun. I'm genuinely perplexed by the matter, or was at the time of posting this.

The actions he's been following have been largely on a morally gray path and while Iomedae is certainly a militant god, that is not a free pass to kill everything. It's not inherently good to kill something that is evil, just because it is evil - there is such a thing as being over zealous. Keep in mind some real world examples of men who've committed atrocious acts of oppression and genocide in the name of their god, in the name of their country and in the name of good. Good is a subjective term and while many can agree that there are several actions that are inherently good and bad, the act of killing will always (or at least, more often) fall in between.

There's a point where it becomes too much, where the simple fact that someone has not once attempted to find another solution to a particular situation and you begin to wonder: Is he truly good, or is he a zealot?

For the character that's involved in this game it's hard to tell, because as I've mentioned before, he doesn't participate much in RP so trying to figure out who he is has been a difficult task. That's why I came here in the first place. I have an e-mail sitting in his inbox now with some questions about his character, questions largely provided by Zenith's blogspot above (which again was super helpful, thanks!) and hopefully we'll be able to clear up our issues and get back to having fun.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / How to Handle a Fallen (Falling) Paladin All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.