Can paladins worship an evil deity?


Rules Questions

401 to 450 of 537 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Let me rephrase then: A paladin gains the lay on hands ability, allowing him to channel positive energy from their god - evil gods do not grant the ability to channel positive energy (this is very explicitly stated under the cleric section), therefore a Paladin cannot worship an evil god - by level 2 he'd know for certain his god was evil, and would need to atone/find a new god.


Trekkie90909 wrote:
Let me rephrase then: A paladin gains the lay on hands ability, allowing him to channel positive energy from their god - evil gods do not grant the ability to channel positive energy (this is very explicitly stated under the cleric section), therefore a Paladin cannot worship an evil god - by level 2 he'd know for certain his god was evil, and would need to atone/find a new god.

That's not a rephrase, that's a different argument, just to point it out. :P

It's a good inference, but nothing in RAW to substantiate that they cannot worship evil due to their channeling positive energy.

Currently the best argument and the one most held up by RAW is association with evil.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:
Let me rephrase then: A paladin gains the lay on hands ability, allowing him to channel positive energy from their god - evil gods do not grant the ability to channel positive energy (this is very explicitly stated under the cleric section), therefore a Paladin cannot worship an evil god - by level 2 he'd know for certain his god was evil, and would need to atone/find a new god.

That's not a rephrase, that's a different argument, just to point it out. :P

It's a good inference, but nothing in RAW to substantiate that they cannot worship evil due to their channeling positive energy.

Currently the best argument and the one most held up by RAW is association with evil.

It's the same thing; highly religious characters cannot knowingly worship a god opposed to their beliefs. This is enforced with most classes by stating that an x must worship a deity within one alignment step of their own, but applies generally. By level 2 a paladin would know unequivocally.

It's not an inference; if you worship an evil deity, the deity only has the ability to give you anti paladin abilities. If you worship a good deity, it only gives you paladin abilities. The only room for any grey area at all would be for a paladin archetype of a neutral god where you'd need to infer based on cleric/paladin codes that the character would choose positive channeling/abilities.


Trekkie90909 wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:
Let me rephrase then: A paladin gains the lay on hands ability, allowing him to channel positive energy from their god - evil gods do not grant the ability to channel positive energy (this is very explicitly stated under the cleric section), therefore a Paladin cannot worship an evil god - by level 2 he'd know for certain his god was evil, and would need to atone/find a new god.

That's not a rephrase, that's a different argument, just to point it out. :P

It's a good inference, but nothing in RAW to substantiate that they cannot worship evil due to their channeling positive energy.

Currently the best argument and the one most held up by RAW is association with evil.

It's the same thing; highly religious characters cannot knowingly worship a god opposed to their beliefs. This is enforced with most classes by stating that an x must worship a deity within one alignment step of their own, but applies generally. By level 2 a paladin would know unequivocally.

It's not an inference; if you worship an evil deity, the deity only has the ability to give you anti paladin abilities. If you worship a good deity, it only gives you paladin abilities. The only room for any grey area at all would be for a paladin archetype of a neutral god where you'd need to infer based on cleric/paladin codes that the character would choose positive channeling/abilities.

No, that's pretty blatantly an inference. It's nowhere outright stated that they are incapable. I honestly would be surprised if gods of any alignment couldn't provide any type of energy they wanted. They're gods, they can do that kind of stuff.

Besides, by definition because it isn't stated outright its an inference. That's the literal definition of an inference.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:
Let me rephrase then: A paladin gains the lay on hands ability, allowing him to channel positive energy from their god - evil gods do not grant the ability to channel positive energy (this is very explicitly stated under the cleric section), therefore a Paladin cannot worship an evil god - by level 2 he'd know for certain his god was evil, and would need to atone/find a new god.

That's not a rephrase, that's a different argument, just to point it out. :P

It's a good inference, but nothing in RAW to substantiate that they cannot worship evil due to their channeling positive energy.

Currently the best argument and the one most held up by RAW is association with evil.

It's the same thing; highly religious characters cannot knowingly worship a god opposed to their beliefs. This is enforced with most classes by stating that an x must worship a deity within one alignment step of their own, but applies generally. By level 2 a paladin would know unequivocally.

It's not an inference; if you worship an evil deity, the deity only has the ability to give you anti paladin abilities. If you worship a good deity, it only gives you paladin abilities. The only room for any grey area at all would be for a paladin archetype of a neutral god where you'd need to infer based on cleric/paladin codes that the character would choose positive channeling/abilities.

No, that's pretty blatantly an inference. It's nowhere outright stated that they are incapable. I honestly would be surprised if gods of any alignment couldn't provide any type of energy they wanted. They're gods, they can do that kind of stuff.

Besides, by definition because it isn't stated outright its an inference. That's the literal definition of an inference.

It's explicitly stated under channel energy. It is also explicitly stated that lay on hands is a positive channel. Where's the inference?


Trekkie90909 wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:
Let me rephrase then: A paladin gains the lay on hands ability, allowing him to channel positive energy from their god - evil gods do not grant the ability to channel positive energy (this is very explicitly stated under the cleric section), therefore a Paladin cannot worship an evil god - by level 2 he'd know for certain his god was evil, and would need to atone/find a new god.

That's not a rephrase, that's a different argument, just to point it out. :P

It's a good inference, but nothing in RAW to substantiate that they cannot worship evil due to their channeling positive energy.

Currently the best argument and the one most held up by RAW is association with evil.

It's the same thing; highly religious characters cannot knowingly worship a god opposed to their beliefs. This is enforced with most classes by stating that an x must worship a deity within one alignment step of their own, but applies generally. By level 2 a paladin would know unequivocally.

It's not an inference; if you worship an evil deity, the deity only has the ability to give you anti paladin abilities. If you worship a good deity, it only gives you paladin abilities. The only room for any grey area at all would be for a paladin archetype of a neutral god where you'd need to infer based on cleric/paladin codes that the character would choose positive channeling/abilities.

No, that's pretty blatantly an inference. It's nowhere outright stated that they are incapable. I honestly would be surprised if gods of any alignment couldn't provide any type of energy they wanted. They're gods, they can do that kind of stuff.

Besides, by definition because it isn't stated outright its an inference. That's the literal definition of an inference.

It's explicitly stated under channel energy. It is also explicitly stated that lay on hands is a positive channel. Where's the inference?

It says its something the cleric does. Not that an evil deity couldn't provide such if they wanted to. It doesn't state why they all provide positive channel.

Thus the inference here is that because all good deities provide positive channel and all evil deities provide negative that they are incapable of providing the opposite.

That is the inference. And a fairly large leap to make, considering these are gods we're talking about.


You are making inferences based on your personal opinions which explicitly disagree with printed material. It's fine if you want to treat it that way for a home brew campaign but get off the rules forum.


Trekkie90909 wrote:
You are making inferences based on your personal opinions which explicitly disagree with printed material. It's fine if you want to treat it that way for a home brew campaign but get off the rules forum.

Not really and

1) You're being rude

2) Nowhere does it state that because paladins get positive channels they have to worship a good god

3) Just because channels work the way they do for clerics does not mean this applies to everyone.

Sounds like you're making crap up. Get off the rules forum.

Edit:

To elaborate.

It does not say Paladins must worship good gods.

It does not say only good gods can provide positive channeling.

It doesn't say if a paladin worships an evil god that he fails to get positive energy features.

You're making crap up and inferring. I won't even say they are bad inferences, but all of the above are inferences on your part.

It is allowed per the standing rules unless the GM rules by association with evil in the code of conduct. Nothing else stands by RAW.


RAW there is nothing to stop this. RAI it is not allowed. The devs did not write it into the rules for the same reason they did not write that casting evil spells was an evil act. they assumed most of us would know it.


Paladind are not powered by deities. per RAW or RAI


1 person marked this as a favorite.

RAW (from the fluff bit in the Magic section of PRD):
Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells.

That plus the Class description:
The paladin is the knight in shining armor, a devoted follower of law and good.

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

As per the description of detect evil a 1st level Paladin/Cleric has a faint aura of the appropriate deity at 1st level. Ergo a follower of an evil deity is actually evil by definition.

So a Paladin can't follow an evil deity as by doing so they'd gain an evil aura, which violates their code of conduct.

Of course House 0 applies - but RAW: Paladin =/= worship evil deity.


Mark Sweetman wrote:

RAW (from the fluff bit in the Magic section of PRD):

Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells.

That plus the Class description:
The paladin is the knight in shining armor, a devoted follower of law and good.

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

As per the description of detect evil a 1st level Paladin/Cleric has a faint aura of the appropriate deity at 1st level. Ergo a follower of an evil deity is actually evil by definition.

So a Paladin can't follow an evil deity as by doing so they'd gain an evil aura, which violates their code of conduct.

Of course House 0 applies - but RAW: Paladin =/= worship evil deity.

Except the paladin's aura isn't based off the deity they follow. Their powers don't come from deities, as has been quoted directly from the magic section of core. Their powers come from law and good forces themselves. A paladin doesn't even need a deity per se.

Edit:

Aura of Good wrote:
The power of a paladin's aura of good (see the detect good spell) is equal to her paladin level.

As you can see the wording is quite different from the cleric aura feature. A paladin receives an aura of good no matter whom they worship.


RAW paladins are powered by deities (from the class description).

Quote:
…Knights, crusaders, and law-bringers, 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…

From the FAQ section on Lay on hands

Quote:

Does a paladin's lay on hands use positive energy?

Yes.

The Paladin's Channel energy

Quote:
When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric.

From cleric channel energy

Quote:
A good cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships a good deity) channels positive energy and can choose to deal damage to undead creatures or to heal living creatures. An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures.

EDIT:

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Except the paladin's aura isn't based off the deity they follow. Their powers don't come from deities, as has been quoted directly from the magic section of core. Their powers come from law and good forces themselves. A paladin doesn't even need a deity per se.

And here’s the Quote which shows you did not read it.

Quote:

Clerics, druids, experienced paladins, and experienced

rangers can cast divine spells. Unlike arcane spells, divine
spells draw power from a divine source.


The question I'm refuting is whether they can be a follower of an evil deity - which I would purport that they cannot.

As to whether they can be empowered by any other source that falls within the divine forces of law and good - then yes, go hog wild.


Trekkie90909 wrote:

RAW paladins are powered by deities (from the class description).

RAW, no they are not.

Magic section of core wrote:
Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells.

As you can clearly see, clerics specifically have deities called out as a possible source of their powers. Paladin's do not.

Furthermore, once again, a paladin need not even have a god in order to function.

And if you read the exact wording of the cleric ability.

Channel Energy wrote:
A good cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships a good deity) channels positive energy and can choose to deal damage to undead creatures or to heal living creatures. An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures.

A good cleric. Your paladin must be good. By a literal reading, because the paladin is good he will get channel positive energy. Neutral clerics have the type of channel they get determined by the alignment of their god, as specified above.

Otherwise it is the alignment of the individual. Normally this wouldn't be a thing for a cleric because a good cleric cannot worship anything lower on the spectrum than neutral, but there is no proviso for paladin.

So by definition, a paladin must be good, and thus his channeling is based off his alignment, not the alignment of his god, directly taken from the quote you yourself provided.


Mark is correct in stating that a Paladin cannot worship an evil god, since they would in turn radiate evil.

Literally you replace paladin class features with anti-paladin class features and you get a paladin who worships an evil god. This is how it works RAW and RAI.


Trekkie90909 wrote:

Mark is correct in stating that a Paladin cannot worship an evil god, since they would in turn radiate evil.

Literally you replace paladin class features with anti-paladin class features and you get a paladin who worships an evil god. This is how it works RAW and RAI.

No he is not, because the paladin class feature gives you an aura of good specifically, not an aura based on the alignment of your god. Dear lord, that's already been refuted straight from the core rule book.


Deities in D&D are the embodiment of the divine forces which compose the world, but I'm not going to argue that. Consider this: How is an evil god to supply the good power for paladin spells?

The exact wording is like that on the cleric ability because clerics have to worship a deity within one alignment of their own. RAW this means that for the class ability to function for Paladins they must worship the same because it functions EXACTLY the same as for clerics.

RAI it provides a written example of god alignment trumping character alignment regarding what powers are granted by deities.


Trekkie90909 wrote:

Deities in D&D are the embodiment of the divine forces which compose the world, but I'm not going to argue that. Consider this: How is an evil god to supply the good power for paladin spells?

The exact wording is like that on the cleric ability because clerics have to worship a deity within one alignment of their own. RAW this means that for the class ability to function for Paladins they must worship the same because it functions EXACTLY the same as for clerics.

RAI it provides a written example of god alignment trumping character alignment regarding what powers are granted by deities.

I already argued that deities are capable of manipulating just about any type of energy they want. They're deities. They sneeze miracles when they want to. Any deity you want can provide both inflict and cure spells. Aka, negative and positive energy. Refutation right there.

Paladin's do not have to worship exactly the same as a cleric, and just because one class feature functions the same as theirs does not mean that a class restriction from beyond the class feature is automatically passed on.

If it were like rage for the viking archetype where the restrictions were part of the class feature they inherited, then I'd say yes, you've got something there.

But the class feature here is separate from the restriction. The paladin will channel according to his alignment, just like a cleric, unless he is neutral, in which case it takes the alignment of his deity. He cannot ever be neutral because of class restrictions, thus he must always have channel positive energy. Which he does.


Trekkie90909 wrote:

RAW paladins are powered by deities (from the class description).

Quote:
…Knights, crusaders, and law-bringers, 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…

That is flavor text, and flavor text is not rules. The magic section has actual rules. The devs even said paladins are not powered by deities. I trust mechanics, and devs over flavor text.


There is NO rule saying an evil deity can not give out positive energy. The rules only say that the current classes don't get it from them. Paladins are no more dependent upon a deity's power than an oracle is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I can't believe this is still being discussed seriously.


Zaister wrote:
I can't believe this is still being discussed seriously.

Same here, I guess on the good side .. there hasn't been that many _new_ treads about paladins lately so maybe alle the paladin-bickering is being absorbed into this tread? like a lighning rod maybe? ... :)

Anyways, on a slightly more relevant (but still sidetracked, make no mistake) note:
In my current game I'm playing a paladin who has been raised by the church. A large part of his personal development has been the realization that the country he has grown up in and the church he was serving aren't really the good guys (think a homebrew version of .. maybe cheliax or something similiar.) namely that they are slavers, have unjust laws for the weak, parts of the church are working for the state to further expand the empires rule and many of the high ranking officials in the state and church don't give half a toss about what they preach or placate the masses with.
so yeah, lots of "I have been fooled!" "how could this be!?" and "I AM MADE OF ANGST!" as he tries to find his way, while battling evil dudes that were his mentors or teachers at one time.

The point is that he is a good guy, they were neutral and/or evil, he had some misunderstandings as he started to get to know the real world.
(he was suffering from a small bit of racism that he had to combat as his new friends challenged his worldview)
but in the end he has stayed true to his god and to his morals, regardless of what the authority of his homeland feels about that.

now: carry on.

-LO


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
No he is not, because the paladin class feature gives you an aura of good specifically, not an aura based on the alignment of your god. Dear lord, that's already been refuted straight from the core rule book.

Shake head, roll eyes, chuckle, close computer and walk away.


Mark Sweetman wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
No he is not, because the paladin class feature gives you an aura of good specifically, not an aura based on the alignment of your god. Dear lord, that's already been refuted straight from the core rule book.
Shake head, roll eyes, chuckle, close computer and walk away.

Jokes on you. :) This is the rules forums. You may not like the rules, but those are the rules. Those who laugh and walk away only do so because they're wrong and incapable of defending their position to begin with.

Have fun, because you can laugh all you want, that doesn't change the fact that I'm right here :)


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Trekkie90909 wrote:

RAW paladins are powered by deities (from the class description).

RAW, no they are not.

Magic section of core wrote:
Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells.

As you can clearly see, clerics specifically have deities called out as a possible source of their powers. Paladin's do not.

Furthermore, once again, a paladin need not even have a god in order to function.

And if you read the exact wording of the cleric ability.

Channel Energy wrote:
A good cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships a good deity) channels positive energy and can choose to deal damage to undead creatures or to heal living creatures. An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures.

A good cleric. Your paladin must be good. By a literal reading, because the paladin is good he will get channel positive energy. Neutral clerics have the type of channel they get determined by the alignment of their god, as specified above.

Otherwise it is the alignment of the individual. Normally this wouldn't be a thing for a cleric because a good cleric cannot worship anything lower on the spectrum than neutral, but there is no proviso for paladin.

So by definition, a paladin must be good, and thus his channeling is based off his alignment, not the alignment of his god, directly taken from the quote you yourself provided.

So what are "divine sources of law and good"?

di·vine [dih-vahyn]
adjective, di·vin·er, di·vin·est.
1. of or pertaining to a god, especially the Supreme Being.
2. addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God or a god; religious; sacred: divine worship.
3. proceeding from God or a god: divine laws.
4. godlike; characteristic of or befitting a deity: divine magnanimity.
5. heavenly; celestial: the divine kingdom.

Pretty sure divine is another way of saying, ya know, 'from a deity' if you use plain English instead of tortured logic.


RDM42 wrote:

So what are "divine sources of law and good"?

di·vine [dih-vahyn]
adjective, di·vin·er, di·vin·est.
1. of or pertaining to a god, especially the Supreme Being.
2. addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God or a god; religious; sacred: divine worship.
3. proceeding from God or a god: divine laws.
4. godlike; characteristic of or befitting a...

Then why wouldn't they just call out deities just like they did with clerics?

Oh wait, that's right. Because divine energies don't just come from deities. Law and good are actual forces independent of deities themselves.

Edit: and if you'll notice your definition is very much based around a monotheistic approach where the vast majority of it seems to indicate "one god." This is not a setting where just one god exists or for that matter where any one god is supreme.

2nd Edit: That doesn't seem to be the meriam webster either

As given by meriam webster Divine

Meriam Webster wrote:

ull Definition of DIVINE

1
a : of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god <divine love>
b : being a deity <the divine Savior>
c : directed to a deity <divine worship>
2
a : supremely good : superb <the pie was divine>
b : heavenly, godlike


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
RDM42 wrote:

So what are "divine sources of law and good"?

di·vine [dih-vahyn]
adjective, di·vin·er, di·vin·est.
1. of or pertaining to a god, especially the Supreme Being.
2. addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God or a god; religious; sacred: divine worship.
3. proceeding from God or a god: divine laws.
4. godlike; characteristic of or befitting a...

Then why wouldn't they just call out deities just like they did with clerics?

Oh wait, that's right. Because divine energies don't just come from deities. Law and good are actual forces independent of deities themselves.

Edit: and if you'll notice your definition is very much based around a monotheistic approach where the vast majority of it seems to indicate "one god." This is not a setting where just one god exists or for that matter where any one god is supreme.

2nd Edit: That doesn't seem to be the meriam webster either

As given by meriam webster Divine

Meriam Webster wrote:

ull Definition of DIVINE

1
a : of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god <divine love>
b : being a deity <the divine Savior>
c : directed to a deity <divine worship>
2
a : supremely good : superb <the pie was divine>
b : heavenly, godlike

So you gravitate to the definition that makes the least sense in context? Interesting.

A: Merrimack Webster is not the only valid dictionary, believe it or not.

B: the most logical reading of the "divine forces of good and law" would be "the gods of good and law". And at any rate, it certainly would not be a definitive enough reading the other direction to count the counter-logical reading as RAW. The BEST you could get out of that reading would be ambiguous in that direction.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Edit: and if you'll notice your definition is very much based around a monotheistic approach where the vast majority of it seems to indicate "one god." This is not a setting where just one god exists or for that matter where any one god is supreme.

Yeah, I think a lof of the issues in this thread stem from people looking at a polytheistic setting through the monotheistic goggles of "One True Deity whose tenets you must follow absolutely and completely, or be damned."


Chengar Qordath wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Edit: and if you'll notice your definition is very much based around a monotheistic approach where the vast majority of it seems to indicate "one god." This is not a setting where just one god exists or for that matter where any one god is supreme.
Yeah, I think a lof of the issues in this thread stem from people looking at a polytheistic setting through the monotheistic goggles of "One True Deity whose tenets you must follow absolutely and completely, or be damned."

The definition of divine is the same either way. Not liking it in context doesn't change it.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Except the paladin's aura isn't based off the deity they follow.

Sure about that? Last time I checked, Detect $slignment had a special entry for Cleric or Paladin of an aligned deity

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
As you can see the wording is quite different from the cleric aura feature. A paladin receives an aura of good no matter whom they worship.

...which would be in addition to the aura they receive from their deity.

Now, this would imply result in a hypothetical Asmodean Paladin pinging Good (as per Paladin class feature), as well as Lawful and Evil (as per the entry in the Detect Evil table), all of these at full strength.

In fact, the exceptional strength of the Paladin's aura from his deity is, in my opinion, a strong argument for the paladin being massively tied into his deities principles... which would heavily imply a one-step-maximum divergence of alignments.

No one stated that a Paladin has to worship a deity. But if he does, evidence strongly suggests his alignment has to be within one step of said deity.

Just my 2 cents...


RDM42 wrote:


B: the most logical reading of the "divine forces of good and law" would be "the gods of good and law". And at any rate, it certainly would not be a definitive enough reading the other direction to count the counter-logical reading as RAW. The BEST you could get out of that reading would be ambiguous in that direction.

Seeing as how they saw fit to specify deities on the cleric and not on the paladin, I'm inclined to heavily disagree. The sheer fact that they specifically stated the gods were the source of one classes' powers in one sentence and then went out of their way to create an ambiguous statement in the following statement would suggest that they didn't want it come from deities.

Otherwise, it would have been much simpler to simply call it out as coming straight from deities like in the previous statement. If anything, in this case the sheer fact that its ambiguous when they clearly did have a clear way of stating the deities in question means they were probably looking for a way to state it without using deities.


Mark Sweetman wrote:
So a Paladin can't follow an evil deity as by doing so they'd gain an evil aura, which violates their code of conduct.

Umm... you lost me there.

Where exactly do you see the violation of conduct? Last time I checked, having an evil aura did not infringe on any strictures a Paladin had to adhere to...


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
RDM42 wrote:


B: the most logical reading of the "divine forces of good and law" would be "the gods of good and law". And at any rate, it certainly would not be a definitive enough reading the other direction to count the counter-logical reading as RAW. The BEST you could get out of that reading would be ambiguous in that direction.

Seeing as how they saw fit to specify deities on the cleric and not on the paladin, I'm inclined to heavily disagree. The sheer fact that they specifically stated the gods were the source of one classes' powers in one sentence and then went out of their way to create an ambiguous statement in the following statement would suggest that they didn't want it come from deities.

Otherwise, it would have been much simpler to simply call it out as coming straight from deities like in the previous statement. If anything, in this case the sheer fact that its ambiguous when they clearly did have a clear way of stating the deities in question means they were probably looking for a way to state it without using deities.

So you are basing your opinion of what IS rules as written based on what is NOT written, but(to you at least) 'implied' by the negative space of not being more clearly defined?

A bit convoluted way to reach a conclusion.


Midnight_Angel wrote:


...which would be in addition to the aura they receive from their deity.

Now, this would imply result in a hypothetical Asmodean Paladin pinging Good (as per Paladin class feature), as well as Lawful and Evil (as per the entry in the Detect Evil table), all of these at full strength.

In fact, the exceptional strength of the aura from his deity an aligned paladin is, in my opinion, a strong argument for the paladin being strongly tied into his deities principles... which would heavily imply a one-step-maximum divergence of alignments.

No one stated that a Paladin has to worship a deity. But if he does, evidence strongly suggests his alignment has to be within one step of said deity.

Just my 2 cents...

Seeing as how they go out of their way to call out that rule is specifically for clerics (and later inquisitors) I'd say evidence does not strongly suggest such.

And once again, the table referenced in detect evil is the same table that is used for all detect spells. It doesn't state that you gain an evil aura by worshipping them.

In fact, if you read the cliff notes.

detect evil wrote:
2 Some characters who are not clerics may radiate an aura of equivalent power. The class description will indicate whether this applies.

That can be found in the table you pulled your info from. This is directly tied to the post containing clerics and paladins. Now if we look back to the class of paladin, aka not a cleric, you will see it gives no statement that would allow for an equivalent aura of evil. Just good. So by the cliff notes in the table, it straight out says to look to the class and the class gives no statement on any possible evil aura.


RDM42 wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
RDM42 wrote:

So what are "divine sources of law and good"?

di·vine [dih-vahyn]
adjective, di·vin·er, di·vin·est.
1. of or pertaining to a god, especially the Supreme Being.
2. addressed, appropriated, or devoted to God or a god; religious; sacred: divine worship.
3. proceeding from God or a god: divine laws.
4. godlike; characteristic of or befitting a...

Then why wouldn't they just call out deities just like they did with clerics?

Oh wait, that's right. Because divine energies don't just come from deities. Law and good are actual forces independent of deities themselves.

Edit: and if you'll notice your definition is very much based around a monotheistic approach where the vast majority of it seems to indicate "one god." This is not a setting where just one god exists or for that matter where any one god is supreme.

2nd Edit: That doesn't seem to be the meriam webster either

As given by meriam webster Divine

Meriam Webster wrote:

ull Definition of DIVINE

1
a : of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god <divine love>
b : being a deity <the divine Savior>
c : directed to a deity <divine worship>
2
a : supremely good : superb <the pie was divine>
b : heavenly, godlike

So you gravitate to the definition that makes the least sense in context? Interesting.

A: Merrimack Webster is not the only valid dictionary, believe it or not.

B: the most logical reading of the "divine forces of good and law" would be "the gods of good and law". And at any rate, it certainly would not be a definitive enough reading the other direction to count the counter-logical reading as RAW. The BEST you could get out of that reading would be ambiguous in that direction.

You are incorrect. Not every divine source is a deity in the game. Certain monsters can grant spells, and so can mythic PC's. With that aside the magic section dictates where paladins get spells from, and it is not a deity. It has been quoted more than once in this thread.


RDM42 wrote:


So you are basing your opinion of what IS rules as written based on what is NOT written, but(to you at least) 'implied' by the negative space of not being more clearly defined?

A bit convoluted way to reach a conclusion.

Actually, I'm stating that line can't be interpreted to solely mean deities, and as they don't state deities its convoluted when they clearly thought of simply stating deities to think they meant deities when they didn't say it. That's a ridiculous assumption that you're basically pulling out of nowhere because its the interpretation you prefer.

It ISN'T RAW that they are driven by deities. They are driven by divine forces of good and law, which is never specified to be deities. So no, its not RAW that they're empowered by deities. If it was they would have included that in there.


"Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces"<--That is RAW.

That "or" means that there deities are not the only source of divine power.

"...the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells."<---That is RAW.

As you can see there is no RAW saying deities power a paladin. It specifically does not mention deities at all, which is the same thing the devs said.

edit: That was for RDM42


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
That can be found in the table you pulled your info from. This is directly tied to the post containing clerics and paladins. Now if we look back to the class of paladin, aka not a cleric, you will see it gives no statement that would allow for an equivalent aura of evil. Just good. So by the cliff notes in the table, it straight out says to look to the class and the class gives no statement on any possible evil aura.

May I point out the fact that the table has, in fact, an entry for Cleric or Paladin of an aligned deity?

The definiton for the intensity of a Pally's aura could not be any more explicit. In fact, what the Aura of Good rule does is to ensure that an Abadarian Paladin will get a Good Aura at full stength, despite his god not providing any.

As will a godless Paladin.

Still, having the choice of not serving a god does in no way mean you can choose pretty much any faith.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Midnight_Angel wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
That can be found in the table you pulled your info from. This is directly tied to the post containing clerics and paladins. Now if we look back to the class of paladin, aka not a cleric, you will see it gives no statement that would allow for an equivalent aura of evil. Just good. So by the cliff notes in the table, it straight out says to look to the class and the class gives no statement on any possible evil aura.

May I point out the fact that the table has, in fact, an entry for Cleric or Paladin of an aligned deity?

The definiton for the intensity of a Pally's aura could not be any more explicit. In fact, what the Aura of Good rule does is to ensure that an Abadarian Paladin will get a Good Aura at full stength, despite his god not providing any.

Yes, and in that very same entry it provides a link to the cliff notes I just entered, where it stated that only clerics automatically applied. From there, it says to look to the class specifically to see if it applies. If we look to the paladin we see quite clearly that any aura other than good does not in fact apply.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Probably because it's assumed that a paladin will be LG and maintain his code of hoor and only willingly associate with non-evil folks.

If the developers had to write rules to prevent ridiculous miss perceived loopholes like this, the books would be 1500 pages long and cost 400 dollars each.


About channeling Positive and Negative Energy and Evil Deities; let me put it this way an Oracle can be powered by(and worship) any Deity let's so say Asmodeus powers an Oracle that Oracle is a Life Oracle and can only channel Positive Energy.

Dark Archive

Sebastian Hirsch wrote:
Can a paladin worship an evil deity, yes, but since this breaks his code of conduit he will lose all class abilities except proficiencies.

This. It violates several portions of the code: particularly the "associating" clause (deities are outsiders and therefore creatures/characters), the "consistently offends morals" clause (evil deities do not change their alignment, thus they are consistent) and "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" (evil deities do both of these things, and worship is the opposite of punishment.)

So they are free to do so but they will quickly become Ex-Paladins and therefore gimped fighters.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Item the first:

Why Asmodeus can have Paladins:

Though the idea of a lawful good paladin
serving a lawful evil deity seems ridiculous, it can happen.
Asmodeus is primarily a deity of law, with evil being
incidental to his concept of law. Very rarely, Asmodeus
allows a true paladin to serve him, using him as a tool in
lands where a more traditional priest would be hunted.
The paladin’s duties are always very carefully explained
and restricted to avoid conflicts that result in evil thoughts
or actions; in effect, the paladin is a champion of contracts
and law, who happens to be good. This is possible for three
reasons: One, Asmodeus can have clerics who are lawful
neutral rather than lawful evil; these clerics walk a fine
line that avoids outright evil while still promoting order,
and therefore in theory a paladin can do the same. Two,
the nature of evil does not require one to always be evil;
an evil person who doesn’t rob, murder, or torture at every
opportunity is not at risk of becoming less evil—in fact,
an evil person can perform good acts every day, making
it entirely possible (though exceedingly rare) for a servant
of Asmodeus to be good, having never done an evil act.
Three, the deceptions of Asmodeus are subtle and deft,
and it’s potentially possible for a paladin to believe his
efforts and the orderly god’s will serve a greater good,
though ultimately he serves nothing more than the god of
tyranny’s cruel agendas.

That would be Sean K. Reynolds in "Mother of Flies" explaining how it is possible within the rules for Asmodeus to have paladins.

Item the second:
This is where the rules denote both that there is a difference between deities and divine forces, and that paladins are empowered by the latter, not the former.

Item the third:
The Order of the God Claw worships a pantheon of deities all simultaneously, including Asmodeus, and specifically counts paladins amonst its ranks. So Council of Thieves is not the only place where Golarion is said to have paladins who venerate Asmodeus. If nothing else, this puts the kibosh on the "associates with" argument, as there are definitively active paladins as members of the Order of the Godclaw, and they would certainly match that rather forced definition.

Item the fourth:
JJ affirms that Paladins don't need gods. This is just to back up what we've already established by the rules. JJ may not be "a rules guy", and his advice is always "this is how I would rule it in my home game", but I think it's worthwhile to note that he has affirmed this particular rules point.

Summation:
As we have established, Paladins do not receive their spells and powers from a deity. There are a exactly two mentions of deities in the paladin block at all, and I discuss that here. What the rules and references would indicate, is that for the Paladin, his choice of deity isn't really any different than a layperson's. His powers aren't coming from a deity, they're a direct channel from the universal forces of Law and Good; so if he chooses to venerate Bahamut, Torag, Asmodeus, or Banjo the Handpuppet, it doesn't actually impact his paladinhood. We also dismissed the "association" myth by noting that there's an entire Hellknight Order which canonically includes paladins who would be considered to be "associating" with Asmodeus under that obviously incorrect interpretation. What matters for the paladin is his character, his vows, and his adherence to his code. By the established rules, if Iomedae went the way of Aroden and was wiped out, her clerics might all suddenly lose their spells, but all of those sword-swinging paladins wouldn't even notice her absence. Even the strictest reading of the rules would only mean that the horse or sword-spirit she granted them would dissipate, but they'd still be smiting and laying on hands like the champions of Law and Good that they are.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I can't believe this thread is still going.

This. is. ridiculous.

Dark Archive

I'm not disputing the "worship an ideal" or even "worship nothing at all" concept of Paladin. But one who chooses to worship an evil deity would fall, if not immediately then evenutally.

Serving Asmodeus for a time is certainly not impossible, but would just as certainly not be a long-term arrangement. The Code allows for short-term associations with evil beings to combat a greater evil and that would count. Particularly since he would be actively attempting to corrupt them the entire time the partnership lasted - subtly and slowly, but certainly all the same.

Finally, worshiping a pantheon is hardly comparable because there is more than enough distance there to justify a longer-term arrangement. Even a cleric can worship a pantheon without losing their powers.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Psyren wrote:
Finally, worshiping a pantheon is hardly comparable because there is more than enough distance there to justify a longer-term arrangement. Even a cleric can worship a pantheon without losing their powers.

I disagree. Veneration of a deity is either association or it isn't. If I have dinner every night with my best friend and his family, and I thank his wife for the meal and compliment her on the table spread, I am associating with her. The fact that her husband was my friend first and her children were at the table does not lessen my association with her. So regardless of whether I'm worshipping Asmodeus alone, or Asmodeus and his wife Torag and their kids Iomedae, Irori, and Abadar, I am still venerating Asmodeus and it either is association, or it isn't. Given that we have canon for 3rd level paladins who are members of the Order of the Godclaw, the indication would be that veneration is not association, because I'm not having Asmodeus over for dinner, and I've probably never met him in my entire life.

Paladins can't pop open a splatbook and read about Asmodeus. Their understanding of him may be completely different. I included SKR's fairly detailed recitation of the 3 reasons he believed a paladin of Asmodeus was allowed by the rules. Maybe the paladin believes that Asmodeus' status as something of the first fallen paladin means that he just enough goodly influence from those who serve him to tip the scales. Maybe the paladin doesn't understand Asmodeus the way we do, and doesn't really have any comprehension of the evil aspect of his nature, instead knowing only about the order and law which are his primary hallmarks.

Unlike clerics, paladins don't have to understand their deity. The deities aren't the ones empowering the paladins to begin with. A cleric is a direct channel for his deity to impact the world, and must be attuned to his deity's nature. A paladin doesn't get this power from a deity so it doesn't matter whether or not he and the guy whose name he yells when he smites evil are actually on the same page. What matters is that he's smiting evil and following his code.


Midnight_Angel wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Except the paladin's aura isn't based off the deity they follow.

Sure about that? Last time I checked, Detect $slignment had a special entry for Cleric or Paladin of an aligned deity

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
As you can see the wording is quite different from the cleric aura feature. A paladin receives an aura of good no matter whom they worship.

...which would be in addition to the aura they receive from their deity.

Now, this would imply result in a hypothetical Asmodean Paladin pinging Good (as per Paladin class feature), as well as Lawful and Evil (as per the entry in the Detect Evil table), all of these at full strength.

In fact, the exceptional strength of the Paladin's aura from his deity is, in my opinion, a strong argument for the paladin being massively tied into his deities principles... which would heavily imply a one-step-maximum divergence of alignments.

No one stated that a Paladin has to worship a deity. But if he does, evidence strongly suggests his alignment has to be within one step of said deity.

Just my 2 cents...

Paladins do not gain the aura of their gods, they just get an aura of Good as a class feature.

They do not gain an aura of Law even if they are LG paragons of LG who worship LG gods whose LG clerics have auras of Law. To get the aura of their patron deities' alignment they can do so by multiclassing into cleric which specifically says as a class feature that they get the aura of their deities' alignment.

Dark Archive

Ssalarn wrote:


I disagree. Veneration of a deity is either association or it isn't. If I have dinner every night with my best friend and his family, and I thank his wife for the meal and compliment her on the table spread, I am associating with her. The fact that her husband was my friend first and her children were at the table does not lessen my association with her.

In FR, the Gnome pantheon includes Urdlen, the Dwarf pantheon includes Deep Duerra, and the Drow pantheon includes Eilistraee. Aberrant deities are part and parcel of nearly every pantheon. By your logic, no paladins who venerate a pantheon would be possible.

And no, you are not "venerating Asmodeus" if you worship the pantheon. You are venerating the organization of divinity itself that the pantheon represents, and he just happens to be a member.

Ssalarn wrote:


Paladins can't pop open a splatbook and read about Asmodeus. Their understanding of him may be completely different. I included SKR's fairly detailed recitation of the 3 reasons he believed a paladin of Asmodeus was allowed by the rules. Maybe the paladin believes that Asmodeus' status as something of the first fallen paladin means that he just enough goodly influence from those who serve him to tip the scales. Maybe the paladin doesn't understand Asmodeus the way we do, and doesn't really have any comprehension of the evil aspect of his nature, instead knowing only about the order and law which are his primary hallmarks.

I'm not disputing that Paladins of Asmodeus are possible - for a period of time. But while Falling itself is a dramatic threshold, the process for getting there can be quite gradual and meandering, and it would start with venerating a deity that has no desire for any of his followers to make it to Heaven/Celestia.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Psyren wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:


I disagree. Veneration of a deity is either association or it isn't. If I have dinner every night with my best friend and his family, and I thank his wife for the meal and compliment her on the table spread, I am associating with her. The fact that her husband was my friend first and her children were at the table does not lessen my association with her.

In FR, the Gnome pantheon includes Urdlen, the Dwarf pantheon includes Deep Duerra, and the Drow pantheon includes Eilistraee. Aberrant deities are part and parcel of nearly every pantheon. By your logic, no paladins who venerate a pantheon would be possible.

And no, you are not "venerating Asmodeus" if you worship the pantheon. You are venerating the organization of divinity itself that the pantheon represents, and he just happens to be a member.

The God Claw specifically venerates all 5 deities. It even uses the word "venerates". It's not like the gnome pantheon in FR where Urdlen happens to be related to the other gnome deities but no sane minded gnome actually worships him. By choosing to be a member of the Order of the God Claw, you are choosing to venerate aspects of Asmodeus, specifically.

401 to 450 of 537 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can paladins worship an evil deity? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.