|
Nobody would ask whether or not he tripped, how is it so difficult to get the rules for falling right but most of the other ones seem so easy?
Detect Evil is absolutely useless against anything short of divine casters, outsiders, undead or very powerful beings. Even the mightiest bugbears would barely trip on the scale. Leaving the bugbear assassin alone is dangerous and irresponsible and in the heat of the moment subduing is not only an unlikely priority but downright dangerous as you may need to assist other party members if bugbears have snuck into their rooms as well, you wont have time to tie up the bugbear.
If he called for help his buddies would have killed it anyway. Nobody is paranoid enough to check every enemy for transmutation or illusion spells.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a very entertaining side note, at least to me, the Paladin was right about the wizard. This isn't exactly a good 'lesson'.
Wizard: Stop judging me to be evil now that I'm a bugbear! Commits heinously evil act to 'teach' a lesson about judging others
Paladin: Hoo boy, now that the wizard who I thought might be evil because they turned into an evil species turned out to be evil and tricked me, I'm certainly never going to judge someone by their species again.
That IS pretty hilarious.
Detect evil does not typically detect evil creatures of his girlfriend's level at all; your average baby-strangling bugbear won't register either.
Only evil creatures of unusually powerful evil register on Detect Evil. That means 5+ HD, typically, or some extra-evil types of creature such as a fiend or an antipaladin.
|
When far away the Paladin is wakened in his room by a monstrous creature spouting harsh sounding gibberish. It does not attack him, but does approach him, gesturing towards him. It tries to touch him, not attack, touch.
It was simple on the how. They were all shattered drunk, and saves were rolled. It was a high level illusion spell. Mechanically everything was up and up. The wizard's dc's were 28 vs a heavily impaired paladin.
I basically figured he would either kill her, or use sense evil. From his past of trying to redeem evil elves and humans, and showing no mercy to anyone of humanoid races, I assumed he would kill her.
Perfect? a few things would have worked. Since she just stood there for a bit before approaching he could have used detect evil, called for help, left the room, subdued her. He had some options. It was a tough situation, but he DID have a lot of ways out of it.
I've cherrypicked some stuff.
Now, how about next time give the full picture instead of adding it post by post?Also, given the past behaviour of the paladin (see quote 3) it cannot be an evil act, as he would have fallen way before that instance. Maybe it was the drop that overflowed the bucket, but then he should have had warning way before now.
|
I see a lot of this as the Raistlin trap, from Dragonlance. A being is treated as being halfway towards being Jr. Demon Lord, and so eventually becomes what everyone accuses him of being in the first place. What people haven't been paying much attention to is that the wizard was NOT a bugbear, he was a (likely) PC race that was reincarnated into a bugbear's body. So what the paladin basically did was "Hey, he (the wizard), just by luck, got brought back in a different body that is, admittedly, usually evil. He must now be evil himself, so I'll persecute him for the whims of fate." Did the wizard do anything evil BEFORE the paladin decided to target him? He was ill tempered and a little bestial. Does the paladin have a problem with barbarians, druids, and rangers?
I might have the paladin lose his powers for a brief period, say one game week, as a warning from the gods. The matter of the paladin recruit was not ENTIRELY his fault, but he bears some responsibility. He could have held her off to find out what's going on, especially since she wasn't acting aggressively.
Actually that's not the situation that the OP described at all. After the bugbear wizard started acting bestial, the pali started to be wary of him. Which only makes sense - if the wizard had already allowed his new form to change his behavior in that way, how much further would he change? Perhaps become evil?
Oh wait - it turns out that the paladin was right! The wizard proceeded to do just the sort of evil act that bugbears are known for, not only killing someone (albeit indirectly) but doing so in such a way as to screw with the victim's friends.
And how is talking gibberish and reach for someone not aggressive in a world with touch spells?
Finally - if it looked demonic, the paladin can assume that it's evil. Demons are ALWAYS evil. Even in Eberron where most alignment "always" shifted to "usually", demons/devils are ALWAYS evil. (That's why tieflings, quite reasonably, often have a hard time.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perfect? a few things would have worked. Since she just stood there for a bit before approaching he could have used detect evil, called for help, left the room, subdued her. He had some options. It was a tough situation, but he DID have a lot of ways out of it.Seriously what would have been the "correct way" to not to fall in this situation?
Start preaching the gibberish thing? completely ignoring the fact there is a demon in your room on the middle of the night?!
Let me ask you one thing. As a DM if you play an npc paladin what would have been the natural reaction in this situation?
like this?:
"Howdy demon wazzup have you seen my gf? Hey you are touching me that tickles! Ow demon you are so fun i love you"
Out of curiosity, what spell or spells did the Wizard use to accomplish this illusion? I can't find a single individual spell that would do it.
Also, again, what method did the Paladin use to try to Raise his lover?
At the end of the day here is the situation you put forward:
Drunk, uneducated Paladin sees what he thinks is a Demon break into his room in the middle of the night, start gesturing and speaking in an unknown language (possibly casting a spell?), advance on him despite his drawn sword, and then attempt to deliver a touch (attack) "in a non-threatening way." The Paladin, perceiving he is being attacked, strikes down his 'attacker'.
Turns out, the Paladin was deceived by a(n) (evil) Wizard, who held a grudge against the Paladin, and transported the Paladin's own lover across the continent, then worked foul magic upon her to make her taken on the appearance and sounds of a monster. All of this supposedly to "teach the Paladin a lesson." Well, it taught him a lesson. That Wizard needs to die. Seems legit.
And no, the Paladin should not fall for this.
(And no, this is not how I would play a Paladin, and I would find plenty of in-game ways to punish this sort of repeated behavior if a player routinely engaged in it. But I think that making the Paladin fall for it is heavy handed GMing, and likely to engender resentment on his part).
|
Finally - if it looked demonic, the paladin can assume that it's evil. Demons are ALWAYS evil. Even in Eberron where most alignment "always" shifted to "usually", demons/devils are ALWAYS evil.
There are examples in Pathfinder of Good-Aligned demons, therefore they are not always evil. They can even ping "evil" and not be evil.
Unless you warn a player that their activity could cause them to fall, then no there is no fall. In this situation, that knowledge would have probably tipped the player that there is more to the situaiton than appears and would have been metagame knowledge.
A strange creature is in your room that you do not recognize, and cannot understand. That it does not appear to be aggressive is of little consequence. Has everyone played the Mass Effect series? Do you remember in Mass Effect 1 where Saren kills Nihlus? Someone doesn't need to be acting aggressively to be a threat. And were talking about a paladin who carries his sword to bed with him and keeps it in hand. His is clearly paranoid, though that is not against paladin regulations. That he accidentally slew his love interest is not an evil act. Because the key part is that it was accidental. He clearly shows remorse because he attempts to resurrect her. It's jerk move to cause the resurrection not to function. And I think it's totally within character at this point for the paladin to attempt to kill the wizard. At the very least the cannot coexist within the group.
The actions on the part of the paladin aren't remotely evil. It is heinously evil on the part of the wizard.
Get the headband of falling or whatever it actually is called. The one that lets you know if any action would go against your oath. Or, my personal feelings, give it free or super cheap to all paladins.
Alright this has a couple of pieces this thread could segment into so I'll try my best to break things down to see what we're dealing with,
1-) Was the Paladin justified in his attack on the illusionary monster?
2-) Is he justified in attempting to kill the bugbear wizard?
3-) Does slaying his love and not blaming himself count as evil enough to fall?
my two copper pieces
1-) This bit is arguable but I will note that after a certain level, a "touch" from monstrous creatures is just as terrifying if not moreso to an adventurer than a soldier swinging a sword. Consider the multitude of curses, diseases, and drains that monsters can use as touch attacks and that's not even counting touch range spells.
2-) Based on the letter the wizard foresaw this to be caused by his illusion and had no qualms about an innocent dying to get at the Paladin. (unless the resurrection spell failed for other reasons and the woman is still alive due to the wizard having a conscience...hmm that'd be interesting...though I guess it's also possible for the wizrd to be trapping her soul)
3-) Now here's where we get at the trickiest part with WILD table variation. I'd suggest if anything have his powers "flicker", not mechanically damaging or anything but enough to get his character to feel that his rage has blinded him to his love and is cutting his connection to his god/goddess. At this point he may have an in character moment of self-reflection, seek the aid of a priest, an atonement, or hell maybe even embrace his fall in desire of revenge.
Point is the general rule is that Paladins should not surprise fall, it feels bad to the player and takes away the richest part of the character development a Paladin's fall offers: being at the edge and deciding if it's worth it to jump. That's an awesomely rich RP moment, why take it away from your player and yourself by doing the whole "you suddenly don't have your powers" shtick?I'll also note that my recommendations would change considerably based on how this...
I just wanted to reinforce this. Especially the RP potential! I don't play paladins, but it would be so much fun to have a chance at RPing a downfall, especially if the GM helped weave it into the story.
I'm just gonna say it: The next "Does the Paladin fall?" thread better be about getting bullrushed off a cliff.
The reaction was not at all evil. It was motivated by justified fear. This guy would be able to claim Castle Doctrine in the real world. The failed Raise Dead is harsh. Excessively so.
Moreover, did the Paladin get a Will save for the illusion as it interacted with him? If not, I think you're legally obligated to have the Wizard's spellbook stolen 3 days before the Paladin and company arrive to kill him.
|
Detect Evil, or sense evil as the OP keeps calling it, would not have detected evil, no, but does that make the thing not evil? No, it doesn't, it could be lesser evil because lower level evils DO NOT PING on a detect evil, which is what a Paladin does.
PRD:
Detect Evil (Sp): At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell. A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds.
So looking at the spell... if something is 4 hit die or lower it does NOT PING on the spell, at all, unless it is a being of innate evil or a cleric/class with an aura that worships a being of innate evil. A typical bugbear does not ping on "Sense Evil" and if the Paladin is a seasoned adventurer they likely know that.
Now with a 'monstrous demon thing' like it was described as, why even check? Yes it could have been a Tiefling, but again the Tiefling would not show up. If the gamers are meta enough to know that 'something is up' because of failed saves, it's WITHIN REASON that they are meta enough to know that demons are beings of evil. (VERY small examples of others who have CHANGED their alignment are in the game, but demons are innately evil; demons, devils, and daemons all are, they are punished mortal souls and thus embodiments of evil.)
The Paladin saw, or believed they saw because of an illusion, which because they failed means they do not disbelieve, a creature gibbering and waving their hands, then trying to touch him. The Paladin is familiar with spellcasting, and already distrusts one that used to be close to him and was reincarnated.
He's perfectly within reason to trust a creature that is generally evil; it may not be the best action, no, and yes it's rather racist, but in a world where this particular race will literally kill you because they FELT LIKE IT that's like saying it's wrong to be afraid of wolves, snakes, or sharks. (I am not advocating racism OR killing animals here, if... that needed to be said.)
TL:DR, the Paladin should not have fallen, the Paladin acted within reason, and that Wizard's got a well deserved smiting a-coming. Give 'im his partner back and let the players enjoy their game.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Threads like this make me really appreciate my gaming group.
The paladin wasn't in the wrong. The wizard should now be a viable Smite target. The GM needs to carefully read the paladin section. Engineering a paladin's fall takes a lot more work than an illusion cast on his girlfriend. The idea behind a Fall From Grace isn't "I was tricked into doing something I shouldn't have and now I feel bad" it's "I'm so upset, and so disillusioned that I did something I shouldn't, and I dont feel bad."
Wait... are you implying that Paladin's must show discretion and good judgment? BLASPHEMY! /smite
It stands to reason that a powerful class like the paladin does have a higher degree of responsibility.
i.e. They're not expected to act like murder hobos.
My basic argument for the paladin to fall is not that he acted evil or not, but rather that he didn't even try to act good and just. Quite unprofessional really.
As for the wizard, if his intent was to get the girlfriend killed, then it's totally evil. If the intent was to teach the paladin a lesson without really giving much thought to what happened to the girlfriend, then I'd go with not evil, but quite a chaotic act. As I read it, he half expected her to get killed, then it doesn't matter if the paladin killed her, the paladin will be justifiably right to b*tch slap smite the wizard with a lesson of his own.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People talk about how threads like this make them want to not play a paladin. I would argue the opposite: part of the joy of playing a paladin is the challenge of walking an edge. You desire to be true and good in a world that is rather murky in its morality.
However, it is one thing to provide a paladin moral dilemmae to consider and work through. It is another to lay such a harsh trap and then just declare the fall. I am especially sorry that the raise dead on the lover did not work -- it should have.
In such a situation, I would have felt seriously betrayed by my GM. As to how to fix this going forward: I am all for the idea that the resurrection was prevented by the Evil Wizard. Because let's face it, the wizard is totally evil to set this trap using an innocent. I might even be okay with a power "flicker."
But more importantly than all the in-game fixes, this is going to need a serious out-of-game fix. The players and the GM have to discuss what happened here and mend fences. We can sit here making all the suggestions we like, but I think that what happened in this instance was a failure of communication above all else.
The GM was unhappy with what he saw as the Paladin's inherent racism. The Paladin is likely (I have to infer, since he is not here) unhappy with being set up without warning for a fall he felt he did not deserve.
You guys are going to need to sit down and talk this through, and then, once you've worked out whether you still want to continue gaming together, you can work out how to make the story fix for what happened here.
Hmm
|
|
There are examples in Pathfinder of Good-Aligned demons, therefore they are not always evil. They can even ping "evil" and not be evil.
Finally - if it looked demonic, the paladin can assume that it's evil. Demons are ALWAYS evil. Even in Eberron where most alignment "always" shifted to "usually", demons/devils are ALWAYS evil.
Ah yes - the overused 'Drizzt Character', only in the case of demons/devils it's moreso. (Drow are mostly just nuture evil, demons/devils are both.) But getting mad at someone for killing a demon/devil is like getting mad at a WWII soldier for shooting a Nazi coming at him in the dark gibbering in German (and the solider doesn't speak german) just because it turned out that he was trying to surrender.
I think going forward, yeah, I might make the evil wizard responsible for the failed resurrection in some fashion that would allow the resurrection to proceed once he is defeated.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since we're in "advice", here's my two cents (without reading the rest of the thread yet--sorry!):
Regardless of the paladin's intent, the paladin did something terrible. This is relevant to the spell atonement:
This spell removes the burden of misdeeds from the subject. The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds. If the atoning creature committed the evil act unwittingly or under some form of compulsion, atonement operates normally at no cost to you. However, in the case of a creature atoning for deliberate misdeeds, you must intercede with your deity (requiring you to expend 2,500 gp in rare incense and offerings). Atonement may be cast for one of several purposes, depending on the version selected.
This implies that, to the designers, atonement is still relevant even if someone commits an evil act against his will. It does not imply the situations in which such atonement is warranted, though.
As for paladins in particular:
A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Did the paladin willingly commit an evil act? No.
Did the paladin fail to respect legitimate authority? No.Did the paladin fail to help those in need? No. (Well, if you want to get pedantic, the victim needed to not die, but I doubt that's intent of the rule.)
Did the paladin use poison? No.
Did the paladin fail to punish those who harm or threaten innocents? Well, that one is interesting. The paladin is honor-bound to punish himself for this. So long as the paladin seeks atonement, there is no code of conduct violation here. If the paladin simply handwaves the situation, that would constitute a violation.
On to what actually causes a paladin to fall:
A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features (including the service of the paladin's mount, but not weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She may not progress any further in levels as a paladin. She regains her abilities and advancement potential if she atones for her violations (see atonement), as appropriate.
Did the paladin cease to be lawful good? No.
Did the paladin willfully commit an evil act? No.Did the paladin violate the code of conduct? So long as the paladin seeks atonement, no.
Bottom line: As long as the paladin seeks atonement, there should be no loss of class features. This should include attempting to rectify the problem--raising her from the dead if possible, dealing with the evil wizard that caused this in the first place, and taking measure to ensure that he is not fooled in this manner in the future. That last bit may entail a change in behavior--not attacking things before verifying that they are a threat--or other measures, like forging an item that allows the paladin to see through illusions. But the specifics are between the paladin and whatever power grants the paladin his abilities.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The original situation sounds like a jerk move by the GM to me. Surprised players haven't revolted and replaced the GM (well, all except for the Bugbear wizard).
Jerk moves make unhappy players who find other GMs.
Actually, it's more than a jerk move, it sounds like it's almost an illegal ruling by the GM...but not explicit, more implicit and borderline on being illegal (aka, not spelled out in the rules, but against the spirit of the rules).
IMO...of course.
I'd see if anyone else in the group was rather unhappy with how the GM ruled on this situation, and if the rest are (except the obvious bugbear wizard), then force the GM to retract the fall or replace the GM with someone who will.
This does seem like a situation the GM should never have allowed to happen. If the wizard was an NPC, that would be one thing. Allowing this kind of intraparty conflict seems irresponsible--unless the players are into that kind of thing, of course.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was simple on the how. They were all shattered drunk, and saves were rolled. It was a high level illusion spell. Mechanically everything was up and up. The wizard's dc's were 28 vs a heavily impaired paladin.
Also I asked the paladin to roll saves a few times, he knew something was up. She did not touch him, when she reached to do so, he killed her. I gave him an attack of opportunity as if it were an unarmed attack from someone without the feat. I also stated it was not an aggressive motion.
Yeah no. I play Paladins and with Paladins extensively and I can tell you that there is NOTHING in this situation that would make the Paladin fall.
1) Saves are abstract, while the Paladin (the player) knows that he's making saves and that something may be up, the Paladin (the character) only sees a demonic creature babbling in an unknown language and attempting to touch him. And tons of creatures have auras or abilities that require saves, hell a vampire can Dominate you with a look. So why would rolling saves be a clue that something is an illusion?
2) "the touch was nonthreatening" yeah, so is a touch attack by a Succubus. Level draining kiss, looks nonthreatening until you shrivel like a raisin. A touch attack can be any type of touch, it doesn't always look like it wants to eat your soul, my point on Succubi again.
3) WHY IN THE NINE HELLS DID YOU LET IT GET THIS FAR!?!?!!? Seriously why? What possible purpose was there in allowing the Wizard to commit such an iredeemably evil and despicable act?
4) "A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act." Since the Paladin had NO in character way of knowing that it wasn't a monster he did not WILLINGLY COMMIT AN EVIL ACT AND THUS DOES NOT FALL. And THEN you had the sheer GALL to tell him that he couldn't raise her, why? He tried to right his wrong and you shut him down, that's not good roleplay or fair, that's just being a dick.
5) The Wizard just proved the Paladin was right all along. When he was angered he orchestrated the murder of not only and innocent woman, but a holy warrior at that. He just pulled a Joker or Scarecrow move, and left a letter on her corpse. HE JUST SIGNED HIS OWN CONFESSION! The Paladin now wanting to kill him is right in the holy sense as that is an incredibly evil act, right in the judicial sense in that the wizard committed a murder and then left basically a confession letter, and right personally in wanting vengeance.
The only way out of this if you want to avoid been THAT DM is to have the Paladin not fall, have a SERIOUS talk with the Wizard about what he thought made this okay, make the wizard an NPC villain while the player rolls a new character, and give the party some way to save the girl and get her back.
This does seem like a situation the GM should never have allowed to happen. If the wizard was an NPC, that would be one thing. Allowing this kind of intraparty conflict seems irresponsible--unless the players are into that kind of thing, of course.
OP already clarified, the bugbear wizard was an NPC by the time this plot had been enacted.
Paladin kills a man who has sincerely surrendered to the party? That's murder at that point, and pretty good grounds for a fall or a serious warning from the gods.Just as a note torag paladins MUST kill the surrendered not to fall.
Except that they don't.
Out of curiosity, what spell or spells did the Wizard use to accomplish this illusion? I can't find a single individual spell that would do it.Programmed Illusion (on the paladin's room) - Make the entrant appear as a tiefling, triggered by when the low level paladin entered the room.
Suggestion (on the paladin's lover) - "You should speak in throaty, guttural tones and pretend you are a domantrix to spice up your evening with the paladin tonight after the party."
I'm okay with the GM's plan. I think he pulled it off perfectly. It was an extremely dastardly trick with lots of highly emotional role-playing reactions. He role-played true evil in his gaming world. Lots of GMs can't do that (I have major trouble GMing that evil) and the majority(?) of players can't hack it when it is directed at them.
That's a very generous interpretation of Programmed Image. Since it acts "as Silent Image," it "creates the visual illusion of an object, creature, or force, as visualized by you [the caster]." I doubt the caster could visualize the exact movements the lover was going to make. Veil is more likely, but does not allow for Auditory components RAW. Suggestion to "speak in throaty, gutteral tones" is good, but the Paladin should have gotten a Perception roll to recognize the voice (even drunk).
I'm okay with the plan, but not with (1) saying the Paladin fell as a result, and (2) preventing a Raise Dead spell (probably cast by someone who was NOT the Paladin) from working because "the Paladin is not remorseful enough."
|
As a very entertaining side note, at least to me, the Paladin was right about the wizard. This isn't exactly a good 'lesson'.
Wizard: Stop judging me to be evil now that I'm a bugbear! Commits heinously evil act to 'teach' a lesson about judging others
Paladin: Hoo boy, now that the wizard who I thought might be evil because they turned into an evil species turned out to be evil and tricked me, I'm certainly never going to judge someone by their species again.
Good point, but it was the ostracization from the group that was the last straw. So was it in a sense self fulfilling prophecy for the paladin?
No, he does not fall since what he saw was a bugbear not the paladin due to the illusion.
This really sounds like a groin move by the DM.
Good point, but it was the ostracization from the group that was the last straw. So was it in a sense self fulfilling prophecy for the paladin?As a very entertaining side note, at least to me, the Paladin was right about the wizard. This isn't exactly a good 'lesson'.
Wizard: Stop judging me to be evil now that I'm a bugbear! Commits heinously evil act to 'teach' a lesson about judging others
Paladin: Hoo boy, now that the wizard who I thought might be evil because they turned into an evil species turned out to be evil and tricked me, I'm certainly never going to judge someone by their species again.
That's up to you, as the GM, to say, since you're now in control of the NPC.
In many fantasy stories though, the main villain feels he was wronged by the heroes. There may even be a lot of truth to it. At the end of the day though, he still has free will. He's choosing to do evil because he feels slighted. His actions (often fueled by his pride), not his treatment by the group, make him an evil person / creature. There is some RP potential here, if you don't just try to use the situation as a method to "teach the Paladin a lesson."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Paladin threw himself into the (evil) wizard's trap. He didn't Detect Evil on the mysterious thing in his room,
Bugbears dont detect as evil, unless they have several levels. And you're allowed to defend yourself from attack, even if your foe is not evil. Touch attacks are common.
This was a complete dick move set up.
Help would be appreciated. The last game ended this way.Here.
Huge +1 for this. Did you warn him?
You cannot fall a Paladin in good conscience if you do not warn the player. Remember:
player = CN real life human trying to play a game as a LG paladin.
paladin = sacred creature directly tied to a god with enormous awareness of what it's god wants and doesn't to the point that it can daily annihilate creatures for it's god and perform massive miracles. Paladins do not accidentally fall except when on a grease spell.
Read the Oath of Vengeance oath. LG gods will even ignore paladins allowing evil to take place to meet bigger goals.
The wizard is an outright murderer. Whether one murder was enough to plummet him into evil or he's just a badly confused, soon to be dead wizard of G/N alignment is sort of irrelevant.
The fun part of this is the social commentary that the wizard being pre-judged may have pressured him into a desperate act, which led to him going actually bad. I certainly hope the wizard had dump-stated wisdom, because wow was that dumb.
As for the raise dead failing, that seems really wanky, unless its part of the above mentioned quest line.
Good point, but it was the ostracization from the group that was the last straw. So was it in a sense self fulfilling prophecy for the paladin?As a very entertaining side note, at least to me, the Paladin was right about the wizard. This isn't exactly a good 'lesson'.
Wizard: Stop judging me to be evil now that I'm a bugbear! Commits heinously evil act to 'teach' a lesson about judging others
Paladin: Hoo boy, now that the wizard who I thought might be evil because they turned into an evil species turned out to be evil and tricked me, I'm certainly never going to judge someone by their species again.
That's up to you, as the GM, to say, since you're now in control of the NPC.
In many fantasy stories though, the main villain feels he was wronged by the heroes. There may even be a lot of truth to it. At the end of the day though, he still has free will. He's choosing to do evil because he feels slighted. His actions (often fueled by his pride), not his treatment by the group, make him an evil person / creature. There is some RP potential here, if you don't just try to use the situation as a method to "teach the Paladin a lesson."
In addition, bear in mind that you haven't specifically stated how overt the Paladin was in his suspicion. I've traveled with a companion for months (in game), and only once mentioned that we might have to kill that person. If that was what happened here, then no, I wouldn't say it was a self fulfilling prophecy.
Another good point to keep in mind is that Reincarnation is not full on resurrection. They're brought back in a different body, as a different creature. The spell itself states that the creature remembers the majority of their past life and memory, but that isn't the same as saying "This is the same person." The best example I have of this is Doctor Who. With each reincarnation, he becomes a different character. He remembers what happened, and still sticks with his goals, but he changes. From what I've been told, this most recent Doctor is rather ruthless and alien. The fear that the bugbear may embrace his darker nature is a very real and very reasonable fear. I would certainly say that the Paladin contributed to it, but I'm not willing to say it's the Paladin's fault, and that he should be blamed for it.
I have likely been too hard....but I'd say you are too easy Undone. Things like watching someone be hurt or killed without interceding ( unless hiding in a hostile land )...and a lot of less than that list things should make a paladin fall.
As a general rule if you have to ask "Should a paladin fall" the answer is nearly always No.
I've yet to see a "Paladin fall's" thread where they did anything even remotely close to provoking an actual justified fall.
Here's the ONLY thing where any mature serious player would have his/her paladin fall:
The Player or the DM discuss how cool it would be to have a Paladin redemption storyline or fallen paladin in the current campaign, and agree OOC that they want it to happen.
It's a agreed upon plot point.
The DM never should say "Your Paladin falls." If you even think this could ever happen*, you give the Paladin a (slotless) Phylactery of Faithfulness and he falls ONLY if it warns him and he does it anyway.
* Like with a immature or new player.