Paladin Code of Honor


Advice

Dark Archive

please forgive the newbisness of this thread.

I recently made my first Paladin character (paladin of abadar) for PFS, and while I love almost everything about how i made her, the game i played the other day suddenly threw a wrench into how I have her designed.

the paladin code of honor.

in the game I was playing we had downed a creature that had attacked us without warning, but had not yet killed it. before the party could slaughter it, I held them back and used detect evil on it, and surely enough it pinged evil, so I left the party kill it. after the game we talked about that moment a bit and someone asked me why I didnt kill it since it was evil. my feelings on it was that since it was down and now unarmed it posed minimal to no threat so it seemed dishonorable to kill it. some one else then pointed out how it could get a second wind and attack from behind in the near future, or block our path of escape if we had to retreat.they then pointed out that i had based my characters code of honor on more modern code then one that might have existed towards a medieval-ish time era. so to me this raised 2 questions

1. what does it mean to for a paladin to act with honor within the realm of PFS?
2. If something goes against the code of honor but serves a greater good, is it justified? (i.e. stealing something on behalf of the PFS with assurance a greater good will be served.)


Look on this page about halfway down for the code of paladins of Abadar. It'll give you some specific advice on how that particular faith influences ideas of "good" or "honor". Deity-specific paladin codes are about the only specific guidelines that exist beyond this sentence in the paladin's description:

d20pfsrd.com wrote:
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.

For anything not explicitly covered by those statements, there are as many different interpretations of "honorable" or "good" as there are people trying to make rulings on it. For what it's worth, in the particular situation you listed, I don't think you did anything wrong.

(Although the safest solution, if you hadn't decided to kill it, would have probably been to use some rope/manacles/whatever you had on hand to bind it and take it in to the nearest settlement for the legal system to handle. Just something to think about for the future.)

Your friends do somewhat have the right of it too, though - if you accept that Golarion is meant to be based off of medieval ethics, then it tends to draw a harder line on a lot of legal issues than modern ethics does. But Golarion is not just porting in medieval ethics - it is its own world, with morals and cultural guidelines that may have little to do with our own medieval time period.

As for your second question...that's a little more complicated. Theft from another person purely for personal gain would be out - but the entire system of adventuring hinges off of gaining wealth by looting the dead or abandoned sites. And there can genuinely be situations in which a theft is the best solution, and situations in which you can be duped into thinking it is.

Really, the answer may come down to "Yes, it's justified because otherwise there's no reason for you to be here and the scenario doesn't continue." It sounds trite, but sometimes it's truly the answer.

Issues of ethics get really sticky sometimes, but being guided by your own more modern system of understanding doesn't mean you're doing it wrong. Just allow that your companions' more hard-line views aren't necessarily wrong, either. Really, as long as you're not being unnecessarily cruel, consciously flouting authority, or something of that sort, you're usually ok. With the waters being so murky, most GMs will give some wiggle room as long as it's evident you're trying.


I could actually see the conversation you're talking about taking place in-character. Especially if you're ICly a relative novice as a paladin. Sometimes ideals do get blurred, sadly. I think you were OK in suggesting mercy, but when mercy proves impractical ... well, things happen.

I'd still generally lean towards being the more ideal voice of 'bring them home to face justice', as long as you don't push it to ridiculous lengths. And as long as the party doesn't decide to turn 'justice' or 'pragmatism' into 'sport' and 'holy f@#$ what are you doing to that thing?!', I don't think it'd be a coming-to-blows thing.

Of course, OOC feel free to talk about things with the group too. Just in case. Did the scenario here end in a quick coup de grace, or did it get messy?

Grand Lodge

As a paladin, it is my honor, and my duty, to destroy that which is evil!!! I cannot abide evil. I cannot protect that which is evil. I cannot turn my back on an evil creature and leave it to it's whims. There may be rules governing the course of action, but the course of action must be the destruction of that which is evil.

In the real world good and evil are subject abstracts. They have no substance. You can't detect evil, there is no test for evil. You can only discuss what any particular person, or most people mean, by evil.

In the game world, evil exists as on objective reality. It is a substance. It can be detected, warded against, bolstered, etc.

A murderer in the real world is a person that commits what almost anyone would consider to be an evil act. A murderer in the fantasy world is partly imbued with an essence of evil.


You did fine.

Even assuming what you did wasn't wholly Good, it also clearly wasn't Evil, so there's no conflict with the Code. It's just as honorable to kill an evil foe so they can't harm others in the future as let it live because there's no threat. Every Paladin is different.


I think you did nothing wrong.

The Paladin code is too vague to be definitive, and thus open to a degree of interpretation.

I agree that ruthlessly slaughtering an enemy who has been rendered defenseless seems dishonorable.

Never forget that a Paladin is Good before they are Lawful, and never let the lights of decency and mercy be extinguished within you.

Dark Archive

haha actually my character only held them off to make the creature was evil, once she saw it was she (more or less) didnt care what they did to it. she just wanted to make sure that they werent killing something that could have just been defending itself against intruders.

I guess i might need to rethink her code of honor a bit though... I swear this is taking more thought on my end then i thought it would have lol


Something to remember --- for everyone to remember -- is that paladins are humans (or at least humanoids), not angels. And that the required alignment is Good, not Perfect.

i tend to be fairly strict with paladins at my table, but that's largely because my group includes a number of people who regard roleplaying as an opportunity to let the inner sociopath out, and then rely on their inner Jesuit to come up with a remarkably casuistic explanation of why setting fire to the village orphanage was actually necessary for the Greater Good. For that reason, I'm generally fairly suspicious of any arguments involving the Greater Good.

But none of that matters here. It's hard to go wrong tempering Justice with Mercy. Even if you and I disagree on the exact proportions, you're still basically acting in a good way.

Grand Lodge

Paladin Code of Abadar


be sure to look at inner sea gods in abadar's section, it has a section for a code of honor for his paladins


Since Paladin is shackled with roleplay restricting alignment baggage, it plays quite a bit differently than any other class.

Dark Archive

thanks for the references to the inner sea gods books and such sources but ive already gone over those, i wasnt looking for paladin code. I was looking for a paladin code of honor, i.e. do not fight a foe unless he is armed and ready, do not strike down a foe thats surrendered, no low blows. things like that.

another way to say it is that im looking for help to deal with the abstracts of being a paladin, not whats written in the books already.

Grand Lodge

Maria Bashin wrote:

thanks for the references to the inner sea gods books and such sources but ive already gone over those, i wasnt looking for paladin code. I was looking for a paladin code of honor, i.e. do not fight a foe unless he is armed and ready, do not strike down a foe thats surrendered, no low blows. things like that.

another way to say it is that im looking for help to deal with the abstracts of being a paladin, not whats written in the books already.

This is where character concept comes in. There is not a single code of honor, even for paladins. If you have a conception of honor than play it.

If you believe an honorable paladin would never strike down a defenseless, but evil creature, then play it. If you believe an honorable paladin wouldn't hesitate to destroy evil in any form, so long as his lawful code was not violated, then play it. The important thing is that you have 'A CODE." If you play it one way in one scenario, and another way in another scenario, then you fail!


Maria Bashin wrote:

thanks for the references to the inner sea gods books and such sources but ive already gone over those, i wasnt looking for paladin code. I was looking for a paladin code of honor, i.e. do not fight a foe unless he is armed and ready, do not strike down a foe thats surrendered, no low blows. things like that.

another way to say it is that im looking for help to deal with the abstracts of being a paladin, not whats written in the books already.

That's what several of us have been doing, giving examples of how we see the idea of Paladin honour.

I, for example, see fair combat as honorable, uneven combat as acceptable, but striking down the defenseless as dishonorable. "Unarmed" can be a difficult distinction in a world with supernatural martial artists and magic, to say nothing of monsters, but "defenseless" is pretty clear.

On the other hand, your approach of not stopping your party is okay by my standards. It would be dishonorable for you, but if they care little for honour, so be it. A quick end to a foe is a fitting end.


Scythia wrote:
Maria Bashin wrote:

thanks for the references to the inner sea gods books and such sources but ive already gone over those, i wasnt looking for paladin code. I was looking for a paladin code of honor, i.e. do not fight a foe unless he is armed and ready, do not strike down a foe thats surrendered, no low blows. things like that.

another way to say it is that im looking for help to deal with the abstracts of being a paladin, not whats written in the books already.

That's what several of us have been doing, giving examples of how we see the idea of Paladin honour.

I, for example, see fair combat as honorable, uneven combat as acceptable, but striking down the defenseless as dishonorable. "Unarmed" can be a difficult distinction in a world with supernatural martial artists and magic, to say nothing of monsters, but "defenseless" is pretty clear.

On the other hand, your approach of not stopping your party is okay by my standards. It would be dishonorable for you, but if they care little for honour, so be it. A quick end to a foe is a fitting end.

There's ideas of what a paladin might be, but ultimately it is your own paladin. I'd say this is a good example of a way to play things, for the most part, although perhaps maybe a final sentencing might be in order. (I now wish Abadar paladins favoured warhammers just for the gavel symoblogy. Then again bludgeoning is the most fun damage type.)


Qaianna wrote:
(I now wish Abadar paladins favoured warhammers just for the gavel symoblogy. Then again bludgeoning is the most fun damage type.)

Aw, man, you're right...I didn't know I wanted this and now it's all I want...

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Paladin Code of Honor All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.