What are some examples of rules that Paladins might break without losing their status of Paladin?
Making a deal with an evil entity to become an Anti-paladin.
Everything else can be worked through with atonement. Even the Anti-paladin route could possibly have that option depending on the circumstances, and contrition. A paladin that breaks a vow and 'falls' doesn't stop being a paladin - they may loose powers but the game has mechanics in place to get them back. You never erase the 'paladin' class levels from your character unless you become an anti-paladin.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two paladins have discovered a child, who has been made a living portal to the eldritch beings who should not be gazed upon. In five minutes, the portal will open, and Armageddon will ensue. There is no way to contact the casters necessary to close the rift in time. Killing the host will disrupt the portal. One paladin refuses to slay an innocent, and actively protects the child. The other slays the first paladin, then the child. Who falls? Both? None? One? Unfortunately, the answer is probably the paladin who stopped armageddon, by the system. Alignment is a remnant of a far worse game, and should be carved off with a hack saw.It would depend on the gods involved, but most likely the paladin that protected the innocent should atone for a chaotic act. He selfishly chose to protect one person to the detriment of many more innocents. For most paladins, the good of the many should outweigh the good of the few.
I do agree that the alignment system is and always has been poorly implemented. I haven't found one I really like. Part of the problem is historic and another part of it is the absolute nature of how it has been implemented. It would probably be better to do something like this as a divine relationship score -- how much do the gods approve of your actions.
Neither paladin falls, but the GM however...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
People seem to forget that Lawful is only tangentially related to Legal. Lawful is a philosophy of order, working together, everything in its place, discipline, and that sort of thing. A lawful society will have laws as part of this principle and those laws will be 'lawful', but just because something is a law, doesn't mean it is 'lawful' as far as alignment goes. Most chaotic societies, and pretty much all neutral ones will have laws too, but those laws may be very different.
Most Paladins would probably consider evil or unjust laws through something similar to Aquinus's Just War theory when it came to opposing them. This includes the evil or chaos of the law being less than than evil or chaos that would result in opposing it, that their be a reasonable chance of being successful, and of course that there isn't another way (working with the legal framework to get the the law changed for example.)
A Paladin (at least the base non-special oath kind) believes that Good is able to fully manifest in an Ordered Society, and that a Laws will only be 'Lawful' in a Good society. They don't see the two principles in opposition, and see them as both being required to be truly moral.
Additionally, a Paladin wouldn't see their code as a weakness, but as the best, and only way to achieve their goals. The end can't justify the means, because evil or chaotic means won't actually lead to a lawful good end.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Michael Carpenter in the Dresden series of novels.
Best example of a paladin I've ever seen in a novel. neither Lawful stupid nor Stupid Good. Smart, tactical, faithful and determined, unbending personally while being understanding that not all others are the same way.
Hero all the way through. The most rock hard and reliable supporting character in the entire series.
As a paladin should be.
==Aelryinth
To be fair, Michael has an advantage that Golarion Paladins don't.
He has his faith in an omnipotent Diety, and can believe that no matter what, if he does what is right, that will be the best thing to do. His faith is rooted in a very different kind of deity that what a Pathfinder Paladin believes in, a Golarian Paladin can have the same principles as Michael, but can't really have the belief that he has the same kind of backup.
(Although I think he is awesome, and to an extent I think the entire 'Paladin' concept has difficulty in a pan-theistic setting)
to an extent I think the entire 'Paladin' concept has difficulty in a pan-theistic setting)
I dunno, I actually really like the questions of what being a Paladin really "means" when you have multiple gods that all field Paladins who disagree on what a Paladin does. Torag would bestow blessings on a Paladin for actions that Sarenrae would reprimand her for; the less-than-perfectly-clear morality is generally more interesting to me.
|
No, you can't always trust a Paladin. Why? Because Paladins are not infallible.
Someone attaining Paladin status is a big deal. This is obvious. Being a Paladin, however, is not something that's bestowed upon the recipient like Sorcerous blood or Oracular gifts; it's something that takes devotion and work.
What this means, however, is that Paladins can totally lie, steal, and commit all sorts of atrocities. Being a Paladin does not make you trustworthy; being trustworthy makes you a Paladin. You don't trust a Paladin any more than a good fighter with a reputation. A Paladin EARNS it, and proves it time and again.
I think experience is a fairly good judge of who you can trust.
My child is choking, there is a teenager and a doctor standing nearby. Which one is more likely to know CPR? I could be wrong, but I think the doctor would be more likely.
A Paladin and a stranger tell me conflicting stories. Who am I more likely to trust? The Paladin. Why? Because although not every Paladin is perfect, more of them tell the truth than the general unknown public.
Sure. And how do you know he's a Paladin? There's nothing stopping anyone from dressing in shiny armor and lying to you about being a Paladin. Again, I'm not saying you CAN'T trust a Paladin. I'm saying that there's nothing about him indicates immediate trustworthiness.
Intimidate checks make Paladins fall now ha.May I present, The Powder Keg of Justice, the gold standard of what it means to be a Paladin for me. Hope this answers a few of your questions.Personally I'd treat that threat as a breach of code. Someone who must live and follow a code shouldn't be allowed to threaten others by swearing to breach that code.
In my opinion anyway.
My issue wasn't the Paladin rolling Intimidate. The Paladin was threatening to break his own vows, to break the very thing that makes him a Paladin and allows him divine privileges.
At best he was lying, and he shouldn't be lying anyway.
At worst he meant it, and his mind had already considered and gone to that place. He had already taken his first steps towards the fall.
Isn't it pretty much a classic by now for a character empowered by their "pure" ideals to lose it all and fall into corruption after a long series of fairly obvious signs that the character is about to dive into the deep end of the alignment pool(or the setting equivalent).
It sounds like that was the party's first warning that the Paladin wasn't nearly as pure as he let on. You need a few more signs of something wrong with him and a really heinous action to top it off before he would be traditionally be slapped with a fall. Otherwise, the Fantasy genre gods will be displeased.
|
Intimidate checks make Paladins fall now ha.May I present, The Powder Keg of Justice, the gold standard of what it means to be a Paladin for me. Hope this answers a few of your questions.Personally I'd treat that threat as a breach of code. Someone who must live and follow a code shouldn't be allowed to threaten others by swearing to breach that code.
In my opinion anyway.
My issue wasn't the Paladin rolling Intimidate. The Paladin was threatening to break his own vows, to break the very thing that makes him a Paladin and allows him divine privileges.
At best he was lying, and he shouldn't be lying anyway.
At worst he meant it, and his mind had already considered and gone to that place. He had already taken his first steps towards the fall.
I'm not a big fan of the thought police. I prefer my alignment infractions to be based on actions.
What worth is it to be pure if you've never faced temptation?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's quite a lot of table variation in how people run paladins and the Lawful alignment. As far as I'm concerned, Lawful characters don't have to obey all laws, but because they value order they generally think that it's a good idea to have laws by which to order society.
So yes, LG people avoid breaking even seemingly arbitrary laws without good reason. Yes, they prefer to address injustices within the system. Yes, this can cause problems. Though usually it's less "I'm a square who won't go underage drinking" and more "I'm not sure why we have a poll tax but there's probably a good reason so I'll enforce it for now and if I find out it's unjust I'll start a letter-writing campaign and it will probably be changed eventually." And yes, that means that the paladin's insistence on doing things "the right way" will sometimes be frustrating to those who just want to get the good done.
No, that doesn't mean that paladins are insufferable. Unless you find anyone who lives by stricter rules than you to be insufferable, in which case you probably have a hard time with vegetarians, recovering alcoholics, professional athletes, and a wide variety of religious groups.
Then again, if he knows the defendant is innocent, why isn't he on the witness stand, cheerfully submitting to any truth-compulsions to be found? If a judge knows you're a paladin, knows you're speaking the truth and you claim the defendant is innocent, how can a guilty verdict be just? And then it's no longer legitimate authority, and the gloves come off.
Even assuming the judge does know you're a paladin (and not eg a warpriest of Iomedae), even a paladin under truth-compulsion can mistakenly report a guilty person's innocence. A paladin's testimony isn't proof, it just means it's time to weigh the likelihood of the paladin being mistaken or tricked vs all the other evidence being invalid.
Michael Carpenter in the Dresden series of novels.
Best example of a paladin I've ever seen in a novel. neither Lawful stupid nor Stupid Good. Smart, tactical, faithful and determined, unbending personally while being understanding that not all others are the same way.
Fantastic as Michael is, he does have at least one Lawful Stupid Good incident:
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the best modern example of paladin behavior is Chris Evans' portrayal as Steve Rogers/Captain America from the Marvel movies.
Cap always fights for the little guy (having previously been a little guy,) is always willing to lay down his life for his teammates or those in his custody, and fights for freedom, liberty, and justice. He's an icon, and he knows as much, and attempts to maintain a high standard of character that matches his public perception.
That being said, we see him use guns and kill people, he conducts covert missions, and he even fights the very government that endorses and empowers him. He went "rogue" against the government in Winter Soldier, and we'll see more of that in Civil War. That's because Captain America always follows his ideals; his code. If Captain America is fighting the government, it's because **the government** has stopped has stopped helping the little guy, stopped representing freedom & liberty.
Regardless of the landscape, Captain America is the *absolute* moral center of the Marvel Universe. Marvel never writes anything Cap does as being off that center. In the comics, he frequently fights other heroes, or leaves the government, or leaves the Avengers and forms an underground "Secret Avengers." In each of those scenarios, [not from mine or your perspective, but from the perspective of the Marvel editing office] Cap is *right* and the other party is *wrong.* If I picked up a comic and saw Captain America blow up an orphanage, my initial thought wouldn't be 'Cap's evil and he's a terrible person,' it would be 'there must be a really, really good reason he did that, or there's an impostor running around.'
Also, that doesn't mean he can't get mad, or go for a beer after work, or can't pick up a girl and have a good time, or tell a lie to protect somebody (including himself.) He's still human.
Whenever I'm playing a paladin, I always ask myself, "what would Steve do?"
Any adventurer who rescues the farmer's daughter will be treated like a hero, because that action is what makes them a hero. Not their class or alignment.And that's my issue. I like Paladins only because I pigeon-hole them as being superstars, adored by the masses, sought after by the opposite sex. I like them mostly for those reasons (I think). Well, a decorative set of plate polished to a high shine is an impressive sight too. Otherwise I'd play a Wizard.
And yes how the Wizard or pally can vary from GM to GM, still in my mind the pally is the glorious champion who stands out.
If that's the box you feel comfortable in remaining in, all power to you. Just keep in mind that from our viewpoint, it's a very small, limited, and confining box.
Dalarond of Keoland wears battered grey plate armor, it's road worn and dirty. But he's no less a Paladin than Sir Shiney.
It never ceases to amaze me that the only class that people seem obsessed to alignment check is the paladin.Because not only must a Paladin be Lawful Good, but he has more at stake than the Fighter who is LG. They're held to a higher standard because their God most likely holds them to a higher standard. That's why they are a separate class with special divine privileges.
Oh, I understand why I just find it absolutely silly and frankly insulting to the paladin player. No other class has their ability to roleplay to a DM's satisfaction so much in question...at all times...in every game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I understand why I just find it absolutely silly and frankly insulting to the paladin player. No other class has their ability to roleplay to a DM's satisfaction so much in question...at all times...in every game.It never ceases to amaze me that the only class that people seem obsessed to alignment check is the paladin.Because not only must a Paladin be Lawful Good, but he has more at stake than the Fighter who is LG. They're held to a higher standard because their God most likely holds them to a higher standard. That's why they are a separate class with special divine privileges.
To be more accurate that's "every game described on these messageboasrds". There actually ARE games where Paladin players actually just play like everyone else. You can take my word that I've witnessed them. It doesn't mean that the character wasn't challenged appropriately, but that the player herself wasn't persecuted for making that character choice.
Oh, I understand why I just find it absolutely silly and frankly insulting to the paladin player. No other class has their ability to roleplay to a DM's satisfaction so much in question...at all times...in every game.It never ceases to amaze me that the only class that people seem obsessed to alignment check is the paladin.Because not only must a Paladin be Lawful Good, but he has more at stake than the Fighter who is LG. They're held to a higher standard because their God most likely holds them to a higher standard. That's why they are a separate class with special divine privileges.
There is nothing silly or insulting.
If someone wants to play a paladin , not a LG fighter , then people will expect him to uphold the code.
LG is open which leads to trully diferent characters and you can do actions outside said alignment and only fall after a while , the code on the other hand isnt , it will tell things the paladin must uphold and breaking it even once will hold repercussions.
There lies the gap to me really , since a player must break the alignments many times to change unless they do something trully different of its expected , most GMs dont bother on warning the player all the time. On the paladin case it is only once , so the GM needs to tell the player much more often , otherwise he falls.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
you are all better than this
these are the worst threads with the same names
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
*drives train off tracks into a mountain of burning tires*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The seer Lamontius saw this coming a mile way. I'm not going to dignify this nonsense anymore than I already have.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
