TheFace's page

Are there any credible rumors of Paizo officially adding any form of spell point system to Pathfinder?

I have not heard any. I have asked, so you will have an answer soon.

Drejk is banned for speaking of confusing a dislike of imitators with discrimination.

I ended up buying Libris Mortis, and I am very pleased. I also borrowed a copy of HoH from the local library, and I have to say I think Libris Mortis was the right choice. I personally like the Undead fluff and new monsters. Undead are by far my favorite monster type to use.

Fraust wrote:

Don't know if you care for this much realism, but just thought I'd share.

Not all dino bones fosilize, some come out VERY fragile. I've never worked on dinosaur bones, but I've dug up bison kills from way back when (don't recall the date), and some of the bones were about as hard as cake frosting that sat out a little.

Also, fosils as old as dinosaur bones rarely come through without some warpage. Geologic forces are pretty intense over that much time, so when you're describing the creatures, feel free to have them twisted and asemetrical a bit.

An additional realism note.

Fossils actually arn't bones. They are mineral deposist that fill in the space of the bone and take it's shape. There really isnt any "Bone Matter" present in a fossil. Basically trying to animate a fossil as a skeleton would be like trying to animate a plaster cast of someone's face as a zombie.

Libris Mortis has rules for animating fossils, so I'll use those for this encounter.

I've never seen anything saying you can't, and I can't think of any reason to say no, so I'd personally allow it.

You could become a Blackguard (which I don't think has been updated to Pathfinder).

The Blackguard is, I'm pretty sure, product identity, preventing Paizo from using it. That's why Paizo has the Anti-Paladin, which is basically a far superior core class version (Though I disagree with the CE alignment restriction. It should be able to be any evil alignment. Then again, I think the same about Paladins and good alignments, and even have a modified spell list and code of conduct for NG and CG Paladins floating around my Gaia account somewhere.).

In Pathfinder, as in Dungeons & Dragons before it, Good and Evil are absolutes. There are actions that are Good and actions that are Evil. Sometimes it's the circumstances.

The ends do not justify the means due to the alignment system.

In the case of the paladin in the original post, that paladin has fallen. Now, as for powers, you can dig up a couple of options from the 3.5 rules. Both would require you to update either an old Prestige Class or an optional Core Class to Pathfinder rules.

You could become a Blackguard (which I don't think has been updated to Pathfinder).
You could become a Paladin of Tyranny (a LE paladin) from the Unearthed Arcana book.

Otherwise, said character is a fallen paladin by the Pathfinder rules alone.

I already stated that she is a fallen Paladin. What is being argued about here is a proposal in Heroes of Horror about an evil deity maintaining a fallen Paladin's powers without her notice. I like the idea, others think a class other than Paladin or an Anti-Paladin would be better. It's basically a clash of individual preferences that nobody is ever going to win, simply because nobody is right or wrong.

TheFace wrote:

SHE IS NO LONGER A PALADIN! SHE. HAS. FALLEN. How many times do I have to say it? Some of her powers are being allowed to function in a modified way, but she's not a Paladin anymore. She's a Cleric who used to be a Paladin.

Yes, I got this, but non of her paladin powers will function that way. Which is why most folks have suggested you use another class in place of the dead levels.

If an official D&D 3.5 supplement puts forth evil divine intervention as a possible solution, I'm inclined to take it seriously as an option. It's in Heroes of Horror, page 31.

As for alignment, I feel sanity should be taken into account. Not to do so seems rather offensive to the mentally ill. I understand why you think she should still be evil, but it doesn't seem fair to call the ill bad.

An animated T Rex is a heap of HD for a caster to animate using animate dead, and being fossilized might stretch the definition of "dead" a bit. However, a few castings of animate object should get things going and make things a little more difficult for the party cleric.

I just checked my copy of Libris Mortis, and fossils, under 3.5 rules, can't be animated with animate dead at all. A special ritual is used, and it doesn't say how it works or how many of these things I create, or whether they can dig themselves up, so I guess I get to decide that as GM, but the actual template for a revived fossil looks pretty cool. It's hard as stone (DR 10/Adamantine), gets bonus HP, gets Combat Reflexes, gets a brutal claw attack if it didn't already have one, and gets good natural armor.

TheFace wrote:

Now, I COULD just add the skeleton template to the dinosaurs from the Bestiary, but there is one glaring issue: These bones are 65 million years old. Presumably, that would effect their utility as fighting creatures. Should they get an AC penalty due to age? Hit point penalty? Be left alone? Furthermore, they are underground, encased in earth. Can such a skeleton be animated, and if so can it dig itself to the surface if so commanded? Can it even hear the command to do so?

WotC's revived fossil template, which was the "official" 3.5 take on this subject, can be found here (it's at the bottom of the page).

I just received a copy of that book in the mail yesterday. I ordered it last week. Haven't had time to browse through it, though. I'll look up that fossil template.

I do agree the concept can and should be pulled off with another class as it simply is not a paladin. Class exist to fit help you play a concept. Sometimes a concept simply does not fit the mold you try to force it into.

SHE IS NO LONGER A PALADIN! SHE. HAS. FALLEN. How many times do I have to say it? Some of her powers are being allowed to function in a modified way, but she's not a Paladin anymore. She's a Cleric who used to be a Paladin.

TheFace wrote:

"Let me clarify some things. I've done some thinking since the OP, and have come to the decision that she is now advancing in level as a Cleric, not a Paladin, as she has lost her Paladinhood, but that, due to the evil influence bolstering her, some of the Paladin abilities from when she was a Paladin that shouldn't be functioning are functioning, though a bit differently. Detect Evil is detecting neutral and sometimes good characters, and Smite Evil is smiting EVERYTHING. She is also channeling negative energy.

She does not realize any of this due to her mental issues. I'll say a second time, to make it clear, that she HAS lost her Paladinhood. The fact that some of the abilities are functioning when they shouldn't be doesn't change that. The evil influence is making some of her Paladin abilities function, not letting her stay a Paladin. Secondly, she is True Neutral because she's so delusional that the moral choices she is making are completely skewed and nonsensical. She lacks the mental capacity to be good or evil, even though she thinks she is good."

No. If a paladin who has slipped from Lawful Good to, say, Neutral Good - willingly violating a just law, though still in the service of good - can't use any of their powers, then someone who is Chaotic Neutral surely could not. Beyond that, you especially wouldn't gain paladin powers from an evil higher power. You might receive Anti-Paladin powers, but not paladin ones.

I got the evil deity part from an official 3.5 D&D supplement (Heroes of Horror). If an official supplement says it can happen, it can happen (The code of conduct is pretty much unchanged from 3.5 to Pathfinder).

I don't know about skeletons, but after reading Dead beat I have been looking for an excuse to throw a zombie T-Rex at my players

Is that the Western where everything is getting zombified, and then then find the land of dinosaurs, and THOSE start getting zombified? I liked that story.

While fantasy art is full of zombies being raised up from graves, the animate dead spell requires touch (and even if made into a reach spell, would require line-of-effect), so D&D/PF lacks the sort of magic that would emulate that traditional effect, so having the skeletons already out and available would be easiest. If you love the 'bursting out of the ground' effect, making a variant (or just flat out changing the spell itself) of animate dead that affects the ground, and anyone buried in it, instead, is an option.

As for the skeletons themselves, the Tome of Horrors has a Paleoskeleton template, but it includes some funky side-effects like a petrification attack. I'd skip that and just give the dinosaur skeletons the Hardness of stone (effectively DR 8/adamantine) and be done with it.

Thanks. I like these suggestions. I definitely want the bursting out of the ground effect. It'd be such a scary moment.

The hardness of stone works fine for me.

I'd say they get an AC bonus for being fossilized.

Oh, yea. I forgot that fossilization hardened bones. Silly me. How much of a natural armor bonus would you recommend?

I'm working on a new campaign setting, and I believe it is time for me to begin preliminary playtesting. I am planning to run though three scenarios. The psycho Former Paladin/Cleric is first. The second scenario is one in which treasure hunters enter an "Egyptian" pyramid and wake up a swarm of undead guardians, magic traps, and one very pissed off mummy sorcerer, and the third scenario is the one I am talking about here. In all three scenarios the PCs are government officials dispatched to handle the situation.

Here's the third scenario. Paleontologists are searching for dinosaur bones, and come across a prime dig site. One paleontologist cheats another out of digging rights, leaving him so angry (this isn't the first time this particular rival has screwed him over like this) that he goes and hires a necromancer to animate all of the intact dinosaur skeletons as his revenge. Chaos ensues.

Now, I COULD just add the skeleton template to the dinosaurs from the Bestiary, but there is one glaring issue: These bones are 65 million years old. Presumably, that would effect their utility as fighting creatures. Should they get an AC penalty due to age? Hit point penalty? Be left alone? Furthermore, they are underground, encased in earth. Can such a skeleton be animated, and if so can it dig itself to the surface if so commanded? Can it even hear the command to do so?

Voharius wrote:

Or do you object every time the bad guys use powers not available to players?

yes! I object to a playable race having powers not available to PC's. If the power is for a monster, I have no objection as long as it follows the paradigm of other powers.

Available to players means to me, if I made a character with those proper motivations I could get those powers as well.

For plot, I can accept deviation from this for some circumstances. To make a Paladin that isn't a paladin, no way.

I think there is a purpose to following the rules. One can have perfectly creative plots whilst working within the rules. That is the SCIENCE part of GMing.

The situation the OP wants can easily occur within the rules. just not with a Paladin. If the OP is the GM than do whatever, I just would not stay in the game for long as a player.

I said it before in the thread.

"Let me clarify some things. I've done some thinking since the OP, and have come to the decision that she is now advancing in level as a Cleric, not a Paladin, as she has lost her Paladinhood, but that, due to the evil influence bolstering her, some of the Paladin abilities from when she was a Paladin that shouldn't be functioning are functioning, though a bit differently. Detect Evil is detecting neutral and sometimes good characters, and Smite Evil is smiting EVERYTHING. She is also channeling negative energy.

She does not realize any of this due to her mental issues. I'll say a second time, to make it clear, that she HAS lost her Paladinhood. The fact that some of the abilities are functioning when they shouldn't be doesn't change that. The evil influence is making some of her Paladin abilities function, not letting her stay a Paladin. Secondly, she is True Neutral because she's so delusional that the moral choices she is making are completely skewed and nonsensical. She lacks the mental capacity to be good or evil, even though she thinks she is good."

Let me clarify some things. I've done some thinking since the OP, and have come to the decision that she is now advancing in level as a Cleric, not a Paladin, as she has lost her Paladinhood, but that, due to the evil influence bolstering her, some of the Paladin abilities from when she was a Paladin that shouldn't be functioning are functioning, though a bit differently. Detect Evil is detecting neutral and sometimes good characters, and Smite Evil is smiting EVERYTHING. She is also channeling negative energy.

She does not realize any of this due to her mental issues. I'll say a second time, to make it clear, that she HAS lost her Paladinhood. The fact that some of the abilities are functioning when they shouldn't be doesn't change that. The evil influence is making some of her Paladin abilities function, not letting her stay a Paladin. Secondly, she is True Neutral because she's so delusional that the moral choices she is making are completely skewed and nonsensical. She lacks the mental capacity to be good or evil, even though she thinks she is good.

Require skills to use the stuff. Not as in make a UMD check, but needing a certain level of relevant knowledge skills to use them.

I think that common stuff that most everybody has should not require the Knowledge skill, but I am willing to require it for more complicated devices that require special training.

I’ll also add a hopefully unnecessary plea, but it needs to be said just in case. Don’t restrict use by requiring people to play certain races that need to take a special feat at first level for the privilege! That more than anything made me hate Eberron.

I don't plan on doing that. The races generally differ in social structures and traditions, not in available technology. An elf is just as likely to posses a modern firearm as a human. The same with other technology. Just because elves like their woodlands doesn't mean they don't like high tech equipment.

I like to use this username for coming up with extreme ideas or ideas that could get me construed as stupid (usually an idea involving alignment, Paladins, or both), and my alias for everything else.

What if I'm not even using dollars? My planned system is pence, shillings, and pounds. Once penny (pence coins are called pennies) is about 2 copper pieces, 20 pence are a shilling, and 20 shillings are a pound. Pence, shillings, and single pounds come in coins, multiple pounds come in paper (actually a fabric) currency.

As you will no doubt notice, this is essentially a highly simplified version of 19th century British currency (The real deal was INCREDIBLY complicated, and I'm not even going to try and translate it into Pathfinder terms.). This is because the planned campaign setting takes place in an analogue of the British empire (Though here institutionalized racism was canned after a near collapse of the empire, though unofficial racism is still an issue. Like regular Pathfinder, gender roles are pretty loose, and women can legally serve in any area of the military or any other career, and often do. They can also be legally drafted in times of war.). This analogue, however, colonized some things Britain did not and did not colonize some things they did. It possesses analogues of the American Southwest/Texas (for all you cowboy fans out there), California (my beloved homeland), Hawaii, New England (Salem witches coven, anyone?), and a chunk of Brazil (not the whole thing), but it does not posses India or the Middle East (Except Egypt. This analogue MUST have Egypt. I want mummies and pyramids.). It DOES posses Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada, and Jamaica. It also (obviously) possess England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales.

EDIT: What I like about this country is that, although it has the classic 1890s setting (the American West), it's also got lots of other places, so not every campaign or adventure has to be a Wild West romp, though they certainly can be. There are all sorts of places to go adventuring in. If I want to protect a town from undead in Texas, Colorado, or Arizona, I can do that. If I decide I want to hop over to Australia to track a dangerous bush ranger across the Outback, I can do that. If I want to explore a medieval Scottish castle, and try to bring peace to the ghosts that've been plaguing it for 800 years, I can do that. If I want to hunt alongside the Iroquois in Eastern Canada, I can do that. If I want to explore an ancient Egyptian pyramid, I can do that. There are a plethora of options available in this world.

Ask your GM. It is the only answer that matters in a question like this, since the whole topic boils down to an aligment interpretation question and house rules.

And I think we all know that alignment questions are never answered, just debated, on forums.

RAW you cannot have a non lawful good paladin. As far as most of the settings go, you cannot have an evil power grant paladinly abilities. That is why they have the blackguard/antipaladin.

I'm the GM. This Paladin is mean as an NPC that the PCs need to subdue or kill (preferably subdue), and I wanted advice on how to handle her.

@Tiny Coffee Golem: Of course, rules for lair construction and out-of-combat monster spawning are beyond the scope of a monster stat block, and are thus not included herein. (If you're trying to emulate the zerg, all of that lair building and monster spawning probably involves harvesting magical, creature- and terrain-warping crystals.)

@TheFace: Here are a ghostly rider, and the fiendish cattle that such a rider is likely to tend:
** spoiler omitted **...

Thank you very much.

TheFace wrote:

Crimson Jester wrote:

TheFace wrote:

Crimson Jester wrote:

EDIT: of course it could be the the Good Spirits choosing not to help or provide abilities to someone with say, an evil aura.

The issue with that is that it's pretty easy to just go to a neutral or evil spirit.

Maybe. If say for a Paladin it takes some sort of good aligned Patron, or group of Patron spirits. Then just going to a Neutral spirit wont work because, they just don't care.

Evil on the other hand might care a lot. Which would be a darn good excuse for Anti-Paladins/Black Guards ect...

Yes, Anti-Paladins would work.

The best part of a game like this, is that potentially an ally Paladin who fell, could always pretend for a short time at least, that he is still a Paladin.

Correct. It usually takes time for a Paladin's fall from grace to become obvious under this system.

TheFace wrote:

Crimson Jester wrote:

EDIT: of course it could be the the Good Spirits choosing not to help or provide abilities to someone with say, an evil aura.

The issue with that is that it's pretty easy to just go to a neutral or evil spirit.

Maybe. If say for a Paladin it takes some sort of good aligned Patron, or group of Patron spirits. Then just going to a Neutral spirit wont work because, they just don't care.

Evil on the other hand might care a lot. Which would be a darn good excuse for Anti-Paladins/Black Guards ect...

Yes, Anti-Paladins would work.

EDIT: of course it could be the the Good Spirits choosing not to help or provide abilities to someone with say, an evil aura.

The issue with that is that it's pretty easy to just go to a neutral or evil spirit.

TheFace wrote:

Crimson Jester wrote:

Not sure if I would agree with the Paladin part. Though I have trouble writing it out. Just a basic concept, if they are not LG then they are not going to be a Paladin.

Also you might consider adding some sort of ancestor worship as well.

Ancestor worship could work, especially if in some cultures they were thought to be the spirits.

As for Paladins, if they cease to be good aligned, they will be dealt with. It's just that the structure of this divine magic system makes me feel a storyline resolution (having other Paladins and agents of the Paladin organization sent after them) works better here than a simple taking of their powers would, what with the lack of deities to take their powers away.

:) your world, your rules :)

It just does not fit my my idea of paladins, or much of my understanding of the history of them in the game. That being said, you could always choose to opt out of the class in its entirety. I am of the opinion that you do not have to include every class or option. There being no beings to give the power or to enforce the rules. Of course keeping it the way you are gives you a great excuse to make use of Inquisitors. So 6 of 1; 1/2 a dozen of the other.

I didn't think of the Inquisitor thing. Thanks. Inquisitors could be useful in this campaign. If the lack of evidence of God didn't get rid of Inquisitors in the real world, it won't here.

TheFace wrote:

Now, just because there is no hard evidence of deities does not mean there is no belief in deities. Religion and the belief in higher powers still plays a large role in this campaign, and the lack of hard evidence of the existence of deities just serves to intensify religious tension and, at times, violence and prosecution.

So it's the real world?

Sorry, couldn't resist. Sounds cool.

That's what I was aiming for: religious strife intensified by the fact that neither religion can prove itself to be correct.

Not sure if I would agree with the Paladin part. Though I have trouble writing it out. Just a basic concept, if they are not LG then they are not going to be a Paladin.

Also you might consider adding some sort of ancestor worship as well.

Ancestor worship could work, especially if in some cultures they were thought to be the spirits.

As for Paladins, if they cease to be good aligned, they will be dealt with. It's just that the structure of this divine magic system makes me feel a storyline resolution (having other Paladins and agents of the Paladin organization sent after them) works better here than a simple taking of their powers would, what with the lack of deities to take their powers away.

Here are the basics of a divine magic system I intend to use in this campaign setting.

I have an idea for a religion/divine magic system that I think would be cool. Under this system, the insane Paladin would make perfect sense, especially if the PCs were the agents sent to deal with her violations of the code of conduct.

So, I have an idea for a religion system in this campaign setting. Under this setting there is no hard evidence of the existence of deities. There are, however, millions of spirits, and there are everywhere in the world (Think Japanese Kami). These spirits exist to provide humans with magical power in the same manner as deities, but unlike deities they can only do this if the individual is nearby. Furthermore, different spirits offer different types of magic. In game terms, each spirit has a general focus, like healing, divination, smiting, and the like. When a divine spellcaster prepares or learns a spell, a spirit of the appropriate focus provides the power instead of a deity. This requires prayer to the spirit in the same manner as one would pray to a deity. Spirits exist specifically for this purpose, so they do not refuse to give the power. Since there are millions of spirits, it is always assumed that there is an appropriate spirit close enough to give the power.

Under this system, Cleric domains show a preference for certains kinds of spirit, as divine spellcasters focus on types of magic that fit their moral beliefs or interests, and gain power from those types of spirit more often than from other types of spirit.

Since Clerics do not gain power from deities under this system, they cannot lose their spells and class features for misbehaving. This also applies to Paladins, and for the same reasons: there simply isn't a god to get mad at them for violating the code of conduct. However, there is an organization of Paladins that trains all Paladins and shows them which prayers to make to which types of spirit, and this organization keeps an eye on it's members. As a result, any Paladin who violates the code of conduct will have agents of this organization sent to either reform, or, if it should prove absolutely necessary, execute him or her. Paladins may not be able to lose their abilities for violating the code of conduct, but any such violations will be dealt with appropriately. It'll just be done in RP terms instead of through loss of power.

Now, just because there is no hard evidence of deities does not mean there is no belief in deities. Religion and the belief in higher powers still plays a large role in this campaign, and the lack of hard evidence of the existence of deities just serves to intensify religious tension and, at times, violence and prosecution. Spirit warship is also highly common, often alongside deity worship.

I've decided to split the PDF into two parts:

First - Basic Stuff - This is useful for any campaign with 1890s technology

An overview of how the core and base classes work with firearms

Recommendations on which classes to allow and disallow

Information on skills in a tech-heavy world

Travel rules (such as how trains and steamships work)

Naval combat rules

Vehicle combat rules

Weapon stats

Feats

Recommendations regarding spells

An overview of the technology that existed in the real 1890s in game terms

Part two is campaign setting specific stuff. It has a lot of the stuff I've been talking about here, such as explanation of a world where magic and technology work together more often than not. It has:

An explanation of the technology/magic system I've been talking about where magic and technology work together to do greater things than either can do alone

Information about the countries (Maps, culture bases, legal codes, diets, economies, militaries, race interactions)

Monsters

Classes and weapons allowed

Religion (I have something pretty good in mind)

Prestige Classes

Spells

Available technology

I'm organizing it this way so that people who just want the 1890s tech rules can simply read the first part without bothering with the whole campaign setting, which is a setting I feel some will like but others will not (It subverts a lot of basic D&D world assumptions.).

So, if the Rogue has issues in combat, as Mort says, how could it be fixed? What abilities would it need to be more useful?

I'm getting told that it is, and I don't have enough experience with Rogues to agree or disagree. I've always leaned towards Ranger, Fighter, and Sorcerer. How does the Rogue stack up in combat to other classes as far as RAW is concerned?

Edit: Should I have posted this here? It seemed appropriate since this is an issue dealing with the class under RAW, but maybe it should have gone in Advice. Would a moderator please move it?

Tarrasque with 10 levels of Barbarian. If the players want to screw with me, THEY WILL PAY.

True. But using the regular tables, the Sorcerer gets a bunch more spells per day anyway, so I reflected that in my updated tables. Make sure to look at the Conversion Note comment at the bottom. I noted some of my thought process there. And let me know how it works out in play -- I haven't playtested it yet, so I haven't figured out if the boosts to SP totals would be disruptive.

I'll let you know how it goes.

Though fair warning. This kind of concept only works in morally gray to evil groups. Try it in a good aligned group with any common sense and you might find yourself rapidly put down or quickly abandoned to whatever fate you find yourself in.

This isn't a character that's joining the adventuring party, it's an NPC I'm running as the GM that the (good aligned) party has to go up against and either kill or subdue and somehow find some sort of mental treatment for. She is in no way, shape, or form ever meant to be used as a playable character.

Sorry, meant to post the URL in the previous post. Somehow missed that part... 8^)

Spell Points

Thanks a billion. I have noticed that the Sorcerer has over a hundred more SP than the Wizard, which was not the case in Unearthed Arcana. That should compensate for the Wizard being more Sorcererish very nicely.

TheFace wrote:

Martin Kauffman 530 wrote:

Her mental illness has made her commit evil acts which have shifted her alignment towards evil. She has, barring an atonement, lost her paladinhood. Do not try to get around the class restrictions by attempting to ascribe motivations and actions to the Gods.

If a good deity can provide a Paladin with power, shouldn't an evil deity have the same ability? It makes mechanical sense, and I think the story of a badly delusional Paladin who doesn't understand what she's doing is worth subverting the class restrictions. I feel it makes for a rather sympathetic villain.

Look, the point is that if you're playing straight Pathfinder then she's evil. If you're the one running the game, or if you can talk your GM into it, then you can bend the rules any way you want. But if you're asking us to find some RAW justification that you can take to your GM because he's already said "no" then you're going to be disappointed. It doesn't exist.

I'm the GM. What I wanted to do in this thread is try to figure out how insanity effects whether someone can be evil, something I wasn't 100% clear on as far as RAW is concerned. I have my answer now, though I have decided to implement my own house rule on the issue.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/alternate-classes/antipaladin

Yet there are others, the dark and disturbed few

Seems as though they take mental instability into account there.

So its a delusional Anti-Paladin then.

I'm willing to accept an Anti-Paladin under the house rule that they can be of True Neutral alignment and not lose their class abilities if they are insane.

I asked a question similar to this a while back, and it seems the consensus is that an insane paladin is going to lose their paladin powers.

If, however, you want to play up the "evil deity encouraging her" angle, all you need to do is come up with a new template of sorts to illustrate "pawn of devils" and have it bear enough of a similarity to the paladin's most recognizable abilities, at least in a way that makes sense thematically.

Detect Evil: The voices of imps claiming to be angels whisper in your paladin's ear, denouncing certain people and exalting others as they see fit. Your paladin mistakes this whispering for Detect Evil.

Lay on Hands: Your paladin gains the ability to cast False Life on herself, or Bear's Endurance on an ally, and mistakes the increased vigor for the effect of Lay on Hands.

Smite Evil: Devils secretly replace the paladin's weapon with an axiomatic identical version.

And so forth.

I like this. Thank you.

Oh I get it all to well.

The problem is the player in question is looking to be a 'Paladin' and is under the delusion that they are doing 'good'. As such, praying to (insert evil god) and sacrificing babies at the altar would kind of tip them off right from the outset that they are, in fact, Evil. Not slightly mad and misguided, but Evil from day one. They can't even pretend.

Now part two is the suggestion that an Evil god would think it was the lulz to power a lone nutcase as though they were a normal good aligned Paladin... now why would they do that when they could just as easily make an Anti-Paladin; handing the loony a bunch of good aligned powers against evil seems like a bit of a crazy decision.

Basically it makes no sense, mechanical or othwerwise.

May as well just be a straight fighter who has lost their marbles and calls themself a Paladin whilst actiong like a sociopath.

As I said before, she is too badly delusional to comprehend the deity change. She would be able to do so if she were sane, but she isn't sane.

As for why the evil deity is helping her, her delusions are causing her to kill a lot of people for incredibly minor things, which is causing a lot of problems, and the evil deity wants these killings to continue.

You do have a point, however. She is mostly fighting good and neutral people, so perhaps her smite evil and protection from evil spells are actually functioning as smite good/neutral and protection from good/neutral?

After some thought, I am instituting a new house rule. Any character who is mentally ill to the point where he or she is incapable of differentiating right from wrong or of making reasoned morality choices is of True Neutral alignment. I base this off the fact that animals are True Neutral do to their inability to make moral choices. I feel that the same should apply to those individuals too insane to make moral choices. As such, the Paladin, under this house rule, is True Neutral.

As to the issue of her alignment disqualifying her from Paladinhood, I decree that she is no longer a member of the Paladin class (she now levels up as a Cleric) do to the alignment change brought on by her insanity, but do to the evil deity's intervention her Paladin abilities from the Paladin levels she once possessed still function (though her Smite Evil is now Smite Anything).

Her mental illness has made her commit evil acts which have shifted her alignment towards evil. She has, barring an atonement, lost her paladinhood. Do not try to get around the class restrictions by attempting to ascribe motivations and actions to the Gods.

If a good deity can provide a Paladin with power, shouldn't an evil deity have the same ability? It makes mechanical sense, and I think the story of a badly delusional Paladin who doesn't understand what she's doing is worth subverting the class restrictions. I feel it makes for a rather sympathetic villain.

i beleive that alignment should have been removed from the game entirely. it would remove so many pointless headaches. and it would save both a massive amount of page space and the millions of alignment threads.

if some guy wants a mentally ill paladin with a psychotic order obscession. it should be possible. even if driven to evil.

i beleive alignment is nothing more than an unneccessary straightjacket that needs to be discarded for all the headaches it causes. it's just as stupid as the race/class restrictions in 1st edition.

It would be nice to abandon alignment, but difficult because of everything that relies on it.

I'd like to clarify what I'm asking in this thread: Can a character be evil if they are mentally ill, and cannot form the intent to do evil or understand that they are doing evil? That is what's going on with this Paladin. She's Lawful Stupid out of bona fide insanity, not out of stupidity or ineptitude. If an insane person cannot be evil, should their alignment be True Neutral like animals not intelligent enough to make morality decisions? If not, how should alignment be handled for the mentally ill?

The thing is, she is mentally ill, and has been for a long time. The fact that she isn't all there could conceivably cause her to have trouble realizing that she has changed deities, even with detect evil. People with mental issues people can be highly easy to manipulate, especially when deities are involved, and that's what's going on here. She isn't moronically inept, she's too sick to realize what's going on, which is how the evil deity got to her in the first place. Her brain just doesn't work well enough to make well reasoned decisions anymore, and the evil deity is taking advantage of the situation. That's actually why her original, good deity abandoned her: the deity realized her Paladin was going mad, and had take her powers for the safety of others. Then the evil deity gave them back.

An Anti-Paladin wouldn't work. It focuses specifically on doing evil, and this character doesn't. She does evil unwittingly.

Furthermore, this isn't an "I want the goodies but don't want the baggage issue", it's something I think would be an interesting idea to explore.

If you're interested, I spent some time a little while ago "converting" the Spell Points system to Pathfinder. It was pretty much just recalculating the spell points by class and level table.

I would be interested. Thanks.