Weeble Paladin's page

Well, you might ...

... wait, this is a paladin thread now? *jumps out the window*

I see what you did there, my paladin friend.

In the quarter of a century I've been gaming I cant think of a single paladin that would take an elected official to the sword because he refused to recognize the election of an evil person as legitimate.

I don't see your statement as factual. Legitimate authority is recognized and respected. If not for the person then for the office that person holds.

That's a nice image to have spread around about Paladins, and I see no reason to say anything to the contrary nor to leave any witnesses who could testify against it.

Zarius,

I'm glad that you've been enjoying the hobby for a while. I, and many other posters, have been enjoying the hobby since 1st Edition AD&D (and some even before that). In that time, I've seen a lot of DMs try to screw over players, either through technicalities or "hands are tied" literal rulings. I want to get across the point that technicalities swing both ways, and that rulings don't occur in a vacuum (consider a Kitsune Paladin sing Dominate Person to cause a king's chef to poison him because he isn't technically murdering or poisoning anyone).

I also understand that I am basing my opinion on this from the one line stating that a Paladin must "willingly" perform an evil act. But you should understand that you're basing your opinion on exactly zero lines that say that a Paladin should fall from unwillingly performing an evil act.

In short, surprise rules that run contrary of written rules that completely trash your character aren't fun and tend to cause havoc in a game.

Just to be sure I'm on the same page, are people posing that a paladin can fall if somebody sneaks poison onto his gear without him knowing?

People are posing that a Paladin can fall for doing something unwillingly. According to the text on how a Paladin can fall, the only thing that makes sense for him to do unwillingly and suffer a fall from is to use poison. Taken to its (il)logical extreme, a paladin can fall if someone sneaks poison onto his gear (or if he serves/consumes (i.e. uses) alcohol).

If he didn't know about it and fell it was because:

1. He used poison
2. The DM houseruled or misruled him to fall.

Technically, helping an evil entity violates the paladin code, but a Charmed paladin can be made to feed a person that registers to his Detect Evil sense, thus breaking said code. Since, you know, an inherently evil person is going to use that food to fuel themselves to commit evil.

You're reading that backward. The "except if evil" clause is an out for the "help those in need" requirement. That is to say, Paladins aren't prevented by code from helping evil people. However, "a Paladin avoids" working with evil people (and seeks Atonement if he does, but does not explicitly fall).

You could infer that it is against the Paladin's nature to work with or aid evil people, granting him a +2 save every round he is under effect of Dominate Person. Alternately, if it would cause him to fall (an obviously self-destructive act), he simply would follow no orders from the evil caster and receive a new save at +2 each round.

Depends highly on the definition of self destructive. After all, losing your class features isn't the end of the world (It's literally one spell away from coming back, not even any notable material components), especially compared to proper self destructive orders like "cut your own throat"

And per the definition of Charm Person, having the target do something against their nature means they need to pass a cha check but Charm spells in general are a crazy can of worms to begin with hence my "maybe." Suggestion would just work fine.

That said, I think the losing class features while under compulsion is stupid as hell, but that's Pathfinder rules, particularly Absolution and I believe JJ's personal opinion at work. I will say it doesn't fly at any table I run.

Destroying everything that you've worked your whole life to accomplish is what I'd consider self destructive. I'd like to note that slitting your own throat can also be undone by a single spell.

And Charm Person has this written in the text: "A subject never obeys... obviously harmful orders."

Basically, the way to do it is to convince/compel a Paladin to use poison without knowing he's using poison.

Dominate Person/Monster for the easiest example. Suggestion can also be fenagled as can Charm spells with a passed Cha check (maybe).

Violating your code is an obviously self-destructive action and "obviously self-destructive actions are not carried out"as per Dominate Person.

Charm Person cannot make a person do something he/she would not ordinarily do.

Edit: Noting that Suggestion has similar verbage to Dominate person as to self-destructive actions.

Which spells cause the Paladin to lie, cheat, use poison, disrespect legitimate authority, refuse to help those in need, or refuse to punish those who threaten or harm innocents?

What I want to know is why people expect Lawful Evil folk to twist the meaning of everything that anyone every tells them while at the same time expecting a Paladin to try to interpret his enemies' demands as favorably as possible. Paladins should act like a Lawful Good version of a Cleric of Asmodeus, considering what's at stake.

Wizard: Suggestion!: Your Lord is a traitor and you should attack him.
Paladin (to Lord): Your stance on poverty leaves much to be desired.
Wizard: No, I mean with your sword.
Paladin: You didn't say that, now did you?

Tableflip McRagequit wrote:

Hey, I hear ya. Sometimes a GM will claim your paladin fell because he forgot to say "god bless" after an NPC sneezed

To leave a poor innocent without the blessings of a paladin to ensure their soul does not shoot out of their nasal cavity upon a sneeze? Why, I could not think of a more DIABOLICAL act of callus disregard for the spiritual safety of the innocent.

You're going to big house, busto!

I've emulated Angels, beings created out of utter good, and been ineffective, uninterested and uninvolved when it comes to innocents. This has served me and my paladinhood well.

Nah. He doesn't fall; he just wobbles a bit.

Snowlilly wrote:

Snowblind, Snarkwyrm wrote:

Likewise, using Holy Word (Good) to nuke an entire orphanage filled with little children would go a ways to counter the Good from casting Holy Word but it wouldn't equal out. That's why aligned magic is dangerous, especially very tempting orphan nuking aligned magic, because alignment is mostly a label and having the wrong label is Bad(TM) because it is dangerous because it is bad(TM).

What if they were orphaned goblin children?

Then it is just a Good act, because goblins are evil because the bestiary says so. Yes, even children. Especially Children.

I do have to warn you though, for every goblin baby orphan that you hit, somewhere in the world a Paladin falls.

Nah, the Paladin just wobbles a bit.

what's that blue skinned idiocy doing in a serious thread?

Point me towards a serious thread, and I'll try to figure out what it's doing there.