A lot of players do actually. Hence the slippery slope.
Or do you object every time the bad guys use powers not available to players?
These boards make me sad.
These boards make me sad.A lot of players do actually. Hence the slippery slope.
Or do you object every time the bad guys use powers not available to players?
In our home game when the player asks the DM if he can do something (or how certain things work) the DM always says, "If you can do it so can the bad guys. Still want to do that?" It's pretty sobering.
"Mechanically" was in terms of abilities and rolls. The oath aspect of the class means nothing in this case, because the character -isn't- a paladin. She has fallen, but is being propped up by another deity. The mechanics of the class are all that are being applied.
I disagree, and you seem confused. First you say mechanically she is a paladin, then you say she is not as she can't be a paladin. You even go on to say how her abilities are not what she thinks they are.
The code is part of the class, so is how you fall, just like a cleric or a barbarian or a monk. Welcome to the concept of classes, fluff is often hard wired into the class.
Concept wise she is nuts possibly CE but thinks she LG. Mechanically there are dozens of ways to build this, the easiest being an anti-paladin, but oracle, inquisitor, cleric or Holy Vindicator all work. The paladin does not as she clearly is not a paladin.
This is a case of people being caught up in the "concept" to let the mechanics work. Shes thinks and used to be a paladin, but the OP has fallen into the "fallen paladin is to weak mechanically so I need to rework the paladin class" trap. When his concept really needs for him to use other classes to work best.
I disagree, and you seem confused.
...This is a case of people being caught up in the "concept" to let the mechanics work. Shes thinks and used to be a paladin, but the OP has fallen into the "fallen paladin is to weak mechanically so I need to rework the paladin class" trap. When his concept really needs for him to use other classes to work best.
No, you seem confused in regard to the entire point of this thread.
This has nothing to do with any "trap" involving reworking a class.
This is an NPC that seems to be a paladin, thinks she is a paladin, but...DUN DUN DUN...Isn't a paladin.
It was an alignment question, not a class spec question. The character has to believe they are still a paladin, so jumping through hoops in regard to class goes against that.
It's such a great story hook, I'd hate for it to be torn down because "nuh uh, that's not how paladins work." The fact that paladins don't work like the NPC in question is exactly what will get the PCs interested.
Don't let rules get in the way of a good story.
Don't let rules get in the way of a good story.
I agree but I understand that if the rules get in the way and I'm force to compromise them in order to tell it then perhaps its a better idea to do away with them altogether.
That being said the suggestions being given are ideas on how to accomplish this goal without compromising the rules. It's much more palatable to change the flavor of an ability then it is to change the rules to fit the flavor.
And ultimately you are not proposing anything different.
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.
This is an NPC that seems to be a paladin, thinks she is a paladin, but...DUN DUN DUN...Isn't a paladin.
See there is that confusion again. You agree she is not a paladin. You do not use a fighter for a Magic missile wizard and don't use a paladin for something that isn't a paladin.
The OP, and you it seems are letting the mechanics trap the concept. The concept is someone who thinks she is a paladin, and you seem to agree she is not. Yet are hung up on using the one class that simply will not work.
The Al question makes her a non paladin. Shes not and can not be a paladin. Shes nuts and thinks she is. If she is that nuts you can make her a fighter using the heal skill for all mechanics matter.
You should use the right tool for any job. The paladin class is not the correct tool for this concept, just one the OP is hung up on.
If "dumb" or "Unwise" is a used as an excuse to break the code, then yes. All paladins are held to the same standard. It does not matter why you break the code, it does not matter it was the lesser of two evils,if your too dumb to understand or your on a holy crusade.
Excuse, no. Reason yes.
There is no "Well I didn't know" clause.
So what happens when a paladin travels? Are they supposed to know the laws of every land they visit? Are they supposed to never be fooled into thinking that the wrong person is guilty of a crime?
I'm not talking about "i thought that orphan was going to kill me!" , Just the sort of mistake an int 7 paladin is a bit more likely to make than an int 10 one.
Excuse, no. Reason yes.
I'm not talking about "i thought that orphan was going to kill me!" , Just the sort of mistake an int 7 paladin is a bit more likely to make than an int 10 one.
The reason does not matter. It might not be enough to make you fall, but you would have to atone for any and every violation. The paladin's oath and code are rigid, why you broke or violated it does not matter.
The reason does not matter. It might not be enough to make you fall, but you would have to atone for any and every violation. The paladin's oath and code are rigid, why you broke or violated it does not matter.
You have to atone for committing an act of evil. A mistake is not evil.
If you accidentally attack and kill an innocent man thinking he is someone else, you have still murdered him. There is a reason paladins are rare.
The code is harsh and unforgiving, it is a standard few LG people can live up to, a standard almost bounden what a mortal can live up to. And yes a mistake can make you fall just as can an act you willfully committed.
If you accidentally attack and kill an innocent man thinking he is someone else, you have still murdered him.
This too is a slippery slope. And a reason paladin alignment threads are so reviled.
If you accidentally attack and kill an innocent man thinking he is someone else, you have still murdered him.This too is a slippery slope. And a reason paladin alignment threads are so reviled.
No one said it was an easy class. Often its the unyielding code that cases trouble far more then the Al, even if it is heavily based off an idealized LG Al. In the case above its the code that gets the paladin, as it simply dos not matter why he killed the innocent man, he committed the act.
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.
If you accidentally attack and kill an innocent man thinking he is someone else, you have still murdered him.This too is a slippery slope. And a reason paladin alignment threads are so reviled.No one said it was an easy class. Often its the unyielding code that cases trouble far more then the Al, even if it is heavily based off an idealized LG Al. In the case above its the code that gets the paladin, as it simply dos not matter why he killed the innocent man, he committed the act.
That is the FUN of playing a paladin. Playing a paladin should be as much your skill at roleplaying as anything else. You know what the Oath is, now ROLEPLAY and stay within it. Or ROLEPLAY and do not whilst accepting the circumstances.
Alignment is an important mechanic in D&D. There are plenty of games that do not use it, but it is one of the mechanics that Defines D&D. I enforce it by offering XP bonuses at the end of sessions from 5-15% of the sessions XP for individual characters that stay in alignment. If your a playing a paladin correctly your guarantees that bonus. If you are a Chaotic Neutral rogue, killing everyone you see, you are getting no bonus that night.
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."
That is the FUN of playing a paladin. Playing a paladin should be as much your skill at roleplaying as anything else. You know what the Oath is, now ROLEPLAY and stay within it. Or ROLEPLAY and do not whilst accepting the circumstances.
Alignment is an important mechanic in D&D. There are plenty of games that do not use it, but it is one of the mechanics that Defines D&D. I enforce it by offering XP bonuses at the end of sessions from 5-15% of the sessions XP for individual characters that stay in alignment. If your a playing a paladin correctly your guarantees that bonus. If you are a Chaotic Neutral rogue, killing everyone you see, you are getting no bonus that night.
I never said it wasn't fun. I said it wasn't easy. The paladin is the class for those that want the challenge as it is a challenge. But my point was many of the "paladin issues" people can't seem to get over tends to come down to the code and not AL, Al gets blamed but rip it out and keep the code and you have the same issues.
In all honestly most of the so called paladin problems are people who don't really want to play a paladin, they just what its goodies.
"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.
Also, I think Chaotic Neutral is much more apt because the character's moral code is all based on their personal perception and whim; Chaotic Neutral is the epitome of the self-centered, amoral mindset, neither good nor evil, always justified in their own mind.
I still think this is an awful concept but it's your game, run it how you like.
At the end of the day there is nothing wrong with calling it a 'paladin', but it isn't a Paladin.
In the case above its the code that gets the paladin, as it simply dos not matter why he killed the innocent man, he committed the act.
It's exactly this sort of thinking that encourages trollish GM's.
In all honestly most of the so called paladin problems are people who don't really want to play a paladin, they just what its goodies.
No. Most of the problems stem from GM's arbitrarily imposing there own rigid interpretations of the code on the spot without consultation with the player.
I'd like to go on and argue that the class and mechanics of the paladin are meaningless to the concept. The code and challenge exist purely for flavor and I could easily play the same character utilizing any number of classes available.
I am gonna disagree on the trollish GM, you as they player know what your getting into. You need to read the class and not just the neat powers it gets, but the whole class and yes the code is a part of that class.
Furthermore, it is the GM's job to do so. It is the players job to find out where the GM stands on any of this, If a GM is gonna make you fall for an "arbitrary reason" you wont be playing a monk or a barb or even a wizard long in his games either.
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.
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.
"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."
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 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.
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."
None of her abilities will work at all. Your trying to fit a concept into a frame it does not fit. Go anti-paladin/Holy vindicator or inquisitor , which fit far better for what ya want to do.
Also she isn't TN, shes CE or at best CN thinking shes LG. She may lack the ability to know right from wrong, but she is infact doing evil, lots of evil, which makes her evil if insane.
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.
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.
As the GM ya can make em CE and using LG powers or not able to fall or all surrounded by flame if ya want.m I don't own that book, I do own the 3.5 book with the paladin in it and every other PHB with the paladin.
The class does not work that way without a rewrite. Ya can do what ya want but its like forcing a square peg into a round hole. It'll fit if ya use a sledge hammer, but it don't go there.
Actually let me just bow out of this gracefully. I'm going to get sucked into an argument that ToZ would smack me in the back of the head for.
You've actually already described a pretty arbitrary reason right there. Killing someone because of mistaken identity in a world where magic is prominent is a pretty itchy case from the start. Order of paladins might as well not exist at all.
In fact by your standards no one, let alone mortals, are qualified. Not even LG gods. Honestly though this shouldn't surprise me.
That one was about a dumb paladin just going in swinging because someone told him people there are evil. Ya can't just murder random folks because that guy said he was a bad man. Now if he attacked you and died in combat, sure but that wasn't the case being used.
All I said was the code does not care if you didn't do your homework. Much like the law does not care if that 16 year old said she was 21 and you where drunk.
As for my standards...have you read the code? I mean really? How hard would that be for anyone to live by 24/7? Not even lawful god folks are that strict. Its a harsh, strict code that embodies the paragon virtues of what LG is.
EDIT: for the correct quote
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.
TheFace, I don't call "the ill" bad, but I do call her actions, regardless of the reasons, evil. One thing that typifies evil is self-centered or selfishness to an extreme. Most evil could be boiled down to "I don't care about them, this is what I believe is correct". From your descriptions, that's what I'm getting: yes, she's ill, but her illness causes a moral myopia, a complete lack of understanding (or interest in understanding) anything beyond herself. This is the bases for which I, at least, suggest making her evil. I really and truly understand that she's "sick" - but so is the Joker, and that doesn't stop him from being evil. Being "ill" isn't the point. Having a complete lack of moral reference is. Usually the most evil people never consider themselves evil. Point in fact, it is defined as insanity for a person to know they are evil but to continue doing that which they know to be evil for the sake of doing evil. Sane people tend to rationalize and tell themselves it's not really evil.
Now, after reading your compromise and concept... I'm still strongly inclined to suggest Shadowbane Inquisitor as the class she should be taking. It allows you to smite whoever, adds some nifty (and flavorful) abilities, and allows you to be any alignment while retaining all abilities. Further, she could have fallen (even reversed alignment or become an antipaladin!) and, due to the nature of the class and its special ability "Absolute Conviction", never know it via 3.5 RAW. The other reason is that it takes far less work on the god's part. Effectively, every day, as far as I can tell, the god's got to be casting miracle on the "paladin" to get their abilities to work. With Shadowbane Stalker, they just have to cast atonement (or miracle) every once and a while (just before her level up, mechanically) and the "paladin" can do the rest.
Here's what I'd recommend. Either allow her to take the Sneak Attack Feat that was created for the Unearthed Arcana and purchase cross-class ranks in hide and move silently, or have her take one level of rogue. Five levels of Paladin. Proceed with Shadowbane Stalker. This neatly bypasses why she doesn't cast spells (especially if she had a low-ish wisdom in the first place), and doesn't short-change her much.
If you want her to cast spells, you can start applying one level of cleric and Shadowbane Stalker can take it from there. It's easy enough to Pathfinderize, if you want, just update the skills and sanve, and probably the Inquisitor gets a good will; the hit dice, I believe, is already correct for the BAB.
If you want to go RAW pathfinder, you'll find a much more "paladin-like" class in the Holy Vindicator (perfect for the cleric-who-thinks-she's-a-paladin) or Hellknight (perfect for the one who's convinced chaos is evil).
Anyway, I can see the potential here, but it's a dangerous thing. One of the reasons I disliked this initially was that it smacked of all the unpleasant arbitration of badness I've seen... but you're pulling out some good stuff. If you want her to retain many of her class features, but still be behaving in an evil way, there are some options for you.
Heck, one of the most terrible things I could think of is a magical amulet or ring that once per day automatically performs atonement (to LG) on the character who wears it (perhaps with a few other enchantments). Place this around the neck of a disturbed person (especially if it has a magical aura spell to make it look like something else) and you've suddenly got someone who's constantly being redeemed from their evil ways... only to go commit them tomorrow. Alternatively, if she has a cursed phylactery of faithfulness (or did for a while) that convinced her that actions which were exactly opposite of what her code indicated were "according to her alignment" it might have been the basis for her slow degradation into insanity.
Again, I'm not throwing out magic items to cheapen your story - I'm suggesting them (along with the amulet above) as MacGuffins - potential plot devices that could help with the situation you envision coming about. Effectively, I'm exploring the reason for her insanity - what caused her mental break with reality. Cursed or bizarre magic items are a perfectly RAW way to start someone down the wrong path.
Anyway, best of luck to you with your campaign, whatever road you choose to take.
|
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.
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.
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.).
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
You do NOT loose your paladin powers, or the lawful good alignment, for one act of law breaking. (especially if you do it for good) You DO loose your powers for commiting a single act of evil. That spells out something that a lot of players and DM's miss: a paladin is good first, lawful second.
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.
Note that there's no huge "or else" attached to the code. You won't fall for a single code violation either. You could very easily have an evil doer that threatens innocents hiding behind the aegis of law, meaning the paladin is going to fall for either not punishing him or by breaking the law if the DM insists on having a 1 violation 1 fall rule.
That is the FUN of playing a paladin. Playing a paladin should be as much your skill at roleplaying as anything else. You know what the Oath is, now ROLEPLAY and stay within it. Or ROLEPLAY and do not whilst accepting the circumstances.
Alignment is an important mechanic in D&D. There are plenty of games that do not use it, but it is one of the mechanics that Defines D&D. I enforce it by offering XP bonuses at the end of sessions from 5-15% of the sessions XP for individual characters that stay in alignment. If your a playing a paladin correctly your guarantees that bonus. If you are a Chaotic Neutral rogue, killing everyone you see, you are getting no bonus that night.
I never said it wasn't fun. I said it wasn't easy. The paladin is the class for those that want the challenge as it is a challenge. But my point was many of the "paladin issues" people can't seem to get over tends to come down to the code and not AL, Al gets blamed but rip it out and keep the code and you have the same issues.
In all honestly most of the so called paladin problems are people who don't really want to play a paladin, they just what its goodies.
definitely. Every poorly played paladin I have encountered, and those that are wont to complain are usually from gamers that do not understand the paladin or have an axe to grind with those that do.
You do NOT loose your paladin powers, or the lawful good alignment, for one act of law breaking. (especially if you do it for good) You DO loose your powers for commiting a single act of evil. That spells out something that a lot of players and DM's miss: a paladin is good first, lawful second.
I didn't say you fell that easy, but you would need to atone for minor violation and if you keep violating you would fall. For instance, if you kept lying all the time, ya know for the greater good. And no, the paladin is Lawful and good, first and always. You can't be one or the other, you must be both at the same time. A good first paladin is the road to an ex-paladin.
You take an oath you must live by, and yes if you keep blowing it off you will fall as you are not living by the code. You don't get the option of using the code when you feel like or when it is easy. You live by that code everyday and at all times.
And yes most paladins fall, not because they commit some great evil act, but because they can't live by the code. Not everyone who is called can live up to being the paragon of law, justice and good that is a paladin.
definitely. Every poorly played paladin I have encountered, and those that are wont to complain are usually from gamers that do not understand the paladin or have an axe to grind with those that do.
Yep, that is the case I have always seen. Or wanting to play a NG paladin or a CG paladin and just not getting that the paladin is not a holy warrior for god x. Its a hard class to play, a rewarding and fun class, but not an easy class at all.
If you want an inspiration for your lawful stupid, may I suggest you read up Miko from the order of the stick?
If you want an inspiration for your lawful stupid, may I suggest you read up Miko from the order of the stick?
She's a great example of that. She believed that she was right, regardless of what the truth was, and that caused her to fall. And since she never atoned for her mistake, and never admitted that she had been wrong, she stayed fallen.
|
And no, the paladin is Lawful and good, first and always. You can't be one or the other, you must be both at the same time. A good first paladin is the road to an ex-paladin.
I don't think you realize what "X first, Y second" implies. It does not mean "I am X, and maybe Y if I get the time or feel like it." It means that you are both X and Y, but when there is a conflict between X and Y, you always favor X. Thus the Paladin is good first, because otherwise they wouldn't be able to disobey unjust laws and all that jazz.
I don't think you realize what "X first, Y second" implies. It does not mean "I am X, and maybe Y if I get the time or feel like it." It means that you are both X and Y, but when there is a conflict between X and Y, you always favor X. Thus the Paladin is good first, because otherwise they wouldn't be able to disobey unjust laws and all that jazz.And no, the paladin is Lawful and good, first and always. You can't be one or the other, you must be both at the same time. A good first paladin is the road to an ex-paladin.
Sure if he has to make a call between lawful and good, good wins, but that is how ex-paladins are made. People ignore the lawful and forget you must stay lawful and good. Its not one or the others, its both or a fallen paladin. does that make a paladin very hard to play? Yes, yes it does, which is why its so rewarding.
They are an easy class for a GM to set up a no-win if he wants to. But a Gm can screw with anyone if he wants to.
Sure if he has to make a call between lawful and good, good wins, but that is how ex-paladins are made
Only if the dm is being a prat or ignoring the rules. Their alignment has to outright change on the lawful axis in order to cost them their powers. That does not happen from a single act. A single evil act on the other hand will cost them their powers.
This can be a slippery slope, but it is not a pit.
This whole thread is a good reason why it's best not to put "mental issues" into games, at least not to this extent. Somebody who went insane from seeing their family killed by ghouls? Sure. But I'm sorry, TheFace, do you know anybody with OCD? Do you realize how horrible a condition it can be, how it affects your day to day life? Do you think you can tastefully represent that with this character? To me it sounds flippant.
I would not want to play at a table where somebody said a specific mental condition is the sole reason why somebody is now evil. I know multiple people with OCD (and other mental conditions). They can tell the difference between right and wrong. If you are saying this character was once good and is now evil, you can find many reasons for it better than OCD. OCD and most other commonly occurring mental conditions do not affect a person's moral compass.
Only if the dm is being a prat or ignoring the rules. Their alignment has to outright change on the lawful axis in order to cost them their powers. That does not happen from a single act. A single evil act on the other hand will cost them their powers.
This can be a slippery slope, but it is not a pit.
Its not simply an Al issue. Any paladin who ignore his code and yes bends his Al simply when its inconvenient to hold to his convictions and his oath, will not a a paladin long.
You do not have the option of doing the easy thing, of bending rules or lying to make someone feel better. You choose to lay a paladin with its strict, rigid code. Ya have to deal with that.
I will say this is an epic proportion beyond Kender handling issues!
;)
Thats an easy issue to fix. You treat kender like any other menace. They are about as destructive as a tribe of goblins so treat em the same way. Problem solved.
... some of the Paladin abilities from when she was a Paladin that shouldn't be functioning are functioning, though a bit differently. ...
So why not just make her an Anti Paladin? It has all the abilities the Paladin has, in reverse. Her 'dementia' can make her think that her abilities are working properly.
She detects 'evil' and smites 'evil' only they are actually good people and creatures she is killing with smite good. Her mania convinces her they are evil not good and that all is as it should be.
When she uses lay hands to aid the injured, she will instead kill them but 'realise' again from her dementia that she was 'just too late'. etc.
Or she thinks her "lay on hands" is simply burning out the corruption and evil within the soul.
Its not simply an Al issue. Any paladin who ignore his code and yes bends his Al simply when its inconvenient to hold to his convictions and his oath, will not a a paladin long.
Its not as strict and rigid as you're making it out to be, especially as it concerns a dumb paladin.
First of all, if a paladin has to choose good or the code he chooses good. If the paladin is protecting an orphanage, winds up grappled and swallowed by a giant abomination, he's not going to refuse to cut his way out because the only dagger he has on him still has the blue whinnis on it from when he took it into evidence.
Secondly, if the paladin KEEPS getting put into that position with no way out, the DM is being a prat and targeting the player.
A paladin who keeps taking up the rogues offer to "sharpen" his weapon and doesn't notice the "special oil" it comes back with shouldn't loose his powers. (what you do to the PLAYER pulling that trick on the other hand...) Think about it, you'd have a fallen paladin walking around, saying "dear god, forgive me for... whatever it was that i did"
You do not have the option of doing the easy thing, of bending rules or lying to make someone feel better. You choose to lay a paladin with its strict, rigid code. Ya have to deal with that.
I'm begining to see why you think most paladins fall. You think they have to be absolute , immortal perfection.