Its not as strict and rigid as you're making it out to be, especially as it concerns a dumb paladin.
And I feel you think its ok to follow the code when it suits you to do so and toss it when it does not.And if your so dumb you can't follow the code its ok as your dumb so no harm no foul.
Simply No. You follow the code or you are not a paladin. It does not matter why you broke the code, you broke the code. Paladins are not NG, they are not CG and they do not toss the code as its "hard"
Being dumb is no free pass, if you break the code, you break the code. end of story.
And I feel you think its ok to follow the code when it suits you to do so and toss it when it does not.
No, i do not. And if you had the wherewithal to examine a position beyond shunting it off into binary you would know that.
There is a difference between "I don't feel like it" and "If i don't the orphanage is going to die"
And if your so dumb you can't follow the code its ok as your dumb so no harm no foul.
So you expect a paladin to be a master of every law of every land? The modern major general, with information vegetable, animal, and mineral ? Without that you're going to be screwing up and falling left and right by your standards.
You're not looking for a class you're either looking for a stupid good stereotype or you don't want anyone playing paladins.
Simply No. You follow the code or you are not a paladin. It does not matter why you broke the code, you broke the code.
Please point to anywhere in the rules that say you fall for one code violation. I've already pointed out the problem with this interpretation.
There was a Celtic legend about Cu Cuchulain. He was a man of amazing strength, but could loose it for eating horse flesh, or refusing hospitality. While he was on the way to a battle one of his foes, having learned his weakness, met him on the road and offered him some horseflesh.
You have to punish evil doers, and you have to follow the law. Sometimes those get in the way of each other, and the paladin has to choose.
Paladins are not NG, they are not CG and they do not toss the code as its "hard"
This is an absurdly ridiculous dichotomy that has already been addressed. You do not change alignment for one act of chaos, nor do you change alignment for removing mattress tags.
I have no clue what your even arguing at this point. All I said was you do not get a free pass for breaking the code. Maybe you fall or maybe you need to atone for breaking it. Even fallen paladins can atone and become paladins again, unless they did some major evil.
This started as you said being dumb was a reason to not be held accountable for breaking the code. I disagree. There is no reason good enough to not have to atone, it does not matter why, you failed to live by the oath you swore to live by upon all that is holy, good and just.
If ya need to go say 50 hail mary's or donate money, partake a rite of cleansing or spend a few weeks in jail in penance. You do
You simply do not get a few pass for breaking your oath.
Edit: I am not saying you fall for one act, I am saying you must atone for that one act. However if you keep repeatedly ignoring your code or falling to atone for breeches of that code,then yes you fall or switch Al. It simply is not something you live by when its easy to do so.
(snip)
There was a Celtic legend about Cu Cuchulain. He was a man of amazing strength, but could loose it for eating horse flesh, or refusing hospitality. While he was on the way to a battle one of his foes, having learned his weakness, met him on the road and offered him some horseflesh.
(snip)
warning: a little off topic
Cu Chulainn was under a geas not to eat dog-meat (Cu means dog, so this was a form of spiritual cannibalism), not horse meat. Celtic geases were the way in which one was fated to die, by the contravention of personal taboos - not breaking societal rules per se - and Celtic warriors wanted to know how they might die and their own geasa to avoid whatever might bring about their deaths. A Celt who willingly breaks a geas was essentially suicidal. Unwilling breaking of a geas simply made one vulnerable to death, not out of punishment for committing a sin - geasa might as easily keep one from fulfilling proper behavior by banning acts of hospitality or politeness - though some did correspond to wrongful acts. Essentially geasa are not based on a moral or law code, but on supernatural prohibitions. This isn't how the Paladin code works, or players and GMs would be really arguing... :)
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.
I like this way of handling it. Who is to say a powerful Evil being couldn’t or wouldn’t be able to do pull this off if they wanted? Though saying she fell because of mental illness is problematic for the reasons discussed earlier. Also… you’d think a good deity would have mercy and heal the poor lady’s mind if she atoned.
Though… I find the concept intriguing. Whatever her story is make sure the PCs learn it, I think they’d dig it too.
I like the idea that she fell by her own choice. Not that she wanted to but doing the right thing can be hard you know – especially for a stubborn, lawful type in a tough spot where strong emotions are involved. A traumatic event coupled with a fall from grace cause her to break from reality and an Evil power steps in and grants her twisted versions of paladin powers.
I don’t have a problem with giving NPCs unique abilities that are counter to the rules. Of course you could always offer the same to the players, if they want to fall, go crazy and hope an Evil power wants to use them for its sick pleasure. But to be fair to the players, she should probably mechanically be Evil if she is running around eating babies and stuff even if she honestly thinks they are jaywalking chickens. IMO anyways, a PC being schizophrenic shouldn’t be treated alignment-wise as the equivalent to a PC with 2 Int if she is committing Evil acts all over the place – which she probably would be, being under the influence of an Evil force and all. :)
I have no clue what your even arguing at this point.
I can't make it any clearer. Your absurdly rigid view on the paladin makes it completely unplayable.
This started as you said being dumb was a reason to not be held accountable for breaking the code. I disagree. There is no reason good enough to not have to atone
Atone for what? Something the paladin doesn't know he did. Case in point, lets say the CN rogue keeps replacing Gump the zweinhander wielding paladins daggers in his belt with poisoned daggers (using his sleight of hand vs the paladins sharp as a bowling ball senses)
Gump gets into a grapple, draws, stabs and... just violated the code. Should he fall for that?
|
it's kind of hard to reconcile paranoia when you have Detect Evil at will and can verify that most people aren't evil-
[threadjack]Sorry, but someone posed this earlier in the thread and I wanted to respond to it. Actually, paranoia for paladins in pathfinder is the easiest thing in the world to play on. Especially with paladins who use detect evil as a go to rather than as a demon/evil cleric detector.
Case in point: Paladin is trying to track down a serial killer who skins the faces of his victims faces and removes their jaws and hands. Paladin follows some minor clues and winds up at a shop, the shop owner denies any knowledge, he behaves courteously and helpful to the paladin, but the paladin feels something is off about the man (sense motive). He detects evil, and the guy has no evil aura, then to be safe he detects magic, since he has no real evidence implicating the man and neither detect show anything the paladin passes it off as bad judgement and goes about his investigation. With no further leads he instead decides to stake out the neighborhood the killer has been striking. He hears a scream, rushes to the scene and engages the killer. Lo and behold its the shopkeep. He goes back to the shop and in a hidden back room he find all the faces of about ten victims hanging on the walls, but how did this happen how could a man so thoroughly evil not have registered, he doesn't find anything magical, or religious in the room to have granted the man protection from detection.
You don't see how a paladin could slip into paranoia from an event like this, by the way above event is possible within the rules if the shopkeep was a 3rd level expert. Any non cleric/outsider/undead under level 5 doesn't register on a detect evil spell or for the paladin ability.
I have no clue what your even arguing at this point.I can't make it any clearer. Your absurdly rigid view on the paladin makes it completely unplayable.
Nope its the one from the book, I just choose to make players ya know, use the code. A vow or oath is rigid. You take a vow of Chasity it does not matter if ya was drunk or drugged when the women seduced you. You sleep with her and broke your vow. You would need to atone for that.
Atone for what? Something the paladin doesn't know he did.
He broke his code, so yes he would need to atone ot\r loose his powers until he did.
Case in point, lets say the CN rogue keeps replacing Gump the zweinhander wielding paladins daggers in his belt with poisoned daggers (using his sleight of hand vs the paladins sharp as a bowling ball senses)Gump gets into a grapple, draws, stabs and... just violated the code. Should he fall for that?
If he does not seek pence for and atone for his violation, yes. He did not seek to break his code, yet he did. He would need to atone in some manor, it need not be a spell of atonement, but he would need to seek out a priest or something.
Also,stop being in the party with the rogue as he is trying to make him fall.
He broke his code, so yes he would need to atone ot\r loose his powers until he did.
And how is he supposed to atone for something he's not aware of?
Dear god, I'm sorry I.... you know i have no idea why I'm being punished but I'm sure i deserve it. I'll try not to do.. whatever it was that I did again tommorow, but since i don't know what it was I probably won't be able to avoid doing it.
[Ned Flanders]I'm also sorry I couldn't do all the stuff that contradicted the other stuff[/Ned Flanders]
Also,stop being in the party with the rogue as he is trying to make him fall.
Better the player than the DM.
In the case above the GM is not trying to make you fall, the other player is. Stop playing with dicks.
Also making a paladin live with his code, is not the GM screwing with you. You took an oath, you have broken that oath. Something will; damned well let you know it, be it a god, a dream or just some powers not working.
Its up to the GM to tell you how, most gods will tell you how you broke your oath.The dick gods that wont tell you what you have done, can't have paladins anyhow.
|
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.).
There's nothing preventing YOU from updating the Blackguard and using it. Plus it does everything you want. Your paladin is fallen and can THINK whatever about the situation, but the end result is that an Evil deity preyed upon and turned you paladin.
I think there is also a feat in City of Splendors: Waterdeep called Veil of Cyric that you might want to look over for ideas.
See also the Paladin of Freedom (CG), Paladin of Tyranny (LE), and Paladin of Slaughter (CE) in 3.5 Unearthed Arcana. By this, the core Paladin becomes the Paladin of Honor. All the extreme alignments are covered this way, which covers what a paladin in essence is: a highly motivated holy or unholy warrior of a deity that answered a calling of that deity.
Perhaps your Paladin has fallen as a Paladin of Honor, but could become a Paladin of Tyranny or Slaughter.
|
Rules that may be helpful here: Madness
Making a cleric/inquisitor/etc. with this character concept seems perfectly rational. Rebranding the class features of one of these other classes to fit "paladin abilities" also seems fine. Paladin with madness becomes fallen and begins trading levels of paladin for another class under the delusion that she is still a paladin ... still no problem.
So, given that OP is doing something like that ... I'm not sure what the problem is anymore. Paladins can fall and atone, people wracked with madness may have trouble understanding what they may have done wrong. Done.
If the madness rules and the atonement rules do not suit anyone's particular plot ... than perhaps these are less than ideal rules by which to approach said plot. Alignment is pretty integral to Pathfinder rules.