Can a Paladin lie to Demons, Devils, Undead and other evil creatures?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 359 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Richard Leonhart wrote:
he can lie to mindless undead, but only if noone is around.

Wouldn't the paladin's god still hear him lie?

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Companion, Lost Omens Subscriber

When I think of a paladin I think of Captain America. There are lots of things he could do, he simply chooses not to. Because he is that good (read excellent not necessarily moral). I remember in one comic the Punisher is giving him a hard time for not using guns, basically calling him a wimp. Captain responds with something like "I have no problem with guns, I just don't need them." That is how I see a paladin. He could lie, cheat and steal, but he chooses not to. He just doesn't need to to get the job done.


To answer the original question, yes, he can, if it's for the sake of his friends and such. Lying is a chaotic act, which will NOT immediately cause him to lose his powers, whereas choosing to give it away probably would. A paladin should be able to resist either way, but if he should HAVE to act, then he should lie- a paladin should always choose the more Good course.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I think the paladin code-angst comes from most people being all-too-willing to put the screws to paladins. From an in-game perspective, this is a person that the gods have personally appointed to be mortal paragons of that particular god. On one hand, it's a lot to live up to. On the other hand, I'd think there would be a bit of leeway. Is your god, who personally imbued you with powers to protect the innocent and fight evil, going to strip you of those powers simply because you lied to a demon who was torturing you with the sole intent of trying to protect your allies? I agree that you should probably go with the "resist torture" route, but as both player and GM, falling because of petty things like that breaks my suspension of disbelief. It's like giving evil an automatic "I win" button, because they managed to put the paladin in a no-win situation by abusing the very public technicality that you're responsible for in the first place. Who would do that? Deities aren't Lawful Stupid.


gamer-printer wrote:
Even then, however, gain a stat loss, and do not lie, what's the problem?

The problem comes down to the phrasing of your posts, intentional or not it sounded like you were saying that the torture was just fluff and not worth caring about because it has no permanent mechanical effect. Whether a character breaks or not torture shouldn't be something the character just shrugs off. If this is a misunderstanding then it's a misunderstanding.


Hippygriff wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:
Even then, however, gain a stat loss, and do not lie, what's the problem?
The problem comes down to the phrasing of your posts, intentional or not it sounded like you were saying that the torture was just fluff and not worth caring about because it has no permanent mechanical effect. Whether a character breaks or not torture shouldn't be something the character just shrugs off. If this is a misunderstanding then it's a misunderstanding.

Well, then I mis-phrased my posts. Sometimes its difficult to convey exact thinking in one's words - so you misunderstood what I meant. I personally don't roleplay torture to the point that it breaks my characters beliefs. It wouldn't happen unless I wanted my character to break.

Silver Crusade

The paladin did resist the torture at first. He never told the demon where his allies were so they escaped. But being tortured for years eventually broke the paladin. Remember, he was only 7th level at that time so he wasn't all that powerful.

I'm the one who gave the DM the idea of making my Paladin turn into an enemy. I thought it was a great story for later.

Silver Crusade

gamer-printer wrote:
Hippygriff wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:
Even then, however, gain a stat loss, and do not lie, what's the problem?
The problem comes down to the phrasing of your posts, intentional or not it sounded like you were saying that the torture was just fluff and not worth caring about because it has no permanent mechanical effect. Whether a character breaks or not torture shouldn't be something the character just shrugs off. If this is a misunderstanding then it's a misunderstanding.
Well, then I mis-phrased my posts. Sometimes its difficult to convey exact thinking in one's words - so you misunderstood what I meant. I personally don't roleplay torture to the point that it breaks my characters beliefs. It wouldn't happen unless I wanted my character to break.

That's one of the problems with leaving things like this up to the players. Most people aren't going to harm their character for the sake of role playing. That's why sometimes mechanics are needed.


shallowsoul wrote:
The paladin did resist the torture at first. He never told the demon where his allies were so they escaped. But being tortured for years eventually broke the paladin.

How did he know where his allies were a couple of years later? O.o


So what if the paladin lies and tells the demon it is a lie, thus speaking the truth.

"I am going to lie to you about where my friends are, they are in the trollmoors."

Silver Crusade

ImperatorK wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
The paladin did resist the torture at first. He never told the demon where his allies were so they escaped. But being tortured for years eventually broke the paladin.
How did he know where his allies were a couple of years later? O.o

Wasn't hard, it's not like they were trying to hide from him.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Paladin: "I'm a 12 yr old girl that eats puppies and steals whenever I get the chance!"
[Paladin powers leave the building]
Demon: "Hahaha you fool, your god cannot protect you now!"
Paladin: "I just didn't want him to have to witness what I am about to do to your corpse... I'll make good later."
[Strength checks/will saves to break free from bindings, fight to the death!!"]

It's all I could think of reading this thread :P


shallowsoul wrote:
ImperatorK wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
The paladin did resist the torture at first. He never told the demon where his allies were so they escaped. But being tortured for years eventually broke the paladin.
How did he know where his allies were a couple of years later? O.o
Wasn't hard, it's not like they were trying to hide from him.

I thought he was telling the demon where they are, not tracking them down for him. :/


Depends on the paladin.

Just because they are all lawful good does not mean they all agree.

Most people consider Superman to be lawful good, but he lied to bad guys all the time.

On the other hand, plenty of other fantasy paladins balk at the idea of lying. They see it as important as their armor.

Great line from Jim Butcher's Dresden Files:

"Because, demon, I know the value of your word--and you know the value of mine."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pyrrhic Victory wrote:
When I think of a paladin I think of Captain America.

I think of Captain Carrot of the Ankh-Morpok City Guard - he's much more interesting.


shallowsoul wrote:
The paladin did resist the torture at first. He never told the demon where his allies were so they escaped. But being tortured for years eventually broke the paladin. Remember, he was only 7th level at that time so he wasn't all that powerful.

O_o and his god left him there, then took his powers for that? Sucks to have to follow a god like that one. I would have thought a serendipitous rescue at some point cleverly engineered behind the scenes, a sojourn in heaven and then a return to the party many years later both older and wiser.

Or maybe reincarnated as another paladin...

shallowsoul wrote:
I'm the one who gave the DM the idea of making my Paladin turn into an enemy. I thought it was a great story for later.

I think you missed an opportunity there for an even better story - unless he came with the possibility of redemption.

Sczarni

Gosh, shallowsoul, I hope the fallen paladin succeeded in killing all of the "friends" who left him to multi-year torture. It sounds like they deserved it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think he'd have to lie in the situation.. he'd just not have to answer the demon.

I mean unless the demon was torturing him minutes after the battle the Paladin probably doesn't know where they are.

Unless the group is Stupid or something "oh no the demon got him /lets move our freaking camp/ so our buddy can't be forced to tell it where we are"

or the Paladin can say things that aren't lying like:
"probably on their way here to slay you, vile beast"

or

"marching forward without me. T hey know our mission is too important to risk a rescue for one person. Your capturing me changes nothing!"

I think lying to him "they are ->>" when they are really <--- would just be unrealistic.

And unless the DM is just torturing out of boredom (i.e. much higher CR than appropriate) the paladin should have a good chance of holding out at least long enough for his answer to actually be incorrect.

four days later:
"Where are your friends"
'agggrh *paladin finally breaks*
"they are.. in Rivendell" *paladin dies*

cept that was 4 days ago, they ain't there anymore.. *and the paladin knew it*
he was broken and told the truth as he knew it, but also figures they ain't there anymore..

but just wimping out to the torture? nah. the demon wants him to start lying, to start being deceitful. the demon doesn't care about the answer- he cares about torturing the paladin. When the paladin weakens and starts stooping to the level of the demons to fend them off, the demons have already started to win the fight.

-S


Yeah, he's a demon, he's not going to stop torturing the paladin just because he's got the info he wanted...


I nearly disallow paladins in my group solely because of too much "that guy" RPing. Either GM, player, or players expectations of what the GM is going to do.

Falling paladins are boring, unless you are talking about taking xd6 damage type falling, then its hilarious.

That guy GMs are always looking to find a petty stupid fault for a paladin to lose his powers, thus making a PC a crappy warrior. I don't really understand this (well I do, I don't understand why people would find its appeal so frequently. it is way overdone). Sometimes they make a power losing event out of a white lie, or a necessary lie. Nah, the Paladin keeps his power, at a later date he says his prayers and gives a donation and everything is fine. If he chose to not make penance, then maybe he loses his powers.

That guy Players are constantly finding ways to make life difficult for the party, unwilling to make the slightest comprise, thus making the party find reason to leave the character in situations where he could lose his power. That guy player thrives on this crap too, letting his character always be put into those kind of situations, even if the GM wants to just move on.

As a player playing a paladin in this kind of group, I would just suicide my character if put into this situation, even if it meant biting my own tongue off. Sure, suicide isn't heroic, and some GMs would say its against the "code" or whatever. They are wrong of course, with suicide you protect your friends from your own unwilling betrayal (after all, demon/devils have access to powerful magic in addition to torture). If the group or GM still had issue with what I did, I would ask if they didn't want me to play a paladin, they should have said something to begin with.


notabot wrote:
As a player playing a paladin in this kind of group, I would just suicide my character if put into this situation, even if it meant biting my own tongue off.

This is why spies carry suicide pills, of course.


Shallow Soul, bbboorrrriiinnnggg... If you think paladins and devils work that way and think a paladin can be turned evil by evil, suit your self. I just think it is no good and would be angry as a player if I couldn't decide of he broke or not, or if it effected him at all.


cranewings wrote:
Shallow Soul, bbboorrrriiinnnggg... If you think paladins and devils work that way and think a paladin can be turned evil by evil, suit your self. I just think it is no good and would be angry as a player if I couldn't decide of he broke or not, or if it effected him at all.

I feel exactly the same way, I get angry when I can't decide everything that affects to my character, such as his response to being tortured... or being hit by a sword.. my GM is a jerk if he tries to decide how stuff affects MY character...


HaraldKlak wrote:
cranewings wrote:
Shallow Soul, bbboorrrriiinnnggg... If you think paladins and devils work that way and think a paladin can be turned evil by evil, suit your self. I just think it is no good and would be angry as a player if I couldn't decide of he broke or not, or if it effected him at all.
I feel exactly the same way, I get angry when I can't decide everything that affects to my character, such as his response to being tortured... or being hit by a sword.. my GM is a jerk if he tries to decide how stuff affects MY character...

Exactly. If I mark 7 points off my hp and say the blow hurt his shield arm, or if I say he was stabbed and is bleeding, it shouldn't matter to him so long as I mark the points off. If I say he resists torture till he dies, or if he converts and becomes evil - what difference does it make? It isn't his character.


cranewings wrote:


I feel exactly the same way, I get angry when I can't decide everything that affects to my character, such as his response to being tortured... or being hit by a sword.. my GM is a jerk if he tries to decide how stuff affects MY character...

Exactly. If I mark 7 points off my hp and say the blow hurt his shield arm, or if I say he was stabbed and is bleeding, it shouldn't matter to him so long as I mark the points off. If I say he resists torture till he dies, or if he converts and becomes evil - what difference does it make? It isn't his character.

Well... My point is actually rather different.

If my character was being tortured, I would be happy to accept fort or will saves (or a combination thereof) to see how well my character copes with it. Eventhough the system haven't established rules for any circumstances, I do expect my GM make it work (or find a solution with the rest of us).

Paizo Employee Creative Director

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

James Jacobs wrote:
This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.

Yay! I win the Internet! :)


6 people marked this as a favorite.

FIEND: Where are you companions? The pain will end when you tell me where they are hiding?

PALADIN: Why do you want to know?

FIEND: So I can destroy them and all they have wrought; surely you know this 'paladin'.

PALADIN: So you can ambush them and catch them unawares and attempt to defeat them through trickery and deceit and dishonor. [Smiles a weary smile at the fiend] It will not serve your purpose, fiend, but I shall answer you question anyway.

FIEND: I expected that you would last longer, 'paladin'. Where are they? Tell me and I shall end this.

PALADIN: The companions with which I adventure, you foul beast, you stinking pile of offal that even a Otyugh would turn up his nose at feasting upon; those companions are men and women of valor, of honor, of integrity. We have scoured evils worse than you from a hundred battlefields and sent them shrieking back into the fires of the Abyss. We have stood together through calamity and tragedy, through triumph and victory. We have mourned our fallen, and avenged those who were unable to defend themselves against your ilk.

FIEND: Cease your riddles! Answer my question: where are they?

PALADIN chuckles, which turns into a laugh, despite his pain.

PALADIN: Need you even ask such a foolish question fiend? They are en route here--to free me and finish you. They will not abandon me to a fate at your hands, no more than I would them. Or did you think that I, a Paladin oath-sworn to the Gods themselves, would associate with fools that would abandon and betray me at their whim?

FIEND raises a glowing taper.

FIEND: You should have told me, mortal. I shall enjoy digging the answer from your flesh.

WIZARD: Ahem. He already answered you. But since you would easily break your oath to preserve your own sorry life, I can see how you might not believe him. Take him, lads!

SUMMONED CELESTIALS: AARRRRRGH!

FIEND: IEEEEEEEE!

ROGUE: Just let me pick the lock, mate; we'll have you out of here in a jiffy.

CLERIC: And allow me to staunch thy wounds, noble crusader.

PALADIN: What took you so long?

RANGER as he slices the fiend with his sword: We stopped for lunch! If you are done lying around, I could use some help! Unless all of you want to gossip some more!

PALADIN: Do you have . . .

ROGUE hands the Paladin a sword.

PALADIN: Thank you. [SMITE EVIL] And now, fiend, you will witness for yourself, the power of my companions and my Diety in full.

FIEND: NOOOOOOOOO!

Or something like that. :)

Master Arminas

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Trinite wrote:
Gosh, shallowsoul, I hope the fallen paladin succeeded in killing all of the "friends" who left him to multi-year torture. It sounds like they deserved it.

Actually it looks like Shallowsoul is just looking for a justification for his "edgy" "dark" Anti-Paladin.

It's actually threads like this that encourage the idea in me to just ban the Paladin classes altogether. Because the only things that a lot of posters like Shadowsoul seem to be interested in is finding reasons to break players who choose the class. Or justify what they think is a cool, original, but actually cliche-ridden origin for characters that have nothing but Trauma to justify their existence.


As I've said, I've actually created a paladin to work up to 12th level, then fall in grace to become an Anti-Paladin. While the character didn't know he was going to fall, I as a player planned it all along. If this is what you want to do and it's alright with your GM and other players then do so. However, nothing, including GM, mechanics, situation will ever force my paladin to fall from grace, it is always a players choice.

If an encounter means Devils are torturing the paladin, then that's what happens, but there is no reason the paladin has to lie, expose his allies, or other means to fail as a paladin. If a paladin does so, it's due to player choice only, no other reason. And there shouldn't be a reason for this to be forced by anything in game.

Silver Crusade

LazarX wrote:
Trinite wrote:
Gosh, shallowsoul, I hope the fallen paladin succeeded in killing all of the "friends" who left him to multi-year torture. It sounds like they deserved it.

Actually it looks like Shallowsoul is just looking for a justification for his "edgy" "dark" Anti-Paladin.

It's actually threads like this that encourage the idea in me to just ban the Paladin classes altogether. Because the only things that a lot of posters like Shadowsoul seem to be interested in is finding reasons to break players who choose the class. Or justify what they think is a cool, original, but actually cliche-ridden origin for characters that have nothing but Trauma to justify their existence.

I didn't get to play the paladin after that so there wasn't an excuse for anything. The DM said that I lost my powers because I lied and that my character was pretty much history. I suggested bringing him back maybe as an enemy later on and he went with it. I started playing a Wizard after that so what happened to the paladin didn't benefit me at all.

Silver Crusade

cranewings wrote:
Shallow Soul, bbboorrrriiinnnggg... If you think paladins and devils work that way and think a paladin can be turned evil by evil, suit your self. I just think it is no good and would be angry as a player if I couldn't decide of he broke or not, or if it effected him at all.

So what now? Do you squeal in joy?

Silver Crusade

James Jacobs wrote:
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.

But that's not what happened. I figured if I sent them on a wild goose chase it would help my companions escape.


Regarding your GM's determination that there is no way for your paladin to make things right again. Apparently this is GM fiat, it's not by the rules of the game. A paladin can certainly, always atone for breaking his code of conduct.

All you need to do is an Atonement spell, and perhaps some in game atoning in some RP way and your paladin would be right as rain.

In fact in this situation, it's not the paladin that needs atoning, rather your GM needs to atone for unforgiving behavior. (I would be looking for another GM to play with, as the best fix for the problem.)

Silver Crusade

gamer-printer wrote:

Regarding your GM's determination that there is no way for your paladin to make things right again. Apparently this is GM fiat, it's not by the rules of the game. A paladin can certainly, always atone for breaking his code of conduct.

All you need to do is an Atonement spell, and perhaps some in game atoning in some RP way and your paladin would be right as rain.

In fact in this situation, it's not the paladin that needs atoning, rather your GM needs to atone for unforgiving behavior. (I would be looking for another GM to play with, as the best fix for the problem.)

I don't think some of you actually get what happened. I spelled it out for you but I guess I need it again.

There was no way my paladin could escape unless my friends came back to get me which they didn't. The paladin actually sent the fiends minions on a wild goose chase so my friends could get away. You can't atone when you are dead, bottom line.

I suggested for fun that it would be neat if my pally came back later in the game as an enemy. That after being turned into a bugbear, on top of being persecuted because looked like a bugbear, on top of some PC's making fun of the pally bugbear, on top of being tortured and being left behind.

Please go and read all posts before commenting. It will save you the trouble, I promise.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That's not he point.

If the campaign runs on questions on the level of "Shall I strip the Paladin's powers for the crime of jaywalking?" Then it's a sign that this simply is not a campaign where the class belongs.

Paladins are supposed to fall to unambiguous acts of BEING EVIL and or chaotic. Not for being human. I don't have a (major) issue with no-win scenarios, but I'm pretty much fed up with questions presented on the "Dammed if you do, Dammed if you don't." format on the matter on when Paladins should fall. If that's the kind of challenge you think that Paladin players should have in a campaign, then Lords help anyone who's sufficiently crazy or mis-informed to run one.

I literally have no patience for people who can only imagine Paladins in a binary sense of absolute compliance or complete fall for the merest infraction. The Paladin code is a hard one to live up to. People will fail on occasion. The better of them will redeem their failures before the question of stripping their powers should come into play.


Paladins can fall quickly and dramatically, but they can also slip slowly away from the faith. The final thing that pushes them over the edge may be a small step as easily as a giant leap.

But if it's a small step it had better be one of quite a lot of small steps, preceded by warnings.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shallowsoul wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.
But that's not what happened. I figured if I sent them on a wild goose chase it would help my companions escape.

Very pragmatic! Just not paladin-like. Take the fall, decide whether atonement is possible (you have to actually be sorry, after all), and continue on.

People seriously wouldn't risk permanent harm of death for their character in order to role-play the character appropriately? Then why are they playing the game at all? There are plenty of computer games where they can make whatever decisions they want with no consequences.

Silver Crusade

LazarX wrote:

That's not he point.

If the campaign runs on questions on the level of "Shall I strip the Paladin's powers for the crime of jaywalking?" Then it's a sign that this simply is not a campaign where the class belongs.

Paladins are supposed to fall to unambiguous acts of BEING EVIL and or chaotic. Not for being human. I don't have a (major) issue with no-win scenarios, but I'm pretty much fed up with questions presented on the "Dammed if you do, Dammed if you don't." format on the matter on when Paladins should fall. If that's the kind of challenge you think that Paladin players should have in a campaign, then Lords help anyone who's sufficiently crazy or mis-informed to run one.

I literally have no patience for people who can only imagine Paladins in a binary sense of absolute compliance or complete fall for the merest infraction. The Paladin code is a hard one to live up to. People will fail on occasion. The better of them will redeem their failures before the question of stripping their powers should come into play.

I don't think you still get it champ!

Just let it go if you have no patience.

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.
But that's not what happened. I figured if I sent them on a wild goose chase it would help my companions escape.

Very pragmatic! Just not paladin-like. Take the fall, decide whether atonement is possible (you have to actually be sorry, after all), and continue on.

People seriously wouldn't risk permanent harm of death for their character in order to role-play the character appropriately? Then why are they playing the game at all? There are plenty of computer games where they can make whatever decisions they want with no consequences.

Question? Did you actually read the posts?


shallowsoul wrote:
You can't atone when you are dead

If that's your paladin's reasoning, then they can't atone at all, as they won't

prd wrote:
be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds

The rules have things for these situations. You could argue that you were under compulsion; your deity may or may not buy it. If that's the case, you basically just have to be sorry that you were forced to lie. And you don't even have to pay for offerings! If your deity is a hardliner, though, you're boned. Enjoy your sub-warrior status, or roll up a new character with less stringent requirements, like a cavalier.


shallowsoul wrote:
blahpers wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.
But that's not what happened. I figured if I sent them on a wild goose chase it would help my companions escape.

Very pragmatic! Just not paladin-like. Take the fall, decide whether atonement is possible (you have to actually be sorry, after all), and continue on.

People seriously wouldn't risk permanent harm of death for their character in order to role-play the character appropriately? Then why are they playing the game at all? There are plenty of computer games where they can make whatever decisions they want with no consequences.

Question? Did you actually read the posts?

Yes. They were completely contrary to RAW. RAW says: you lie, you fall. The spirit of the class is up for interpretation, but in my game: you lie, you fall. All the wishy-washy interpretations about good being more important than law and "being human" are fine for house rules, but they aren't in RAW, and they aren't in my game.

Edit: I'm multitasking right now, so if I got my posts crossed and am militantly agreeing with you, sorry.

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
blahpers wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Spes Magna Mark wrote:

Demon: "Where are your companions?"

Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."

I'm not seeing the dilemma.

This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.
But that's not what happened. I figured if I sent them on a wild goose chase it would help my companions escape.

Very pragmatic! Just not paladin-like. Take the fall, decide whether atonement is possible (you have to actually be sorry, after all), and continue on.

People seriously wouldn't risk permanent harm of death for their character in order to role-play the character appropriately? Then why are they playing the game at all? There are plenty of computer games where they can make whatever decisions they want with no consequences.

Question? Did you actually read the posts?
Yes. They were completely contrary to RAW. RAW says: you lie, you fall. The spirit of the class is up for interpretation, but in my game: you lie, you fall.

I'm not talking about that.

I am trying to tell you OOC that the paladin was dead. The intention of the DM was to torture him a little more and kill him. There was no future for atonement. Do you understand? My paladin didn't give up, when you are captured by something that is more powerful than you you don't get to decide whether you live or die. My group got away and weren't able to come back to get the paladin so they figured him dead. Now me, Shallowsoul, told my DM that it would be cool to have my pally come back in the future but he be evil. So the DM decided to use my idea and go with it. There was already no going back for my character, it was either he died or he came back as an enemy. I am fully aware of the atonement rules.


Yup, I got my posts crossed. You played a paladin's fall perfectly (though they obviously don't have to turn into villains or even change their alignments afterward). Sounds like an interesting game!

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
Yup, I got my posts crossed. You played a paladin's fall perfectly (though they obviously don't have to turn into villains or even change their alignments afterward). Sounds like an interesting game!

No they don't but I thought it would be a neat idea if he did.

There was a lot to play with here because I had a very very unusual paladin.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Who needs to lie?

As paragons of Law, paladins should be able to rules-lawyer their way round some stupid Anarchic being.

Tell the guy what he wants to know; just make your report so long-winded, redundant and tedious, that it becomes utterly obsolete, and ceases to have any connection with the present situation, and your interrogator loses the will to live.

When facing enemy questioning, just start channeling 'Mr Logic', from Viz magazine.

:Armed Robber: No nonsense. Just give me all your money.

:Mr Logic: I shall commence by pointing out to you that my demeanour is not one which could be described as nonsensical. Consequently I can attest you have no cause to reprimand me on your first point. On to your second point: Bearing in mind the potentially lethal situation in which I find myself, to wit: your presence in conjunction with the presumably loaded firearm which is presently levelled at my cranium, I will comply with your request comprehensively, albeit reluctantly. Here, twenty-seven pence.

:Armed Robber: Twenty-seven pence? **** off. There's more than that in the till.

:Mr Logic: Indeed, undoubtedly so. However your request was for *my* money. The currency in the till belongs to a third party and is therefore not "my money". However, if you are still desirous of said money I would suggest that you re-phrase your original statement to recognise and incorporate this important distinction.

:Armed Robber: For ****'s sake.

Silver Crusade

Snorter wrote:

Who needs to lie?

As paragons of Law, paladins should be able to rules-lawyer their way round some stupid Anarchic being.

Tell the guy what he wants to know; just make your report so long-winded, redundant and tedious, that it becomes utterly obsolete, and ceases to have any connection with the present situation, and your interrogator loses the will to live.

When facing enemy questioning, just start channeling 'Mr Logic', from Viz magazine.

:Armed Robber: No nonsense. Just give me all your money.

:Mr Logic: I shall commence by pointing out to you that my demeanour is not one which could be described as nonsensical. Consequently I can attest you have no cause to reprimand me on your first point. On to your second point: Bearing in mind the potentially lethal situation in which I find myself, to wit: your presence in conjunction with the presumably loaded firearm which is presently levelled at my cranium, I will comply with your request comprehensively, albeit reluctantly. Here, twenty-seven pence.

:Armed Robber: Twenty-seven pence? **** off. There's more than that in the till.

:Mr Logic: Indeed, undoubtedly so. However your request was for *my* money. The currency in the till belongs to a third party and is therefore not "my money". However, if you are still desirous of said money I would suggest that you re-phrase your original statement to recognise and incorporate this important distinction.

:Armed Robber: For ****'s sake.

Or he may get anxious and just blow your head off.

Scarab Sages

shallowsoul wrote:
Or he may get anxious and just blow your head off.

Indeed.

Problem solved.

Puritas intacta.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Answer every question with a question.

"Tell me where your friends are"

"Why?"

"Because if you don't, I will torture you."

"Why?"

"Because that is my job."

"Why?"

"Because I was appointed by Lord Scrungeworthy."

"Why?"

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Be utterly pedantic.

"Tell me where your camp is."

<gives location of the site the party once made camp when they were 1st level>

51 to 100 of 359 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Can a Paladin lie to Demons, Devils, Undead and other evil creatures? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.