| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Certainly lying to anyone is evil, and thus a paladin would fall.
But of course, so then would be lying by misdirection. Or lying by not telling the full truth. Even if the paladin doesn't know the full truth, he might be leaving something out, so - fall. Or if he says nothing- he is still lying-right?
In fact if a paladin does anything but lay in bed with his head under the covers- he falls.
Hmm, no- wait- Sloth is a deadly sin too. So, that's out.
Yep, every paladin falls within moments of taking his oath. No- wait- just by taking his oath, he's lying, so FALL!
Fall, fall, fall, fall, fall. Antipaladins all.
Isn't anyone tired of paladin alignment threads yet?
I don't understand why players hate this sort of thing so much. Of course villains are going to try to undermine the heroes virtue and take away his power. That's what villains do. Adapt and overcome. If you don't want that to be an issue, just play an LG fighter.
Thing is though, it's not at a point of relevance. I'm all for testing a Paladin's resolve, but I think those kind of situations will evolve out of day to day adventuring. This DM does so when the character's fate's already forgone.
The character was, presumably, doomed to die at that point(having stayed behind to get captured by said demon). The only options at that point as a DM is to:
-Commend the player on their sacrifice & hand them a new sheet.
-Deus Ex him from situation.
-Set up a scenario where he's tempted by the demon as the Party attempts to rescue him.
Looks to me the DM did the later, but with no chance of survival since the Party never came for him. At that point, when he continued the torture, I feel like it's just the DM rubbing salt in the Pali's wounds for having lost. Sure it led to something fairly cool, blackguards are awfully fun to fight, but I wouldn't do that to my players.
Let's say a Paladin gets captured and a demon asks him where his companions are. Can the Paladin lie to save his companions and not be breaking his Paladin code?
Well, he could simply not answer, or allow the questioner to come to incorrect conclusions (deception).
Second, one incident would not be able to break the code overall, and require atonement etc. There would have to be lesser forms of penance, just as there are in modern Catholicism. You might want to check what the Benedictine rule for monks said about this sort of thing.
|
That seems a bit harsh. When I went to SERE school, one of our instructors was a survivor from the Hanoi Hilton...you cannot possibly understand what "torture" actually means, how hard it is to resist, but how unimaginably ineffective it is as getting worthwhile / useful intelligence.If torture were only physical, resitance would be possible.
This.
Side note: SERE school, eh? May be getting a seat for that in the near-ish future, any tips (without breaking OPSEC)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best option is not to lie, but to joke. Just because you are a paladin doesn't mean you don't have a sense of humour.
Then in an rp roundabout way, explain to the fiend that you are immune to fear and intimidation. While this torture is really going to hurt, you the paladin have nothing to fear (due to your secured place in the afterlife) and cannot actually experience fear, you only have dim memories what it was like anyway. Damn god took all that sniveling away from you, turned you into paladin kill-bot.
So yeah, kind of wasting your time evil buddy.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As has been amply demonstrated in other paladin threads, people of one alignment find it really difficult to get their heads around the opposite alignment, often misunderstanding it and reaching the wrong conclusions.
There have been some laughable recent attempts by non-chaotic people to tell chaotic people how chaotic characters should be played! Even when told what chaotics actually think, it's like they can't hear it!
This would be no different with evil versus good.
People generally, deep down, believe that everybody rationalises the world in the same way they do, until confronted with evidence to the contrary. And even then, they can only guess at what the 'other side' thinks.
A demon might have heard of paladins, but it won't understand one, nor will it be able to accurately predict the paladin's response.
A demon doesn't really get 'self-sacrifice', doesn't understand the 'greater good'. Its attempts to manipulate a paladin in such extreme circumstances is likely to be wide of the mark.
This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.Demon: "Where are your companions?"
Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."
I'm not seeing the dilemma.
Absolutely!
Yay! I win the Internet! :)
I know, it always feels like you're on top of the world when JJ agrees with something you've said!
I've got to say: I don't think shallowsoul did anything wrong. It sounds like a great story, and they had fun, so I think that everything worked out well, in the end, for them. Thus, I'm not really sure where all the 'urdoinitrong' is coming from.
He wasn't being edgy to get an antipaladin (he had a new character - a wizard), he wasn't being metagamey, and he wasn't particularly being vindictive. It sounds like a perfect and comparatively reasonable "fall" story.
Personally? I'd have played it differently. But that's me.
Also, his OP was kind of strange. The short answer is "yes", but the much more accurate answer is "do as your GM decrees". While some have argued RAW, intent, divine codes and what not, the Core book includes lying as an example of dishonorable behavior, and a dishonorable act can cause a paladin to fall.
RAW is a bit different, however, as Faiths of Purity specifically note (as has been pointed out) that there are paladin codes that make way for lying. This code is just as valid as others, and it's RAW that said paladins follow that code instead of the generic one in the Core book.
And, of course, home games vary as well. If the GM and the player agree, then whatever code is crafted is golden. Then it's all good. (Some of them truly make me shake my head in wonder, though, as I really, really can't accept those as lawful good, but hey, it's not my game.)
After centuries, they'd actually successfully killed almost all of (if not all of, it's unclear) the devils that had been sealed into one area by powerful magic (that could be expanded by conquest, due to technicality of the effectively non-repeatable due to cost epic spell). The devils, being tricky as they were, decided to recruit local mortal populations - goblins - and turn them into a fierce warrior-race that could march beyond the border and thus expand the border for the devils. Thus hobgoblins were born.
The Crusade eventually destroyed the (rarely-directly-replicating) devils, but were unable to wipe out the hobgoblin servants (and they weren't into the whole genocide 'just because' thing, anyway).
However, the toll was rather large and the last Bastion of the war, a citadel of half-elf paladins, were rather... tight up for breeding purposes. Add that to the fact that the earth itself became tainted with all the bloodshed - and especially with all the devil blood and decomposing infernal corpses unifying with the landscape - and violence and magic made for a very difficult situation over-all for the crusaders who truly were holding back hordes of powerful barbaric (but lawful) devil-worshiping tribes (kind of like Belkzen with hobgoblins instead).
This, and their tremendous losses and sacrifices (and several successful feints on devilish behalves) within the Crusade had led to an interesting Variant code, effectively making paladins exempt from keeping any specific element of the code in regards to Hobgoblins and 'other devil-kin' (including actual devils), with the sole exception that a paladin was never given leave to purposefully commit a truly evil act against anything.
Sorcery was considered a divine gift as well, considering it was elven sorcery that had successfully contained the devils in the first place and it was believed by more than a few that the same sort of power would one day. Sorcerers were under cultural pressure to procreate often because of this. Pressure, however, is not the same thing as mandating or enforcement.
Those who went out from the citadel worked hard to recruit as many new people as possible. Sex was an entirely acceptable social activity, and was an acceptable recruitment method, presupposing that the paladin was extremely upfront and honest about it.
There were mandatory "vacations" to help ensure a paladin didn't become just an emotionless war machine of hatred.
There were also other interesting (to us) elements.
Now all that happened in a home-brewed world. Some is cliche, some is unusual, and some looks like it could be taken as an 'edgy' take to the paladin. We didn't play it that way. Herdlamb, the character in question, was both paladin and sorcerer, and was culturally pressured to have children. His particular bloodlines prevented this with many potential matches, but his drive and dedication to the war meant that, frankly, he didn't have time for that, and so had never really engaged in any of that*. He was mostly a shining knight in armor, effectively abstinent, and over all a rather happy almost-go-lucky guy (who'd chosen said outlook as a way to combat the all-to-depressing reality of watching every team mate he'd ever worked with get shredded in a never-ending war).
The point of all of this is: Paladins can vary a lot. If the GM and player both agree that something fits as a lawful good character and story. They can aspire to mesh with the "normal" way of things, or be "different from others" that still follow the code.
* To cut people off at the pass: I was one of the main contributors of the whole "low population in eternal-war situation needs to reproduce as quickly as possible, thus sex is a socially encouraged activity" thing. It's hard to be prudish about the ideas that you came up with.
Anyway, the Paladin is a great class. I've had lots of fun with it, and I've never run into a terribad situation in which I was required to fall. I've heard the horror stories... and I'm sorry for them. But, personally, mine have all been really interesting, whether it's me or someone else. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
this seems simple to me. the Paladin refuses to answer. The whole point of being a paladin is that you are willing to Fight and DIE for your beliefs. In this scenerio, you will die for them.
I don't know why people keep trying to undermine the underpinnings of a great class. If dying for your beliefs, or having your beliefs put you in a "a no win situtation", doesnt seem fair to you, then the paladin class isn't for you, there are lot of others.
That seems a bit harsh. When I went to SERE school, one of our instructors was a survivor from the Hanoi Hilton...you cannot possibly understand what "torture" actually means, how hard it is to resist, but how unimaginably ineffective it is as getting worthwhile / useful intelligence.If torture were only physical, resitance would be possible.
This.
Side note: SERE school, eh? May be getting a seat for that in the near-ish future, any tips (without breaking OPSEC)?
Here's a good tip...when they water-board you for real, even though you feel like you're ging to die, you actually won't. Don't let them break you.
I do not understand why people think it is ok for a Paladin to lie.
Through a select, worthy few shines the power of the divine. Called paladins, these noble souls dedicate their swords and lives to the battle against evil. Knights, crusaders, and law-bringers, paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve. In pursuit of their lofty goals, they adhere to ironclad laws of morality and discipline. As reward for their righteousness, these holy champions are blessed with boons to aid them in their quests: powers to banish evil, heal the innocent, and inspire the faithful. Although their convictions might lead them into conflict with the very souls they would save, paladins weather endless challenges of faith and dark temptations, risking their lives to do right and fighting to bring about a brighter future.
It says right there that they adhere to ironclad laws of marality and discipline. A lot of people missunderstand the Lawful part of the paladin alignment thinking that it means the Laws of the country or city etc. Chaotic characters will lie, do what they want when the need suits them. A Lawful character will not, they have a path that they follow and to them that is that. Think of them as being a bit OCD, they have their tics and they have to follow them.
I think it comes down more to whether lawful means the letter or the spirit. Point in fact, a 'pefect' paladin will always be able to adhere to both. 'Perfect' doesn't exist, so some people side more with the letter while some side with the spirit and allow the letter to slide.
"Ironclad", goofily enough, isn't as ironclad as it seems like it should be when it involves things that are at least partially subjective.
That said, PF Core is pretty clear: they shouldn't lie. Whether it constitutes a breach large enough to make them fall immediately or not is subject to GM interpretation (though it's pretty clear to me that it should be).
Faiths and Champions, however, have different codes that specifically allow for such things... again, as adjucated by the GM.
The Paladin class, frankly, requires trust in and communication with the GM. If others have a different interpretation... well, that's them. It's not watering down, it's not rejecting the principles of the class, it's a different interpretation. And according to RAW (which is different than just Core) there are paladins that can lie or at least misdirect. Most can't, and shouldn't, but some... I could see that.
Sir Valoran: Boy...I'd sell my soul for a divinely bonded weapon and mount!
Asmodeus: Ahem.
Sir Valoran: Nah. Changed my mind.
Asmodeus: >:(
High Priestess Virtua: Valoran, stop pestering Asmodeus!
lol
|
|
The Paladin can choose to lie, knowing that this means he is acting without honor, which is ground for falling.
After all, honor does not allow for excuses.
A Paladin can choose to fall if he feels it is the proper option.
After that, judging if he indeed falls and how long it will take him to atone is completely in the hands of the gods (ie, the GM).
Falling at this point would be a very bad idea, you would lose your immunity to fear and bonuses to saves. You want everything you can have on your side if torture is coming up. You want to be able to mentally survive or die with honour if the end is coming.
Falling at this point would be a very bad idea, you would lose your immunity to fear and bonuses to saves. You want everything you can have on your side if torture is coming up. You want to be able to mentally survive or die with honour if the end is coming.
I paladin physically tortured won't fall so easily, the BBEG should know better and use different tactics, like killing innocent in front of him... that would be a lot more effective.
|
|
Falling at this point would be a very bad idea, you would lose your immunity to fear and bonuses to saves. You want everything you can have on your side if torture is coming up. You want to be able to mentally survive or die with honour if the end is coming.
IMO, this is completely Metagaming on the Paladin's player's part.
Also, if I was the GM (and thus the Paladin's God), I would reward my faithful servant (unless for some reason I wanted to see how far he would resist to temptation), whether through not falling, being saved by a deus ex machina or by a sudden death.
For some reason "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" comes to mind.
the answer has been given mutiple times if its a choice to lie to evil or not then it is dishonorable but a paladin could just as easily chose to say nothing at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hiya.
What's more evil...stabbing someone in the face for asking you a question, or lieing to them?
Problem solved. You're welcome. ;)
Basically, the way I see it, if a paladin can attack demons, devils, undead and such "on sight", then lieing to them "on sight" is perfectly acceptable. It wouldn't go against the paladins code at all. Besides, lieing to a demon in order to protect innocents would probably be expected ("innocents" being the PC's and any people they happen to be around when the demon would have popped out and started fireballing everything...).
^_^
Paul L. Ming
|
|
This is the way a paladin should handle the situation.Demon: "Where are your companions?"
Paladin: "I'm not going to tell you. Do your worst, fiend."
I'm not seeing the dilemma.
Absolutely!
Yay! I win the Internet! :)I know, it always feels like you're on top of the world when JJ agrees with something you've said!
I've got to say: I don't think shallowsoul did anything wrong. It sounds like a great story, and they had fun, so I think that everything worked out well, in the end, for them. Thus, I'm not really sure where all the 'urdoinitrong' is coming from.
He wasn't being edgy to get an antipaladin (he had a new character - a wizard), he wasn't being metagamey, and he wasn't particularly being vindictive. It sounds like a perfect and comparatively reasonable "fall" story.
Personally? I'd have played it differently. But that's me.
Also, his OP was kind of strange. The short answer is "yes", but the much more accurate answer is "do as your GM decrees". While some have argued RAW, intent, divine codes and what not, the Core book includes lying as an example of dishonorable behavior, and a dishonorable act can cause a paladin to fall.
RAW is a bit different, however, as Faiths of Purity specifically note (as has been pointed out) that there are paladin codes that make way for lying. This code is just as valid as others, and it's RAW that said paladins follow that code instead of the generic one in the Core book.
And, of course, home games vary as well. If the GM and the player agree, then whatever code is crafted is golden. Then it's all good. (Some of them truly make me shake my head in wonder, though, as I really, really can't accept those as lawful good, but hey, it's not my game.)
** spoiler omitted **...
I'm glad you brought up that other code because it strengthens what I was saying. Apparently the normal code's regard to lying is serious because if it wasn't then they wouldn't need to make a code that does allow it.
|
|
I'd like to note that not only does the code NEVER says a Paladin can never lie. It says they must "act with honor", giving not lying as an example of this. It doesn't even say they must ALWAYS act with perfect honor, merely overall.
I'd also like to note 3.5 to PF drops a "grossly" from the
"violates the code conduct" line, which is annoying.
Actually it specifically says no lying.
It doesn't go into detail on what kind of lie, it just says lying.
|
|
WinningHiya.
What's more evil...stabbing someone in the face for asking you a question, or lieing to them?
Problem solved. You're welcome. ;)
Basically, the way I see it, if a paladin can attack demons, devils, undead and such "on sight", then lieing to them "on sight" is perfectly acceptable. It wouldn't go against the paladins code at all. Besides, lieing to a demon in order to protect innocents would probably be expected ("innocents" being the PC's and any people they happen to be around when the demon would have popped out and started fireballing everything...).
^_^
Paul L. Ming
Actually, no. Darkflame said why in the post just above. You can fall for acting without honor, even if the act is not evil.
Remember : Chaotic does not mean Evil.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm glad you brought up that other code because it strengthens what I was saying. Apparently the normal code's regard to lying is serious because if it wasn't then they wouldn't need to make a code that does allow it.The short answer is "yes", but the much more accurate answer is "do as your GM decrees". While some have argued RAW, intent, divine codes and what not, the Core book includes lying as an example of dishonorable behavior, and a dishonorable act can cause a paladin to fall.
RAW is a bit different, however, as Faiths of Purity specifically note (as has been pointed out) that there are paladin codes that make way for lying. This code is just as valid as others, and it's RAW that said paladins follow that code instead of the generic one in the Core book.
And, of course, home games vary as well. If the GM and the player agree, then whatever code is crafted is golden. Then it's all good. (Some of them truly make me shake my head in wonder, though, as I really, really can't accept those as lawful good, but hey, it's not my game.)
** spoiler omitted **...
Actually, as I pointed out in another thread (self-quote below), there is no "making way for lying" in the FoP codes. Nor do they replace the CRB code. They add to it ("Paladins of all faiths have strict moral codes by which they must abide or risk losing their powers: they must protect the innocent, be truthful, respect lawful and just authority, and live with honor at all times. However, paladins of individual faiths live by additional strictures, and draw on specific codes to seal their bonds with their gods— those who violate the codes of their faiths must atone for their deeds or lose their powers." on page 26 of FoP.)
Thankfully, no deity-specific code says that lying is OK (even under very specific circumstances).
The one that skirts the closest to this is Torag's code (quoted above) which states that you can "mislead" others when serving your people. "Mislead", not "Lie". And it also states the Torag's Paladin is ALWAYS truthful, honorable and forthright.
I believe that it is on purpose that no deity-specific code states that lying is OK in some circumstances (ie, would contradict the core code).
I may be to easy going on my players but I certainly would not punish a Paladin for lying to a Demon to save his allies.
I would base my decision on a Paladins intent, not specifically his actions, within reason.
His intent would be to save lives in this case, which is a good thing. I would hope however the Paladin didn't make a habit of lying, that would probably cause a fall.
Yes, a paladin can lie to an evil creature as long as it's for the greater good.
Paladin codes are not meant to be absolute.
I would run it similar to my own moral code. You can't do those things to innocent and good people. If lying is for the greater good, then I'd say the paladin is not only right to lie, but obligated to do so.
Not sure if this has been replied to yet but...
Says who? You think they should not be absolute, other people think they should be. Just stating an unsupported opinion as a fact is not very convincing. Even the great JJ, who has "creative director" next to his name thinks a Paladin in a lie-and-fall/tell-the-truth-and-fall situation should then say nothing
I would never run a scenario where someone tried to make a paladin deliberately lose their powers. To deliberately make a paladin "fall" is outside the purview of anyone in the game, player or NPC.
The paladin gains their powers through a relationship with their deity. I emphasize RELATIONSHIP, which constitutes an understanding and a covenant. It's not a set of rules to tempt, cajole or cleverly fool a paladin from.
That being said, a demon or devil could be VERY personal in their lifelong vendetta towards a holy warrior, and could certainly set out to ruin that paladin. Perhaps over a period of years they could corrupt him or her and lead them to ruin. They're not going to do it with a session of torture and tricking them into a dilemma of lying.
I would never run a scenario where someone tried to make a paladin deliberately lose their powers. To deliberately make a paladin "fall" is outside the purview of anyone in the game, player or NPC.
The paladin gains their powers through a relationship with their deity. I emphasize RELATIONSHIP, which constitutes an understanding and a covenant. It's not a set of rules to tempt, cajole or cleverly fool a paladin from.
That being said, a demon or devil could be VERY personal in their lifelong vendetta towards a holy warrior, and could certainly set out to ruin that paladin. Perhaps over a period of years they could corrupt him or her and lead them to ruin. They're not going to do it with a session of torture and tricking them into a dilemma of lying.
this doesn't make sense to me, torturing them and tricking them is a dimlema is EXACTLY how a devil would do it. The Paladin of great faith would choose to say nothing and die there, the weakness would lie or find someway to twist thier code to surivive and fall.
But of course your objection really to the GM killing player for a paladin being a paladin and refusing to answer. i personally, i were the GM, if the paladin accepted his fate of death and said nothing, some minor divine intervention would occur that would allow the player a chance to escape. As both a reward for the player living up the standards of his calling , being a paladin, but also because it would make perfect sense that some God of Good(probably Iomadae) would attempt to throw a life perserver to a paladin who kept his/her honor even in the face of certain death.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, as I pointed out in another thread (self-quote below), there is no "making way for lying" in the FoP codes. Nor do they replace the CRB code. They add to it ("Paladins of all faiths have strict moral codes by which they must abide or risk losing their powers: they must protect the innocent, be truthful, respect lawful and just authority, and live with honor at all times. However, paladins of individual faiths live by additional strictures, and draw on specific codes to seal their bonds with their gods— those who violate the codes of their faiths must atone for their deeds or lose their powers." on page 26 of FoP.)
Thankfully, no deity-specific code says that lying is OK (even under very specific circumstances).
The one that skirts the closest to this is Torag's code (quoted above) which states that you can "mislead" others when serving your people. "Mislead", not "Lie". And it also states the Torag's Paladin is ALWAYS truthful, honorable and forthright.
I believe that it is on purpose that no deity-specific code states that lying is OK in some circumstances (ie, would contradict the core code).
Than you and I have very different definitions of both lying and "acting with honor". If I mislead (read: deceive) someone, I'm not being "honorable" by most understood standards (and thus I've broken another part of the core code).
There is no getting around this: Torag's code bends the Core code. In any event, misleading someone is certainly not "forthright" - in fact, misleading someone is exactly the opposite of being forthright.
If you use the definition of "lying" where "misleading" is something entirely different...
* A paladin usually cannot tell a joke: most jokes are predicated on using something that isn't true, ergo they cannot ever tell one.
* A paladin cannot ever recite a made-up story: entertainment, even if it's to get across a core truth or principal, generally is created by enacting fictional elements, not for the purpose of misleading, but distinctly made up of non-truths (aka "lies").
* A paladin cannot sing most songs (ones of their specific religion aside), because most songs revolve around declarations made by the singer either to a non-specified, but strongly implied individual or group of individuals, or the listener. In either case, this would be termed a "lie", even though no one is "mislead" by the Paladin singing.
* A paladin cannot change his mind for any reason. If he vows to kill an evil creature for some crime, and that evil creature eventually becomes a good one, the paladin must subsequently kill a good creature (causing him to fall) or relent and not do so (causing him to fall).
Heck, misleading is a synonym for lying (check the second definition).
Misleading means "to lead or guide wrongly" or "lead astray" or "to lead into error of conduct, thought, or judgment" or "tend to deceive". (Deceive being both related to cheating on one's spouse and synonymous with betrayal - both of which are, I'm sure you'd agree, dishonorable behavior.)
This is not "forthright" or "honest". We have two things here: one, a general rule (the rules for interactions of codes with specific faiths) and one a specific rule (the rules of Torag's faith). They conflict.
In any conflicting rule, the game says to go with the specific over the general.
In general I agree: Paladins can't lie/deceive according to the code. In specific? Torag's paladins can. They shouldn't most of the time, and it's a rare situation, but they're allowed to mislead, which is, in fact, lying (often lying by telling the truth).
mislead and lying are not the same thing. as a matter of fact one can be entirely truthful and misleading at the same time.
Generally one lies to mislead, but they are not, functionally equivalent or the same.
For all those with the " just die honorably " thought. Who says your dying? I'm sure these demons can easily torture you to near death and then patch you back up day in and day out till eternity. They don't have to kill you in fact killing you is too much in your favor, much better to keep your soul bound to your mortal flesh than allow it to go to your Diety's side. And given enough time they will find a way to break you. Maybe fear won't do it but how about insanity, can your mind hold out forever while person after person gets tortured before their eyes all because your wont give one single answer?
For all those with the " just die honorably " thought. Who says your dying? I'm sure these demons can easily torture you to near death and then patch you back up day in and day out till eternity. They don't have to kill you in fact killing you is too much in your favor, much better to keep your soul bound to your mortal flesh than allow it to go to your Diety's side. And given enough time they will find a way to break you. Maybe fear won't do it but how about insanity, can your mind hold out forever while person after person gets tortured before their eyes all because your wont give one single answer?
And you really think they WOULDN'T do the same thing, even after you answered? They're Evil, they would do that anyway, no matter what you did. So you saying anything is just the first chink, a sign that if they keep at it long enough you will fall. A real paladin wouldn't answer anything, he would spend his breath swearing vengeance and justice and praying for those poor people, but never giving evil what they want.
Oh I agree your screwed either way I just want it understood your probably not going to paradise for your heavenly rewards. Nope your staying in hell until old age kills you off.
Oh I agree your screwed either way I just want it understood your probably not going to paradise for your heavenly rewards. Nope your staying in hell until old age kills you off.
(To be clear, if you're actually in Hell or the Abyss, it wouldn't surprise me that they'd have some sort of immortal witch somewhere with the ability to use Forced Reincarnation on you after you aged for a while, thus rebooting you to young adult state. Forever, in all likelihood, until you get bored.)
Alternatively, there's turning you into an undead, too.
Oh I agree your screwed either way I just want it understood your probably not going to paradise for your heavenly rewards. Nope your staying in hell until old age kills you off.(To be clear, if you're actually in Hell or the Abyss, it wouldn't surprise me that they'd have some sort of immortal witch somewhere with the ability to use Forced Reincarnation on you after you aged for a while, thus rebooting you to young adult state. Forever, in all likelihood, until you get bored.)
Alternatively, there's turning you into an undead, too.
Keep praying and hope the next group of adventurers has more luck against the demon, maybe they can free you and you can help kick some demon ass.
At this point you've obviously gone mad with grief, pain and sorrow, but hopefully you've at least gone mad in a good delusional fanatic way instead of a rampaging evil way.
Pretty much, yeah.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue was once explained to me thusly by a pair of theologians:
1. Lying is wrong, even "white lies"
2. Providing false information to someone who has no right to that information and who will not accept silence is not lying.
With that in mind it's not contradictory to say both "a paladin can't lie" and "a paladin can give false information to a demonic torturer or other person demanding information under threat of violence."
Capt. Carrot tells the truth and let's people assume the worst. to badly quote," I really don't want to follow this order I've been given", the order is to not hurt them but the criminal assumes torture.
Of course, I don't think he suspects at all they would take it that way.
Carrot is one of the best knight-in-shining-armour paladins I've seen. That bit's from Men at Arms. After a bit of searching, found a closer paraphrase if not a perfect transcription:
Sam Vimes had just told Carrot that if the Assassins refused to freely allow him into their compound, he was to go away.
Thus Carrot, after politely knocking on the door, informs Dr. Cruces that if he did not let him in, he would be forced to obey his instructions, to the letter.
"What if we resist?"
"That would only make it easier. If it makes you feel better, I would deeply regret it."
this doesn't make sense to me, torturing them and tricking them is a dimlema is EXACTLY how a devil would do it. The Paladin of great faith would choose to say nothing and die there, the weakness would lie or find someway to twist thier code to surivive and fall.But of course your objection really to the GM killing player for a paladin being a paladin and refusing to answer. i personally, i were the GM, if the paladin accepted his fate of death and said nothing, some minor divine intervention would occur that would allow the player a chance to escape. As both a reward for the player living up the standards of his calling , being a paladin, but also because it would make perfect sense that some God of Good(probably Iomadae) would attempt to throw a life perserver to a paladin who kept his/her honor even in the face of certain death.
I know what you mean, but my point is that to deliberately "make a paladin fall" in one scene is too simple. It's too derivative. That NPC demon is (in a sense) metagaming.
Think about it this way: if that devil strapped a druid to a chair, could they make the druid lose their druid powers by (somehow) fooling them into teaching them a single word of the druid language? If you were to watch such a scene play out in a movie, would you think that is was somehow cheap?
What I'm getting-at is the relationship between a paladin and his or her deity is much more complicated and involved than what can be sundered with uttering a single sentence. If a torturer set out to "make a paladin fall" they might only succeed in crushing the paladin's spirits, making them atone (whether they needed to or not) and only strengthening the paladin's resolve.
Oh I agree your screwed either way I just want it understood your probably not going to paradise for your heavenly rewards. Nope your staying in hell until old age kills you off.(To be clear, if you're actually in Hell or the Abyss, it wouldn't surprise me that they'd have some sort of immortal witch somewhere with the ability to use Forced Reincarnation on you after you aged for a while, thus rebooting you to young adult state. Forever, in all likelihood, until you get bored.)
Alternatively, there's turning you into an undead, too.
Alternately there's direct deific intervention. Shouldn't happen very often, of course.
|
|
I once misled some people and I did not have to utter a single lie/false information. I just gave true information worded very specifically to help a misunderstanding on their part and did not say anything to correct said misunderstanding when it occurred.
It was frighteningly easy and something I definitely do not relish, but it is not something I feel really guilty about (because they were not hurt by it in any way).
|
|
The issue was once explained to me thusly by a pair of theologians:
1. Lying is wrong, even "white lies"
2. Providing false information to someone who has no right to that information and who will not accept silence is not lying.
With that in mind it's not contradictory to say both "a paladin can't lie" and "a paladin can give false information to a demonic torturer or other person demanding information under threat of violence."
IMO theologians are very far from the best persons to disambiguate things. After all, they are trained (as are some other professions too, including mine) to be able to explain ANYTHING in a logical and, even more important, acceptable way.
As a reminder, Jesuits did justify telling lies (or more exactly incomplete truths), even after swearing on the Holy Bible, by reasoning that God heard the thoughts as well as the words and that if the whole sentence (words said and words unsaid) was true, then they were not lying in the eyes of God.
Lot of cleverness there. Lot of hypocrisy too IMO. A Paladin who would try this at my table would soon find that his god (me) is NOT amused.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am pretty sure that torture is a fear effect. Paladins are immune to fear. Ergo: you can not break a paladin under torture. You can tempt them, but you can't break them. Barring certain powerful magics.
That's .... Something that I never considered but a pretty cool interpretation. Remove the fear element and the only reason for breaking would be from a selfish sense of self-preservation vs. devotion to the faith. This is a much cleaner scenario where falling could result.
I have to chew on this some, but I like it on 1st glance.
Yep, fearless cannot be broken. You could work off other emotions, but you can't crack them with fear, they aren't actually human in that sense.