Paladin hate.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1,101 to 1,121 of 1,121 << first < prev | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | next > last >>

Marroar Gellantara wrote:
Mavael wrote:

>f I want role-play a paladin how I want, I would also have to enforce my view of right and wrong on the GM.

Can you give an example?

Paladins can never willfully commit an evil act. Doesn't matter how minor. That means if I do anything I think is fine but my GM thinks is evil I fall/have a long discussion about morals that probably ends up with me leaving the table(example in thread. I think it's fine not to listen to hostage takers. Plenty of people don't agree with that and think it is a reckless action to take with the lives of the hostages).

It's true with a new DM you shoudl discuss this ahead ot time.

And just buy a Phylactery. 100% proof vs unintentional fail.


EntrerisShadow wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Lets alter that slightly. Your paladin is recognizably a paladin, and its known in this world paladin's cant lie. Orc orders him to promise to leave, not engage in any hostile actions against them, or tell anyone else about the encampment of orcs and humans.

Actually, that seemed pretty ironclad, but then I realized that the Orc never said leave and don't come back.

Step 1: Leave.

Step 2: Find some Rogues (Lawful, of course!), Rangers, or whatever other sneaky-stealthy types float your boat. Heck, if this is a small settlement in the middle of the woods then a Druid would work with its trackless step. Maybe a Wizard for added Invisibility goodness.

Step 3: Tell them about somebody who needs saving, say that on your honor you cannot divulge all the details - suffice it to say, it'll be dangerous, but it is ultimately for a good cause and you will reward them to the best of your ability. I imagine if there's a good aligned Ranger or Wizard around, they would trust the word of a Paladin.

Step 4: Sneak back in, spirit away a few of the hostages. (They are held illegally so there's no violation of law by taking them.) Bring those hostages to the nearest large city settlement and let them tell the city guard about what's happening.

Heck, even if he did say never come back you could rig a fairly airtight plan without accompanying your associates.

Except you would have lied because you told people about the humans, which he told you not to do. You told someone there were people up there in need of saving. That's breaking your oath not to tell anyone about the encampment of orcs and humans. So you fall, for breaking your promise and telling someone.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:


I'm sorry that an actual example from a game produced by wizards of the coast is a straw man. I'm also sorry that the paladin is not given any lee way in his code is a straw man.

The example isn't a straw man. The paladin Falling is the false part. As we have said he can make offers "Let then go and I'll let you live" He can come back later with more force, and a spellcaster who can put the arrow out. If he tries but the peasants die, then he doesn't fall, but yes, he must try and get revenge.

Let me make that clear- if he tries his best but the orc kills the peasants, the paladin doesn't fall.

Yes, that's a horrible sitrep for a paladin, but it doesn't cause him to fall.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
Mavael wrote:

>f I want role-play a paladin how I want, I would also have to enforce my view of right and wrong on the GM.

Can you give an example?

Paladins can never willfully commit an evil act. Doesn't matter how minor. That means if I do anything I think is fine but my GM thinks is evil I fall/have a long discussion about morals that probably ends up with me leaving the table(example in thread. I think it's fine not to listen to hostage takers. Plenty of people don't agree with that and think it is a reckless action to take with the lives of the hostages).

It's true with a new DM you shoudl discuss this ahead ot time.

And just buy a Phylactery. 100% proof vs unintentional fail.

I object to this on the grounds that tying a box to your head makes you look extremely stupid.


Ashiel wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
Marroar Gellantara wrote:
Mavael wrote:

>f I want role-play a paladin how I want, I would also have to enforce my view of right and wrong on the GM.

Can you give an example?

Paladins can never willfully commit an evil act. Doesn't matter how minor. That means if I do anything I think is fine but my GM thinks is evil I fall/have a long discussion about morals that probably ends up with me leaving the table(example in thread. I think it's fine not to listen to hostage takers. Plenty of people don't agree with that and think it is a reckless action to take with the lives of the hostages).
If the paladin doesn't know its an evil act, then they aren't willfully committing an evil act. Willfully committing implies that you know its evil but do it anyway.
You're thinking of "knowingly". Willfully merely implies agency.
No. I know exactly what I am saying, if you don't knowingly kill someone, you may be guilty of something, but it isn't murder. If you don't know its outcomes are going to be evil, then you are not willingly doing an evil act; you are not choosing to do something evil in full knowledge that is what you are doing.

You did choose to do the act that happened to be evil. You willfully did the act. You did not willfully commit evil, but the act you did do was evil. Therefore you willfully commited an evil act even though you did not willfuly commit evil.

The paladin's code has little to do with actual morality or alignment. That is one of its problems.

Except for the fact that the paladins code as a whole entity doesn't exist.

All that exists is a broad summary of things it contains.
Bad rules are bad.

Not trimming your replies- is bad.


DrDeth wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:


I'm sorry that an actual example from a game produced by wizards of the coast is a straw man. I'm also sorry that the paladin is not given any lee way in his code is a straw man.

The example isn't a straw man. The paladin Falling is the false part. As we have said he can make offers "Let then go and I'll let you live" He can come back later with more force, and a spellcaster who can put the arrow out. If he tries but the peasants die, then he doesn't fall, but yes, he must try and get revenge.

Let me make that clear- if he tries his best but the orc kills the peasants, the paladin doesn't fall.

Yes, that's a horrible sitrep for a paladin, but it doesn't cause him to fall.

Except if he leaves now without making the promise then they die when its completely within his power to stop it and if he comes back later and attacks after making the promise then he lied.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or, as I'd say, if you are playing with a gm who would make a paladin fall for some of these situation - even MOST of these situations, you wouldn't want to play with him or her for a whole host of other reasons anyway, quite outside of how he(or she) deals with paladins.


Ashiel wrote:

I didn't say the system was fatally broken. In fact, I said I like Paladins. I've been GMing for a great Paladin for quite a while. However, a large part of the reason the game has been going so smoothly is because I threw out all the mechanics for the code and such, because they don't work unless you don't follow them.

So then, you have no idea whether or not the RAW code actually cause issues as you don't play with the RAW, but then you blithely dismiss our IRL gaming experiences where we say the RAW does not cause issues at our tables?

At our tables, and apparently at the Devs own tables, the RAW code does not cause issues.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
EntrerisShadow wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Lets alter that slightly. Your paladin is recognizably a paladin, and its known in this world paladin's cant lie. Orc orders him to promise to leave, not engage in any hostile actions against them, or tell anyone else about the encampment of orcs and humans.

Actually, that seemed pretty ironclad, but then I realized that the Orc never said leave and don't come back.

Step 1: Leave.

Step 2: Find some Rogues (Lawful, of course!), Rangers, or whatever other sneaky-stealthy types float your boat. Heck, if this is a small settlement in the middle of the woods then a Druid would work with its trackless step. Maybe a Wizard for added Invisibility goodness.

Step 3: Tell them about somebody who needs saving, say that on your honor you cannot divulge all the details - suffice it to say, it'll be dangerous, but it is ultimately for a good cause and you will reward them to the best of your ability. I imagine if there's a good aligned Ranger or Wizard around, they would trust the word of a Paladin.

Step 4: Sneak back in, spirit away a few of the hostages. (They are held illegally so there's no violation of law by taking them.) Bring those hostages to the nearest large city settlement and let them tell the city guard about what's happening.

Heck, even if he did say never come back you could rig a fairly airtight plan without accompanying your associates.

Except you would have lied because you told people about the humans, which he told you not to do. You told someone there were people up there in need of saving. That's breaking your oath not to tell anyone about the encampment of orcs and humans. So you fall, for breaking your promise and telling someone.

Why do you make that oath? Just leave.

And, actually you can lie to evil in the cause of greater good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:


Except if he leaves now without making the promise then they die when its completely within his power to stop it and if he comes back later and attacks after making the promise then he lied.

It's not within his power. It's the orc's choice, not the paladins.

And since the orc is clearly crazy and evil, there's no saying the the orc won;t kill them anyway.

Look "Do something evil or I kill this puppy" doesn't make a Paladin fall, it never has.


DrDeth wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


Also, where is this messageboard population you're talking about?

That's you all really, because the vast majority of the problems people scream about as "OMG system is fatally broken! must FAQ NOW!!!!" are mostly issues that I don't see as relevant in the hundreds of PFS tables that I've run, nor is it echoed to any significant extent to the Pathfinder community I know in New Jersey, New York City, nor eastern Pennsylvania. I've come to the conclusion that the Paizo message board represents a distinct and separate population of gamers from any other group that I've had familiarity with since the late '70's.

When you encounter more people who have a greater level of system mastery, ... It's not like I spawned an account with knowledge of stuff like Paragon Surge in my head. I had to learn about it, break down how it could be used and apply that.

Anzyr- again with the argument that you are a super special "Systems master" and the person you are replying to is not, thus your replies are right and his are wrong? Really?

No, I honestly consider myself average at best. If I had a redeeming point to my averageness, its that I read about and then incorporate a lot of great ideas on here (Like False Focus + Holy Symbol tattoo) that I would not have known about had it not been for someone posting it on the boards. The difference I think between us DrDeth is that you have tendency to dismiss interesting options as "cheese" or "theorycraft", while I make note of new and excellent combinations. Your path is similar to the path of the fighting game player who refuses to learn how to defend against throws and calls them "cheap" and gets upset at anyone who uses them. My path is the that of the fighting game player who masters the glitches in the game so they can wavedash. Because I chose to be the guy who can compete. And let me tell you DrDeth once you hit the point where you *can* compete it becomes impossible to *not* notice the flaws in system (ie. Metaknight).

I think the real question here is... can you wavedash? (or rather it's analog in Pathfinder?) Because if you can't wavedash, how much about the highest level play can one really talk about? You can talk about casual play all you want, but in a competition, the casual player will suffer for their lack of wavedashing knowledge and then get upset when they are ledge guarded.

This extended Super Smash Bros metaphor (which mixes Brawl and Melee stuff) is brought to you by Hype.


RDM42 wrote:
Or, as I'd say, if you are playing with a gm who would make a paladin fall for some of these situation - even MOST of these situations, you wouldn't want to play with him or her for a whole host of other reasons anyway, quite outside of how he(or she) deals with paladins.

No not really. The code is so iron-clad that minor infractions of evil and dishonor cause you to fall. There are plenty of GMs I would play under who don't agree with my sense of honor or morality.

The problem with the code is that you either have to hand wave it or subject one of your players to your own ethical values.

Grand Lodge

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
EntrerisShadow wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Lets alter that slightly. Your paladin is recognizably a paladin, and its known in this world paladin's cant lie. Orc orders him to promise to leave, not engage in any hostile actions against them, or tell anyone else about the encampment of orcs and humans.

Actually, that seemed pretty ironclad, but then I realized that the Orc never said leave and don't come back.

Step 1: Leave.

Step 2: Find some Rogues (Lawful, of course!), Rangers, or whatever other sneaky-stealthy types float your boat. Heck, if this is a small settlement in the middle of the woods then a Druid would work with its trackless step. Maybe a Wizard for added Invisibility goodness.

Step 3: Tell them about somebody who needs saving, say that on your honor you cannot divulge all the details - suffice it to say, it'll be dangerous, but it is ultimately for a good cause and you will reward them to the best of your ability. I imagine if there's a good aligned Ranger or Wizard around, they would trust the word of a Paladin.

Step 4: Sneak back in, spirit away a few of the hostages. (They are held illegally so there's no violation of law by taking them.) Bring those hostages to the nearest large city settlement and let them tell the city guard about what's happening.

Heck, even if he did say never come back you could rig a fairly airtight plan without accompanying your associates.

Except you would have lied because you told people about the humans, which he told you not to do. You told someone there were people up there in need of saving. That's breaking your oath not to tell anyone about the encampment of orcs and humans. So you fall, for breaking your promise and telling someone.

I realize I'm getting pedantic here, but the orc specifically stated do not tell anyone of this encampment, then clarifies he means the encampment consisting of these orcs and their human subjects. The encampment is the object of that sentence to be acted upon. I only said somebody needs saving at a certain location - I did not say anything about an encampment.


Still not understanding how the Paladin could leave those people in the care of Orcs and not fall. The orcs only said they wouldn't kill anyone. The paladin has no idea if that is true. Even if you get around the lying bit, you are not protecting the innocent and should fall.

You can convince the orcs to leave, convince them to release the prisoners, or attack the orcs. None of those result in falling, even if the orcs kill people. Because the actions of others does not make the paladin fall(sans mind control). The code is broken, but not that broken.


Marroar Gellantara wrote:

Still not understanding how the Paladin could leave those people in the care of Orcs and not fall. The orcs only said they wouldn't kill anyone. The paladin has no idea if that is true. Even if you get around the lying bit, you are not protecting the innocent and should fall.

You can convince the orcs to leave, convince them to release the prisoners, or attack the orcs. None of those result in falling, even if the orcs kill people. Because the actions of others does not make the paladin fall(sans mind control). The code is broken, but not that broken.

Protecting Innocents isn't part of the code.

Seriously, where are you reading that.

The code only asks that you later kill the ones harming the innocents.

Next, define innocent: Are we just saving children? Can the people even prove they are innocent outside of the children.
Because not all women are innocent (some fight too) so it can't be the women.

Are you defining it as non-combatants?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I didn't say the system was fatally broken. In fact, I said I like Paladins. I've been GMing for a great Paladin for quite a while. However, a large part of the reason the game has been going so smoothly is because I threw out all the mechanics for the code and such, because they don't work unless you don't follow them.

So then, you have no idea whether or not the RAW code actually cause issues as you don't play with the RAW, but then you blithely dismiss our IRL gaming experiences where we say the RAW does not cause issues at our tables?

At our tables, and apparently at the Devs own tables, the RAW code does not cause issues.

Oh divinity, give me the patience! (>.<)

Let me break this down to be really simple.
1. The Paladin repeatedly broke his code, but never in a way that should make a Paladin fall.
2. I repeatedly ignored the code because to follow the rules in this case would have only caused problems and would have resulted in asinine stupidity.

Ergo, the rule was thrown out/ignored, because it led to stupid places. That is a bad rule. I never said I threw the rules out before, and even if I did, it doesn't take much to see where he would have fallen because the definition of those rules is no less unavailable than originally even if those rules are not in play because they are dumb.


Ashiel wrote:


.
1. The Paladin repeatedly broke his code, but never in a way that should make a Paladin fall.

We agree the Paladin should not have fallen, we do not agree he broke the Code by RAW.

Webstore Gninja Minion

This discussion is going in circles, and people are getting to the point of not listening to each other. Locking thread.

1,101 to 1,121 of 1,121 << first < prev | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Paladin hate. All Messageboards