Three Laws of Android Paladins
1. An android paladin may not injure an innocent or, through inaction, allow an innocent being to come to harm.
2. An android paladin must obey the orders given to it by legitimate authority, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. An android paladin must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Lol, you know, this whole deal concerning emotionless got me thinking about, from a Star Trek standpoint, a Vulcan Paladin. It seems from reading through this thread that if you could envision a Vulcan as a Paladin, then so too could you have an Android Paladin. On the other hand, if it's a question of does a Paladin gain his abilities based on the purity of his "soul", then the Android as a Paladin might be a problem. Just food for thought.
I was never quite clear on whether Vulcans were entirely emotionless or whether they were trained from a young age to subsume their emotions and speak only with logic.
Because they say Spock only has emotions because of his human side I believe, but then they'll turn around and say stuff like "I'm concerned for your future." or something, which seems kind of mildly emotional.
Three Laws of Android Paladins
1. An android paladin may not injure an innocent or, through inaction, allow an innocent being to come to harm.
2. An android paladin must obey the orders given to it by legitimate authority, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. An android paladin must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
4. **C L A S S I F I E D**
Murphy, it's YOU!
|
Lol, you know, this whole deal concerning emotionless got me thinking about, from a Star Trek standpoint, a Vulcan Paladin. It seems from reading through this thread that if you could envision a Vulcan as a Paladin, then so too could you have an Android Paladin. On the other hand, if it's a question of does a Paladin gain his abilities based on the purity of his "soul", then the Android as a Paladin might be a problem. Just food for thought.I was never quite clear on whether Vulcans were entirely emotionless or whether they were trained from a young age to subsume their emotions and speak only with logic.
Because they say Spock only has emotions because of his human side I believe, but then they'll turn around and say stuff like "I'm concerned for your future." or something, which seems kind of mildly emotional.
Vulcans have emotions, just like any other race in the Star trek universe. The main difference is that they have trained themselves through the Kolinar ritual to deeply suppress them. The Vulcans of thousands of years ago used to be extremely emotional and it almost destroyed them through war.
Why is it so hard to believe that an android could be l good? Could they be l evil? I once had a character named War; he was once a man but gained immortality and in the process actually assumed the persona of one of the four horsemen of the apocolypse. He systematically and logically proved over and over again that, in war, good was a failure and therefore evil was strongest. My GM allowed him to be l evil and I played him as coldly logical as I could think.
Ok, so that was off topic. We're talking androids. Their entry says they're devoid of emotions, but says nothing about alignment restriction. The "emotionless" entry in character creation only states that they suck at Sense Motive.
So then I ask you, forum community: where does it say they CAN'T be paladins? Is there something in the paladin entry that states "if emotionless then cannot be paladin" or "if PC race suffers -4 penalty to sense motive then paladin levels cannot be achieved?"
If not...then android paladin. Y'know how I figure that? Logic.
I feel I should apologize for being a Smarmy McSmarmington here. Not my intention; I just feel like a lot of this is based on, well, emotion. That seemed ironic to me, thus the post. Again, no offense meant.
|
|
You're fine Mark, at the end of the day, if a GM wants to introduce an Android Paladin into the game, he/she can. I believe someone mentioned Data from Star Trek earlier and i could see him as a Paladin because from my perspective, Android or not, Data has exceeded the sum of his original programming, he is more than just an Android.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember logic follows from a set of assumptions. A LG android paladin would just have a set of assumptions that lead it to behave in a certain fashion. Claiming this behavior is not valid because it is just acting the way it was created, would mean that LG outsiders would be under the same claim of invalid goodness (being created from the stuff of the planes they are from).
Funny; the whole spate of "can my paladin do this/that/etc" threads always reminded me of the Asimov robot stories, wherein the robots all had to follow the three laws of robotics, being....
1 A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2 A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3 A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
" Many of Asimov's robot-focused stories involve robots behaving in unusual and counter-intuitive ways as an unintended consequence of how the robot applies the Three Laws to the situation in which it finds itself."
from Wikipedia;....
They probably started android alignment threads about it too, to work logically through the ethical dilemmas posed by real life.
I think an android paladin would be specifically programmed with a set of commandments that it had to follow; how it interpreted the commandments would be the kicker.
Remember logic follows from a set of assumptions. A LG android paladin would just have a set of assumptions that lead it to behave in a certain fashion. Claiming this behavior is not valid because it is just acting the way it was created, would mean that LG outsiders would be under the same claim of invalid goodness (being created from the stuff of the planes they are from).
TBH that's a pretty solid claim.
Can you really be "good" without the free will to choose?
Remember logic follows from a set of assumptions. A LG android paladin would just have a set of assumptions that lead it to behave in a certain fashion. Claiming this behavior is not valid because it is just acting the way it was created, would mean that LG outsiders would be under the same claim of invalid goodness (being created from the stuff of the planes they are from).TBH that's a pretty solid claim.
Can you really be "good" without the free will to choose?
Can good people choose to be otherwise?
Can good people choose to be otherwise?
Good people do it all the time.
|
|
Remember logic follows from a set of assumptions. A LG android paladin would just have a set of assumptions that lead it to behave in a certain fashion. Claiming this behavior is not valid because it is just acting the way it was created, would mean that LG outsiders would be under the same claim of invalid goodness (being created from the stuff of the planes they are from).TBH that's a pretty solid claim.
Can you really be "good" without the free will to choose?
No.
If all someone is doing is following the rules of good with no choice in the matter whatsoever, that's programming, and not viable for a class who shows compassion to his enemies because he "feels" it's the right thing to do and not General Order #5.
Artegal et Talus
Which one of these are you referencing?
And I see nothing denying an Android free will or some form of Emotion.
I would say they are like the Vulcan in that some/most of them can't process standard human emotions.
No.
If all someone is doing is following the rules of good with no choice in the matter whatsoever, that's programming, and not viable for a class who shows compassion to his enemies because he "feels" it's the right thing to do and not General Order #5.
Agreed.
But in the interest of fairness, while the ability IS called "Emotionless" the text just says they have problems processing emotions, which manifests itself as a -4 Sense Motive.
So if I were to make a ruling I would actually say that at worst these Androids have stunted emotions (they think logically most of the time, only feel the POWERFUL emotions, anger, love, hatred, happiness, but not mild emotions like distaste) and at most they have a full range of emotions, but have very little EMPATHY (so they don't understand other people's emotions, which fits with a penalty to Sense Motive).
|
|
No.
If all someone is doing is following the rules of good with no choice in the matter whatsoever, that's programming, and not viable for a class who shows compassion to his enemies because he "feels" it's the right thing to do and not General Order #5.
Agreed.
But in the interest of fairness, while the ability IS called "Emotionless" the text just says they have problems processing emotions, which manifests itself as a -4 Sense Motive.
So if I were to make a ruling I would actually say that at worst these Androids have stunted emotions (they think logically most of the time, only feel the POWERFUL emotions, anger, love, hatred, happiness, but not mild emotions like distaste) and at most they have a full range of emotions, but have very little EMPATHY (so they don't understand other people's emotions, which fits with a penalty to Sense Motive).
Like i said, at the end of the day, it's up to the GM. I'm not opposed to the concept of an Android Paladin, but i would be cautious of the very little EMPATHY which is generally part and parcel with Paladins.
Android:
Paladin loses their Aura Bonuses.
Bards can't get their Bonuses.
Barbarians actually only get partial benefits.
Cavaliers/Samurai lose their Banner Bonus.
Inquisitors lose Stern Gaze.
And that is just what I found under the main class sections searching for Morale Bonuses.
|
|
Android:
Paladin loses their Aura Bonuses.
Bards can't get their Bonuses.
Barbarians actually only get partial benefits.
Cavaliers/Samurai lose their Banner Bonus.
Inquisitors lose Stern Gaze.
And that is just what I found under the main class sections searching for Morale Bonuses.
Yea, i see an Android Paladin as more of an RP challenge/opportunity than one focused on mechanics, no pun intended.
In fact, the Android character would start as something other than a Paladin who quests with others, who through example, show our friend what good really represents. After a period of time we can have our Android finish a certain quest chain that allows him to achieve that "spark" of humanity and finally realize his/her dream of being inducted into a Paladin Order.
One of the Major Bonuses comes from Morale. At least the ones I normally see used constantly.
|
|
Good and Evil can only be determined by having a choice in the matter. If you mean an AI android then I could see an argument made for such a thing. But if you mean the programmed to enforce certain rules completely to the letter without any personal choice in the matter then no they shouldn't be allowed to be Paladins.By that logic, good and evil magic items shouldn't exist because they don't have a choice.
But good and evil magic items are not petitioning to be Paladins either if i'm following your statement correctly. Again, it all boils down to a GM call. I think it could be an interesting RP challenge/opportunity as i stated earlier.
really it all boils down to R.A.W. has made it to where they lose one of the biggest bonus types out there. I mean an Entire Class's Key Feature is effectively negated by them.
|
|
really it all boils down to R.A.W. has made it to where they lose one of the biggest bonus types out there. I mean an Entire Class's Key Feature is effectively negated by them.
Fair enough, i understand the concern. The whole thing really just falls into whether the GM wants to allow it and also if the player understands that there will be some significant challenges associated with it.
|
You might, but it doesn't detract from the logic of the position.This conversation is attributed to Albert Einstein (the student).Falsely, I might add.
So long as we are honest about whose position it is and isn't, we can let it stand on its own merits.
So long as we are honest about whose position it is and isn't, we can let it stand on its own merits.You might, but it doesn't detract from the logic of the position.This conversation is attributed to Albert Einstein (the student).Falsely, I might add.
Pretty sure it was Mark Twain.
Pretty sure it was Mark Twain.So long as we are honest about whose position it is and isn't, we can let it stand on its own merits.You might, but it doesn't detract from the logic of the position.This conversation is attributed to Albert Einstein (the student).Falsely, I might add.
I've read Mark Twain, he was never a student. ;)
“I believe it was Noel Coward who said: 'I believe it was George Bernard Shaw who said: I believe it was Oscar Wilde who said: 'I believe it was Noel Coward who said:....”
~ Oscar Wilde
"Bill Gates is so much like Winston Churchill, he makes Kaiser Wilhelm look like Oscar Wilde."
Mark Twain
It actually is just a Folk Tale. It has no proven speaker in real life.
On-Topic: I personally will be in my Homebrew campaigns be allowing Androids/Contructed Races to benefit from Morale Bonuses from themselves. But they also suffer the penalties as well.
So their own Bard and Barbarian bonuses benefit themselves.
Though in my games Androids and the other Constructed are made by the Artifice Vestige and its followers. They will also be a fairly more common race than on Golarion.
Did you realize that an android barbarian can ragecycle from level 1?It actually is just a Folk Tale. It has no proven speaker in real life.
On-Topic: I personally will be in my Homebrew campaigns be allowing Androids/Contructed Races to benefit from Morale Bonuses from themselves.
So their own Bard and Barbarian bonuses benefit themselves.
Though in my games Androids and the other Constructed are made by the Artifice Vestige and its followers. They will also be a fairly more common race than on Golarion.
You must of posted this when I went back to edit it.
@Terquem: I was meaning which Language etc.
Meh, 4 levels of martial artist does the same thing. There are many ways to get immunity to fatigue. Also, would a barbarian even want to rage cycle at level 1? They have no benefits.
With the question of 'freewill' and faith, I must say, whether anyone has freewill has been a question for philosophers throughout history. Are we merely a god's puppets? Are we just Pavlovian models shaped by our raising? Are we just a collection of chemical processes dictated by our genes and physical condition? How different is any of this from a mere automaton?
Voice 1: "I am not insane. I am not insane."
Voice 2: "What are you talking about of course we are."
Voice 3: "The question is: Is he insane himself or not."
Voice 2: "I AM A ROBOT!"
Voice 1: "Gah! Wait... What!?"
Needless to say I don't suffer from insanity I enjoy every second of it.
In my opinion, it is the acts and motivations behind those acts that people do that dictate good or evil, not their thoughts. Just my opinion. If the android has free will to choose their actions and do them purposefully (indicating a motivating force), then they can choose to be either good or evil. Emotions don't have to come into making a decision to act. In fact, emotions can get in the way of doing the "right" thing. Just my two cents. As a GM, I would welcome a player who wanted to try to role play an android paladin. The storytelling could be awesome.
Lol, you know, this whole deal concerning emotionless got me thinking about, from a Star Trek standpoint, a Vulcan Paladin. It seems from reading through this thread that if you could envision a Vulcan as a Paladin, then so too could you have an Android Paladin. On the other hand, if it's a question of does a Paladin gain his abilities based on the purity of his "soul", then the Android as a Paladin might be a problem. Just food for thought.
Vulcans have emotions. Androids appear to have none.
Did you realize that an android barbarian can ragecycle from level 1?
Did you realize that the bonuses to Strength, Constitution, and Will saves were all morale bonuses, and thus the android gets no benefit from rage cycling except for a few rage powers and a -2 AC?
Lol, you know, this whole deal concerning emotionless got me thinking about, from a Star Trek standpoint, a Vulcan Paladin. It seems from reading through this thread that if you could envision a Vulcan as a Paladin, then so too could you have an Android Paladin. On the other hand, if it's a question of does a Paladin gain his abilities based on the purity of his "soul", then the Android as a Paladin might be a problem. Just food for thought.Vulcans have emotions. Androids appear to have none.
Did you realize that an android barbarian can ragecycle from level 1?Did you realize that the bonuses to Strength, Constitution, and Will saves were all morale bonuses, and thus the android gets no benefit from rage cycling except for a few rage powers and a -2 AC?
He was talking about my houserule. And Android apparently are like Data they aren't sure about Human emotions. They might have the capability but not the knowledge of feeling the Emotions.
Think Robocop. He was for the most part programmed to do X when Y happened with his Human consciousness handling any unexpected situations and interpersonal interaction.
Androids don't have the Human Mind and aren't used to Human culture. At least not in the Golarion Setting.
|
The Bestiary entry does not say that Androids do not have emotions. It states that they have the racial trait Emotionless which means that they have a -4 penalty on Sense Motive checks. AND THAT IS ALL IT DOES !!!
Trying to read anything else in Emotionless is RAI pure and simple.
Forbidding a Android Paladin character is most definitely a houserule, as the Bestiary entry would mention any such forbidden class (and there is none).
all i have to say about this is" Robocop.
gratned he was a cyborg and not an android, but still the same idea...a machine what upholds the law.
Single minded law machine? Bam. May have some trouble with gray areas, though.
Granted, I'd probably play that more as an Inquisitor, but not everyone plays the same paladin.
Can you have a L Neutral paladin? Raven hair there helped make the point of my smarminating earlier in the thread; it merely says Emotionless puts a penalty on Sense Motive; it doesn't restrict alignment.
Maybe the android just needs to be taught HOW to love. Barbarella, you're up...
|
|
Another vote here that Emotionless is being taken too literally. I'd say they can experience emotion, empathy, and whatnot, but they feel them very differently from their organic counterparts. Like "Blue and Orange" emotions, along the lines of "Blue and Orange Morality".
Also, regarding android-specific paladin codes:
1. "Serve the public trust"
2. "Protect the innocent"
3. "Uphold the law"