|
mmmm interesting...
personally as GM I ignore it completely and let the player do what he does. His character, whatever.
What I tend to see more often is players of Paladins using their code to commit atrocities and slaughter villages of evil monsters (women and children... they are all evil after all)... Detect Evil find a ping and kill him, even if he was a just a greedy shopkeeper, he pinged evil and had to die. Never an ounce of mercy shown. In fact I have never seen a Paladin even once offer mercy (unless a quick death is considered mercy).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But any lie is breaking the code. It isn't a interpretation thing as it says no lying. So he fell so hard the crator was the size of australia for those whire lies.
Nor would I consider a white lie always grounds for one either if it was done to keep someone from needless suffering. Telling the Chr 8 Lady of the Manor that she is most beautiful is a white lie, but does no harm. Or the child that has been badly burned on her face. if he acts with honor doing it I don't have an issue doing it and I have my paladins follow 1E codes of conduct!
And here's where we have a perfect example of how strict adherence to RAW causes some mind boggling departures from common sense.
Thanks Starbuck.
cf. Gawain and the Green Knight, most Samurai stories.
Honor is not a common sense thing. That is why we ditched honor in the modern period, it's dumb as s%$# (from a real world perspective; can be awesome in storytelling).
Super strict honor should contradict common sense.
Edit: Honor, in general, should contradict common sense. Evil villain dangling off the cliff? Help him up and then fight him.
mmmm interesting...
personally as GM I ignore it completely and let the player do what he does. His character, whatever.
What I tend to see more often is players of Paladins using their code to commit atrocities and slaughter villages of evil monsters (women and children... they are all evil after all)... Detect Evil find a ping and kill him, even if he was a just a greedy shopkeeper, he pinged evil and had to die. Never an ounce of mercy shown. In fact I have never seen a Paladin even once offer mercy (unless a quick death is considered mercy).
And theeere's the opposite end of the "Why people hate Paladins" spectrum, which is just as much of an issue, sadly (though I see it less).
@Whale, I disagree. honor is just a synonym for integrity, and in my opinion a person with great integrity would not offend someone just because telling a lie is supposedly wrong.
@Whale, I disagree. honor is just a synonym for integrity, and in my opinion a person with great integrity would not offend someone just because telling a lie is supposedly wrong.
I think, then, you are ignoring the literature that the Paladin is based on.
Integrity should also not be equated with honor. You can have integrity without honor (a spy who cheats, scams, lies for a greater good is an example of this). Honor has a double meaning, one of which is usually lost in D&D (this meaning being something like 'worthy of respect'). In D&D, it is supposed to mean something like what is meant by 'honorable conduct' which is essentially what the paladin code is.
And you can be worthy of respect even while telling harmless (or even helpful) lies. In fact, someone who tells the truth all the time can still be considered unworthy of respect failry easily, if they use that truth to harm (by ignoring social mores).
And yes, I'm ignoring the literature the Paladin was based on, as this game has its own canon, and many mythological beings work differently than they do in other works.
|
mmmm interesting...
personally as GM I ignore it completely and let the player do what he does. His character, whatever.
What I tend to see more often is players of Paladins using their code to commit atrocities and slaughter villages of evil monsters (women and children... they are all evil after all)... Detect Evil find a ping and kill him, even if he was a just a greedy shopkeeper, he pinged evil and had to die. Never an ounce of mercy shown. In fact I have never seen a Paladin even once offer mercy (unless a quick death is considered mercy).
Yeesh. Yeah, those. You'd think some folks were getting their notions about Lawful Good from Warhammer 40k. At best.
My current barbarian is better at paladining than those guys.
But... but... if a child pings as evil that means they either have 5 or more HD and are evil, are undead, are an evil outsider, are the cleric of an evil god, or - by DM fiat - super evil for some plot reason (someone destined to destroy Mount Celestia or some such).
If someone pings as evil a Paladin should deal with them. Doesn't mean slaughter them, but it does mean interaction with the paladin and possible violence.
DMs with paladins in their game need to know how detect evil works, too many people just assume what it does based on the name and put little thought into it. "Oh yeah, orcs are evil so this guy dings as evil" is not how it works.
Contributor
|
Well, if we are bringing Gawain into this, we ought to keep in mind that he was sworn to be courteous (and was consistently so, until the Post-Vulgate was written).
Based on his respect for the apparently hideous Dame Ragnell, I don't doubt he would have been flummoxed by this.
He clearly states that as a knight, his honour demands that he treat his wife (and any woman) as beautiful, and hence adjusts his concept of beauty to be more courteous. But notions of beauty are far more subjective in terms of truth that rules of courtesy and politeness. Hence to be both true and just, Gawain simply has to acknowledge that beauty is not superficial.
|
I'm sorta confused. I thought I was fairly strict with paladins, but I've never even heard of causing a fall for something like a "little white lie."
RAW says: "A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."
Those paragraphs are separated for a reason: the first paragraph describes how a paladin falls -- losing the LG alignment in general, or committing even a single evil act. The second paragraph explains the paladin's code (what he or she must adhere to if possible): breaking the code a single time doesn't cause a fall. Breaking it more than very seldom would definitely cause a fall (if nothing else, it would reflect a shift from LG), but I'm not sure why -- when how a paladin falls is so explicitly laid out in the first paragraph, people are reading it into the second paragraph.
Man, if I ran into a GM like that, I'd be out the door crazy-quick, and I'm pretty sympathetic to GMs.
Below is the in-character Paladin's Code I created for the paladin in my Greyhawk game. I'm not super-familiar with Sarenrae, but I'm guessing it could be used pretty much as-is for her.
The following edicts and observations, gathered and
compiled by the most knowledgeable theologians in
Pelor's service, comprise the code by which Pelor's
paladins must live by to maintain their status. These
are from about four primary sources -- religious texts
and transcriptions.
Note that because Pelor is a Neutral Good deity, His
code differs substantially from that of a God of
Valor, such as Heironeous, and even more so from a God
of Retribution, like St. Cuthbert.
In no particular order:
* "Do not suffer evil to thrive."
* "Evil associates with evil, as lowly things under
rocks, and likewise squirm in the warm glow of the
Sun."
(The interpretation of this passage is that paladins
are strictly forbidden to maintain evil companions.)
* "Obey just laws."
* "Promote just laws wheresoever thou goest, and
likewise speak boldly against the unjust."
* "The Sun is warm gold and the Moon is lustrous
silver. Are not both beautiful and worthy? But when
both hang in the sky, doth the Sun not outshine His
sister?"
(This passage is interpreted to mean that where Good
and Law -- even just Law -- conflict, Good must be
held higher.)
* "Offenders, be they redeemable, treat with as thou
wouldst thy brother; but do not suffer the
irredeemable to live."
(I'm considering a house rule that only irredeemably
evil creatures ping for a Peloric paladin, but
infallibly so.)
* "Of all the Sun-like qualities in mortals, Mercy and
Compassion are those most beloved of Pelor."
* "Cowardice is to be despised in ourselves, second
only to the wasting of a good life."
(This passage means that paladins need not throw their
lives away, even to combat evil. But note that likely
death, or even CERTAIN death, is not necessarily
"wasting a life." Martyrs are fairly common in Pelor
worship.)
* "Pelor does not shine in ambush behind dark clouds."
(This aphorism has been interpreted to mean that a
Paladin of Pelor must behave honorably in life and in
battle. In truth, only truly questionable tactics --
or those "dishonorable" tactics that become relied
upon or habitual -- seem to earn Pelor's disapproval.
As above, Pelor places more emphasis on Good than upon
manifestations of Law such as "honor.")
* Undeath is an abomination to be purified beneath the
Sun."
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Not lying" is found as an example of acting with honour under the code.
Honour includes acting courteously. I'm not arguing that Gawain (in my example) is making a white lie. He honestly believes or strives to believe that beauty is not a superficial concept, as part of his dedication to courtesy.
A white lie of telling the burned girl that she is beautiful is not a white lie if one consciously embraces the idea that beauty is a holistic concept, including one's character and goodness. Believing in such a concept is a part of being "good."
Thus the "white lie" is only one if the person saying it doesn't believe it. If the same girl asked our paladin if people were frightened of her, he would be obliged to answer truthfully, but also to assist her in confronting the feelings that unjust prejudices or superficial judgments spark in us.
It's kind of like being a caring teacher or loving parent. Kindness is a type of truth as well.
My bringing up Gawain was in reference to Gawain and the Green Knight (it was him and not Galahad, right?).
He keeps his word despite the fact it will kill him for no good reason AND he feels terrible when he breaks his word on a very small matter. This seems to me to be the type of people Palidans are supposed to be.
(havent read it in a while and on phone, sorry if I'm unclear)
Jeff, look under Ex-Paladin
"A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features "
It doesn't say "repeatedly violate the paladin code". If he ever violates it, by raw, he loses his powers.
Edit: forgive typos, on phone
Exactly. It is a code of conduct and not a list of suggestions. That being said, I don't see anything wrong with violating the code and then attonening as long as there was a good reason for the breach and it is not a standard pattern of behoove for the paladin. Alternatively, breaching the code for no good reason but the feeling remorse for it and attonening for it is also fine (I'll call this lanceloting). Both open up good storytelling g opportunities.That being said, I think a lot of the issues around the paladin code come up from a combination of PC power gaming and DMs with a DN vs party attitude. If all participants are into fun stories, the padin can provide many (I had a paladin who choose his friends over his code; that was boss).
|
Contributor
|
My bringing up Gawain was in reference to Gawain and the Green Knight (it was him and not Galahad, right?).
He keeps his word despite the fact it will kill him for no good reason AND he feels terrible when he breaks his word on a very small matter. This seems to me to be the type of people Palidans are supposed to be.
(havent read it in a while and on phone, sorry if I'm unclear)
Yes, you're correct. It's Gawain. (Lancelot has the same adventure, the beheading test, in Perlesvaus). Originally, this was a test of honour in as much as the person had to face death through keeping their word. In every example, however, they aren't actually killed, since their honour provides plot armour against that.
However, the beheading test is actually pre-Arthurian, since it appears in the Irish Feast of Bricriu. The man obliged to return and be beheaded is there Cu Chulainn, who is a pretty much perfect example of a Barbarian (including the Rage abilities), except for his intense sense of honour, which really makes him Lawful. This would ordinarily make him lose his class abilities... I mean, dangerous adherence to rules is pretty much the opposite of being Chaotic, right...?|
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
I'm of the belief that the things outside the brackets are the code. If the paladin violates these he loses his powers until he atones. I believe the things inside the brackets are not 'the code', they are examples of what a paladin's code can include, whilst other examples may be included in specific codes.
With this in mind:-
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honour, help those in need, and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Then each religion creates a more specific code that includes these things, but decides on it's own specifics. The specifics of:-
• Legitimate Authority• Honour
• 'In need'
• Punishment
• Harming or Threatening Innocents
There will be many similarity between different codes, but there will be differences also.
In real life, major religions have hundreds of thousands of volumes dedicated to minutiae when it comes to moral questions, helping it's adherents navigate the hazards of baby goblins, baby hitlers and babies in the attic. It is absurd to believe that any paladin would only have this one Infamous Paragraph to help him make judgements!
We cannot expect the CRB to print 20,000 extra pages as a representative fraction of the available advice for each religion, but in our game worlds each major religion would have a body of work helping it's members live their lives according to the precepts of that particular religion.
In a world with orders of paladins, they have a vested interest in helping paladins deal with complex situations without falling. They know that evil creatures have a vested interest in making them fall, and won't make it easy for the baddies to trick them out of paladinhood.
I usually make sure I word things properly to get mt point across, but it appears I failed miserably this time.
@Rynjin - I wasn't implying you were some sort of 'cry baby' (although when I read back through my post it appears that way). What I meant was that EVERYONE - players and DMs alike - need to have a little common sense. People play this game for fun, not to follow a strict set of mandates from 'on high'. The rules are not infallible - they are guidelines. Its just a game - no-one is going to die (for real) if your DM lets the Paladin do things to the best of his ability, and doesn't penalize him just because the rules say he can. No-one is perfect, not even make-believe people - you will almost never be faced with choices that are 100% B&W. If you play the rules by RAW, then yeah, the Paladin is an unplayable mess. Every single decision he makes, no matter how small, can never, ever at any point in time accidentally 'misfire' and do harm. Thats just stupid.
@StabbityDoom - I seem to have failed even worse in your case. what I meant was that lots and lots of people play pathfinder, and Pathfinder has its paladin a certain way. 4e did things differently, and it has its own following. If you want to play a paladin that can do whatever he wants to whomever he wants then there is a system for that. For whatever reason, though, more people are playing pathfinder, and thats NOT how it works in pathfinder.
If I want to run Runequest-style Runelord, I don't start demanding that the rules be worked so I can play the character I want the way I want, I go find a game where I can play exactly what I want without bothering everyone else. If I choose to play a Pathfinder paladin, then that's a choice I made. If I don't like their paladin, I don't have to play it.
And as I said above, the rules are just guidelines. When a paladin is in the game everyone needs to apply a little common sense. No-one is going to be 'walking on water' 24/7. He is just a man (or woman), and all he can do is be the best person he possibly can. 'Trying' counts for a lot more in the eyes of 'the gods' then folks realize. You don't cure leprosy... you try to make their lives better. If one failure can wipe-out a lifetime of good, then it sure as hell is a raw deal being a paladin.
I came from FR, so I'm not all that familiar with Golarion yet. If it is as you guys say, and gods are not even involved with paladins, well then I find that totally weird. Paladins should have a very general code, and then some specifics as per their deity. I wouldn't blame the rules, in this case, I'd blame the setting for coming up short.
|
Contributor
|
I was addressing your point that "breaking the code a single time doesn't cause a fall". By the rulebook, it does cause a fall. The second paragraph is equally part of the Paladin Code Of Conduct."Not lying" is found as an example of acting with honour under the code.
Honour includes acting courteously. I'm not arguing that Gawain (in my example) is making a white lie. He honestly believes or strives to believe that beauty is not a superficial concept, as part of his dedication to courtesy.
A white lie of telling the burned girl that she is beautiful is not a white lie if one consciously embraces the idea that beauty is a holistic concept, including one's character and goodness. Believing in such a concept is a part of being "good."
Thus the "white lie" is only one if the person saying it doesn't believe it. If the same girl asked our paladin if people were frightened of her, he would be obliged to answer truthfully, but also to assist her in confronting the feelings that unjust prejudices or superficial judgments spark in us.
It's kind of like being a caring teacher or loving parent. Kindness is a type of truth as well.
I'm confused; I don't think I wrote that. I was arguing that telling someone that they are beautiful is a more nuanced situation than the original example suggests. Gawain, for example, or any other paladin, wouldn't fall if they told someone that they were "beautiful to me" or a similar statement, if they were dedicated to courtly love, in particular (like a paladin of Shelyn, for example); and there are probably other situations where being honest or good requires careful and thoughtful wording to remain courteous, but a simple lack of brusqueness is not dishonesty.
|
Contributor
|
So it appears there are two jeffs posting. My apologies.I'm confused; I don't think I wrote that. I was arguing that telling someone that they are beautiful is a more nuanced situation than the original example suggests. Gawain, for example, or any other paladin, wouldn't fall if they told someone that they were "beautiful to me" or a similar statement, if they were dedicated to courtly love, in particular (like a paladin of Shelyn, for example); and there are probably other situations where being honest or good requires careful and thoughtful wording to remain courteous, but a simple lack of brusqueness is not dishonesty.I was addressing your point that "breaking the code a single time doesn't cause a fall". By the rulebook, it does cause a fall. The second paragraph is equally part of the Paladin Code Of Conduct."Not lying" is found as an example of acting with honour under the code.
Honour includes acting courteously. I'm not arguing that Gawain (in my example) is making a white lie. He honestly believes or strives to believe that beauty is not a superficial concept, as part of his dedication to courtesy.
A white lie of telling the burned girl that she is beautiful is not a white lie if one consciously embraces the idea that beauty is a holistic concept, including one's character and goodness. Believing in such a concept is a part of being "good."
Thus the "white lie" is only one if the person saying it doesn't believe it. If the same girl asked our paladin if people were frightened of her, he would be obliged to answer truthfully, but also to assist her in confronting the feelings that unjust prejudices or superficial judgments spark in us.
It's kind of like being a caring teacher or loving parent. Kindness is a type of truth as well.
Yes, that was Jeff Wilder, below my post... No worries. Though I think that this is more of a game style thing than a RAW issue. "Violate" implies a pretty egregious episode of straying. Anyway, it's not idiotic to act in a dangerously honourable way if the world you operate in rewards that behaviour. In the fictional world of Celtic myth and Chivalric romance, it certainly does; i.e., the GM looks kindly on foolhardy adherence to the Code. I think the problem in PF is that we want a gritty and realistic world, and thus these paladins are lawful stupid. But in fact, these fictional examples live in a universe where Gods (or the Sidhe) respect honour more than they do pragmatism. I'm not saying Gawain is brave; he certainly is. But he also lives in a world of wonders like the Holy Grail and the Round Table itself, where principle is more powerful than logic.
But... but... if a child pings as evil that means they either have 5 or more HD and are evil, are undead, are an evil outsider, are the cleric of an evil god, or - by DM fiat - super evil for some plot reason (someone destined to destroy Mount Celestia or some such).
If someone pings as evil a Paladin should deal with them. Doesn't mean slaughter them, but it does mean interaction with the paladin and possible violence.
DMs with paladins in their game need to know how detect evil works, too many people just assume what it does based on the name and put little thought into it. "Oh yeah, orcs are evil so this guy dings as evil" is not how it works.
If I were a particularly unscrupulous demon getting hassled by a overly zealous paladin, I'd pop down the local orphanage and cast Misdirection on as many of the orphans as possible (so they detected as evil as me)...
...then sit back and enjoy the fun.
Paladins usually have pretty good will saves to overcome that sort of thing. Nonetheless, masking or changing what alignment is being emanated should be something paladins are aware of. Get that evil baby checked out by a few more clerics or paladins, it's unlikely they will all be wrong. Or just isolate the kid for 24 hours (it's a hour/level spell).
These sort of magic shenanigans should be a part of the game world as they are logical tactics given the resources at hand.