|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is literally making me LOL at work. It's just hard to believe anyone could believe the way that Marthkus does and not think they are just trolling to mess with everyone else. At least I hope he's really trolling and doesn't really believe the drivel that he's been spouting...
Oh, I've been laughing for hours. Literally. If I keep it up, I'm going to have to make a Fort save vs. Jaw Ache. :p
Town Guard: "Excuse me, sir, law states that anybody entering this city must eat a live baby."
Paladin: "Hm...guys, this sucks, but we need to follow the law."
Ranger: "WHAT?
Wizard: "Dude, what the F@~#?"
Paladin: "It's the law. We already entered this city, we can't break the law."
Ranger: "I AM NOT EATING A BABY!"
Town Guard: "Law also states that if you see someone resisting the Baby Eating Law, you must help guards force them to follow it."
Paladin: "Then I will have to do so, I guess."
Ranger: "Dude, stay away from me."
Wizard: "That's it, we're out of here."
Paladin: "Hey, where are you going?! Come back! You can't just leave, it's the law!"
Paladin and the party doesn't enter the city. Problem solved. Or they leave city do to ignorance of the law. That or they submit themselves to the authorities for breaking the law. They don't eat the baby.
Again more weird corner cases.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin is not necessarily a legitimate authority. He must respect the laws of man along with those of his God. He cannot break the law, simply because he feels like it or views himself above the the law. At which point he breaks his code and falls.Show me ONE example, just ONE, real or otherwise, legitimate authority that is more pure an true to the idea of justice than that of the paladin code.
I take back what I said earlier, your sense of ethics is not just stunted, it is wholly nonexistent. You put the L waaaaaay over G, and make the paladin a construct with less self-determination than ED-209.
Being more true or pure to the idea of justice does not make you more legitimate. You are saying that paladins are basically Azatas while in fact they must behave more like Archons. Paladins must respect the law. They are not above the law.
Are you saying a paladin can be less lawful than Superman?
Respect =/= blind obedience and deference. A paladin is Lawful Good, not Lawful and Good. He supports good laws, and work to improve those that are not good. He will question the legitimacy of obviously corrupt rulers (much like superman) and destroy those who actively use law as a weapon to subjugate and terrorize.
He is JUSTICE, which is the ideal law can only hope to imitate, with its fallacies due to being crafted by humans, which means it is invariably corrupt. That is why he not only is above corrupt law, he is the ENEMY of corrupt law.
Keep in mind, Ilja, the reason people see killing the morlocks as okay is because morlocks are much worse than goblins. They're basically a step up from fiends. They aren't humanoids, they're creatures of the Darklands. In Golarion, they are born evil. Period.
Paladin and the party doesn't enter the city. Problem solved.
As clearly stated, they already entered.
Or they leave city do to ignorance of the law.
Then they will be pursued by the guards, having broken the law.
That or they submit themselves to the authorities for breaking the law. They don't eat the baby.
So the paladin chooses to break the law. BAM, FALL'D!
Again more weird corner cases.
You're a weird-corner-case sorta guy.
Keep in mind, Ilja, the reason people see killing the morlocks as okay is because morlocks are much worse than goblins. They're basically a step up from fiends. They aren't humanoids, they're creatures of the Darklands. In Golarion, they are born evil. Period.
So paladins can just stab baby creatures from evil races all day long and never worry about falling.
Not only would that be racist and evil, but it breaks his code. Fall
To be fair, some druids can serve Erastil, god of the hunt. A druid might see himself as a member of the food chain--animals use other animals as expendable tools all the time. Cats use mice as toys. Parasites use animals to look after their young. Fungi possess bees to transport their spores (I'm not even kidding, that's a real thing).
I completely agree. It irritated me that the GM let me get away with it.
We don't really wonder to far from the core books. Somehing I'm planning on fixing. But thanks for the input. Oh and the Fungi bee thing, I love that.
He is JUSTICE, which is the ideal law can only hope to imitate, with its fallacies due to being crafted by humans, which means it is invariably corrupt. That is why he not only is above corrupt law, he is the ENEMY of corrupt law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJiYrRcfQo
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
However, you are exaggerating the other side. I know it's hard to make Marthkus's position any more comical, but could you please try, for the sake of balance?
Actually, Marthkus didn't say proper duel, just "honorably", which apparently includes not aiming for the soft spots, not attacking unless the opponent has an option to escape and most everything else... So I exaggerated in words, but not in the actual result.
And isn't that the same case with the other interpretation? What's the point of the paladin rule of "must respect legitimate authority" when this is the attitude towards legitimate authority?
Show me ONE example, just ONE, real or otherwise, legitimate authority that is more pure an true to the idea of justice than that of the paladin code.
But that's half the point, the Paladin is the legitimate authority figure, ordained by his god to make such judgments.
A paladin is a legitimate authority figure...his authority comes from his god...that had better be legitimate.
If the paladin is the ultimate authority then most anything the paladin does will be acceptible. Torturing baby goblins is ahokay since the paladin can just sentence them to torturous death - and his authority comes from his god! Thus it's legitimate, and no reason for the paladin to fall!
I dislike the whole attitude of paladin's goodness having gone from "a paladin must act good!" to "however a paladin acts, is good!".
That or they submit themselves to the authorities for breaking the law. They don't eat the baby.So the paladin chooses to break the law. BAM, FALL'D!
He must respect the law. Breaking it does not make him fall, unless he is not respecting it.
He broke the law by accident. And in accordance with the law he submits to the authorities and pleads his case at his trial.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind, Ilja, the reason people see killing the morlocks as okay is because morlocks are much worse than goblins. They're basically a step up from fiends. They aren't humanoids, they're creatures of the Darklands. In Golarion, they are born evil. Period.So paladins can just stab baby creatures from evil races all day long and never worry about falling.
Not only would that be racist and evil, but it breaks his code. Fall
Again dude, read the rules. Clearly allowed in Faiths of Purity when discussing morale quandries and goblin babies.
Non-PRD splat book only affects those who have that book. If you don't own the book you can't use it in PFS games. In home games without access to those rules, it is difficult to use them.
|
|
He is JUSTICE, which is the ideal law can only hope to imitate, with its fallacies due to being crafted by humans, which means it is invariably corrupt. That is why he not only is above corrupt law, he is the ENEMY of corrupt law.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvJiYrRcfQo
Bingo. Judge Dredd is a modernized paladin...whose 'god' IS the state...and he breaks the rules, when they're bad, and goes against corrupt officials.
Keep in mind, Ilja, the reason people see killing the morlocks as okay is because morlocks are much worse than goblins. They're basically a step up from fiends. They aren't humanoids, they're creatures of the Darklands. In Golarion, they are born evil. Period.So paladins can just stab baby creatures from evil races all day long and never worry about falling.
Not only would that be racist and evil, but it breaks his code. Fall
Racist...
REALLY!? In a world where creatures are hopelessly and irredeemably evil, created SPECIFICALLY to be so by super-charged demonic gods that have only malice envisioned when they created them, you bring in RACISM!? Holy smoke, Batman, you are on some fine psychedelics, mister. I almost want to ask for the number to your dealer.
And re: Judge Dredd clip: That is the paladin YOU envision. Blindly following the law until shit goes wrong, law is used against him and he "falls". An actual paladin would stop and question Rob Schneider instead of arbitrarily sentencing him to prison.
Let me finish with this: I have never made a paladin fall in any of my games. But if someone played one like you claim they MUST be played... that streak would be broken.
Yeah, actually what mostly is being argused seems to be more along the lines of the Grey Guard from 3.5. If a legitimate law says no killing. Then the paladin cannot kill the evil person. But out in the wild or deep in dungeons where there usually are no laws. Keep in mind this is suppose to be in the past, not present, where laws rarely carried more then several yards from the edges of town. Unless you employ the use of wandering guards or rangers,lawbringers in the wild not the class...unless thats how you play rangers. So in cities paladin obeys LEGIT lawyful laws. In the wild he is not bond by code to capture and bring evil to trial, he deals with evil as he sees fit. And accepts any concequences if his god doesn't agree with what he just did.
Keep in mind, Ilja, the reason people see killing the morlocks as okay is because morlocks are much worse than goblins. They're basically a step up from fiends. They aren't humanoids, they're creatures of the Darklands. In Golarion, they are born evil. Period.So paladins can just stab baby creatures from evil races all day long and never worry about falling.
Not only would that be racist and evil, but it breaks his code. Fall
Again dude, read the rules. Clearly allowed in Faiths of Purity when discussing morale quandries and goblin babies.
Actually the goblin babies stuff is in Champions of Purity, but you are right that it's allowed.
Racist...REALLY!? In a world where creatures are hopelessly and irredeemably evil, created SPECIFICALLY to be so by super-charged demonic gods that have only malice envisioned when they created them, is governed by RACISM!? Holy smoke, Batman, you are on some fine psychedelics, mister. I almost want to ask for the number to your dealer.
And re: Judge Dredd clip: That is the paladin YOU envision. Blindly following the law until s+%~ goes wrong, law is used against him and he "falls". An actual paladin would stop and question Rob Schneider instead of arbitrarily sentencing him to prison.
Let me finish with this: I have never made a paladin fall in any of my games. But if someone played one like you claim they MUST be played... that streak would be broken.
So paladins can't follow their code in your games without falling? That's cool.
So paladins can just stab baby creatures from evil races all day long and never worry about falling.Not only would that be racist and evil, but it breaks his code. Fall
Racist against morlocks? Got it. While we're at it, I would like to complain of the specism against sharks. People are all convinced that they eat meat. Maybe they want to be vegetarians! But of course the zoos refuse to give them the chance. All they need to do is only throw in fruits and vegetables for a week or so. But they won't!
The discrimination against our fishy friends just makes me sick.
|
|
However, you are exaggerating the other side. I know it's hard to make Marthkus's position any more comical, but could you please try, for the sake of balance?Actually, Marthkus didn't say proper duel, just "honorably", which apparently includes not aiming for the soft spots, not attacking unless the opponent has an option to escape and most everything else... So I exaggerated in words, but not in the actual result.
And isn't that the same case with the other interpretation? What's the point of the paladin rule of "must respect legitimate authority" when this is the attitude towards legitimate authority?
Show me ONE example, just ONE, real or otherwise, legitimate authority that is more pure an true to the idea of justice than that of the paladin code.
But that's half the point, the Paladin is the legitimate authority figure, ordained by his god to make such judgments.
A paladin is a legitimate authority figure...his authority comes from his god...that had better be legitimate.If the paladin is the ultimate authority then most anything the paladin does will be acceptible. Torturing baby goblins is ahokay since the paladin can just sentence them to torturous death - and his authority comes from his god! Thus it's legitimate, and no reason for the paladin to fall!
I dislike the whole attitude of paladin's goodness having gone from "a paladin must act good!" to "however a paladin acts, is good!".
Who said that? Paladins follow their god's tenets...and unless that god is LN, those tenets ARE good. If he's not following those tenets, he's in trouble with his god...and the LN god's tenets are not as good, but incredibly legalistic.
We don't really wonder to far from the core books. Somehing I'm planning on fixing. But thanks for the input. Oh and the Fungi bee thing, I love that.
Erastil actually is in the core book, I think--though only in that tiny little table. :P
So paladins can't follow their code in your games without falling? That's cool.
So paladins can't be Good in your games without falling? That's cool. :)
So paladins can just stab baby creatures from evil races all day long and never worry about falling.Not only would that be racist and evil, but it breaks his code. Fall
Racist against morlocks? Got it. While we're at it, I would like to complain of the specism against sharks. People are all convinced that they eat meat. Maybe they want to be vegetarians! But of course the zoos refuse to give them the chance. All they need to do is only throw in fruits and vegetables for a week or so. But they won't!
The discrimination against our fishy friends just makes me sick.
I don't see how any of that relates.
Erastil actually is in the core book, I think--though only in that tiny little table. :P
We don't really wonder to far from the core books. Somehing I'm planning on fixing. But thanks for the input. Oh and the Fungi bee thing, I love that.
I was meaning with 3.5. That druid was in 3.5 not Pathfinder. But thanks again for the tip.
So paladins can't be Good in your games without falling? That's cool. :)
So paladins can't follow their code in your games without falling? That's cool.
Yeah they can't be chaotic or break their code. They are paladins not LG fighters.
You wouldn't, would you?
Guys, I have another question. My alicorn illusionist 16/fighter 2 has been jealous of another PC, an alicorn abjurer 16/paladin 2. In the next session, she's going to make a deal with an evil spirit, and there's a good chance it's going to possess her. Now, she isn't fully aware of what the consequences of this will be, but is it still Evil?
Well I've got to go for a bit. Something about cleaning the fridge. I was gonna make some paladin pun involving cleaning my fridge, but I lost my train of thought.
They are paladins not LG fighters.
I think you mean, "They are paladins, not LG."
Because your version of paladins is "Lawful Evil, but standing for good ideals". They do good when they can, but if the law tells them to do evil through action or inaction, they have to obey.
Well I've got to go for a bit. Something about cleaning the fridge. I was gonna make some paladin pun involving cleaning my fridge, but I lost my train of thought.
Just don't drink anybody's milk. That will cause you to lose your paladin powers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
However, you are exaggerating the other side. I know it's hard to make Marthkus's position any more comical, but could you please try, for the sake of balance?Actually, Marthkus didn't say proper duel, just "honorably", which apparently includes not aiming for the soft spots, not attacking unless the opponent has an option to escape and most everything else... So I exaggerated in words, but not in the actual result.
And isn't that the same case with the other interpretation? What's the point of the paladin rule of "must respect legitimate authority" when this is the attitude towards legitimate authority?
Show me ONE example, just ONE, real or otherwise, legitimate authority that is more pure an true to the idea of justice than that of the paladin code.
But that's half the point, the Paladin is the legitimate authority figure, ordained by his god to make such judgments.
A paladin is a legitimate authority figure...his authority comes from his god...that had better be legitimate.If the paladin is the ultimate authority then most anything the paladin does will be acceptible. Torturing baby goblins is ahokay since the paladin can just sentence them to torturous death - and his authority comes from his god! Thus it's legitimate, and no reason for the paladin to fall!
I dislike the whole attitude of paladin's goodness having gone from "a paladin must act good!" to "however a paladin acts, is good!".
What I say is that the ideals that a paladin MUST live up to has a higher standard than most real or fictional system of government. And a paladin cannot be corrupt and still be a paladin, while a judge and jury can be corrupted to the core, and still maintain their position.
And torture is out for a paladin. He is given spells and class abilities as well as Diplomacy and Sense Motive to find his information. There is no justifying torture.
Routing noncombatants that are irredeemably evil is fine, but he needs to do it in a humane manner. This is harsh for real world people to accept, because there is no such thing as a genetically EVIL race in real life. The only self-aware, sentient life on earth is humans, and arguably some sea-mammals and simians.
|
|
They are paladins not LG fighters.I think you mean, "They are paladins, not LG."
Because your version of paladins is "Lawful Evil, but standing for good ideals". They do good when they can, but if the law tells them to do evil through action or inaction, they have to obey.
I think that's more LN. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No matter how much sarcasm, RAW, or truth we send at the troll, he just won't get it. Still funny though and this thread is still making my day fly by at work while I sit here and chuckle at his absurdity.
Who said that? Paladins follow their god's tenets...and unless that god is LN, those tenets ARE good. If he's not following those tenets, he's in trouble with his god...and the LN god's tenets are not as good, but incredibly legalistic.
What god has "kill unarmed prisoners" as a tenet? I can see Torag but I don't think any of the other's have.
Also, if the god's tenet is the only thing the paladin has to obey, why even write out "respects legitimate authority" in the CoC? Why not simply write "respects it's god"?
And what happens with paladins without gods? Because you know, paladins don't have to have gods. They may if they want to but it isn't a direct part of the class.
I think that's more LN. :)They are paladins not LG fighters.I think you mean, "They are paladins, not LG."
Because your version of paladins is "Lawful Evil, but standing for good ideals". They do good when they can, but if the law tells them to do evil through action or inaction, they have to obey.
Are you one of those people who believe it "evens out"? That if you wipe out an orphanage, then save another, you get to be Neutral?
Sorry if I've misunderstood, I've been dealing with that bizarre opinion a lot lately. If you're willing to do evil, you're evil. Neutrality is not "all of the above", it's unwillingness to commit either way.
|
|
However, you are exaggerating the other side. I know it's hard to make Marthkus's position any more comical, but could you please try, for the sake of balance?Actually, Marthkus didn't say proper duel, just "honorably", which apparently includes not aiming for the soft spots, not attacking unless the opponent has an option to escape and most everything else... So I exaggerated in words, but not in the actual result.
And isn't that the same case with the other interpretation? What's the point of the paladin rule of "must respect legitimate authority" when this is the attitude towards legitimate authority?
Show me ONE example, just ONE, real or otherwise, legitimate authority that is more pure an true to the idea of justice than that of the paladin code.
But that's half the point, the Paladin is the legitimate authority figure, ordained by his god to make such judgments.
A paladin is a legitimate authority figure...his authority comes from his god...that had better be legitimate.If the paladin is the ultimate authority then most anything the paladin does will be acceptible. Torturing baby goblins is ahokay since the paladin can just sentence them to torturous death - and his authority comes from his god! Thus it's legitimate, and no reason for the paladin to fall!
I dislike the whole attitude of paladin's goodness having gone from "a paladin must act good!" to "however a paladin acts, is good!".
What I say is that the ideals that a paladin MUST live up to has a higher standard than most real or fictional system of government. And a paladin cannot be corrupt and still be a paladin, while a judge and jury can be corrupted to the core, and still maintain their position.
And torture is out for a paladin. He is given spells and class abilities as well as Diplomacy and Sense Motive to find his information. There is no justifying torture....
...and hey...I have no problem with it not being genetic. Heck, even some demons get redeemed. My guess is that pretty much in every case, the demon made the first move, though, perhaps after an example of a better way to be...
Just because some demons have seen the light...if the only way goblins ever get raised is in an evil society, and I have no options for their raising...merciful death is the appropriate answer.
Paladins without gods follow their own code, or the default code. Either way, it's approved by the GM. As long as it's Lawful Good, it's a suitable code. Killing prisoners should be avoided, but when it comes to fiends, undead, most aberrations or morlocks, I'd say all bets are generally off. They're basically serial killers according to Golarion canon.
What I say is that the ideals that a paladin MUST live up to has a higher standard than most real or fictional system of government.
Uhhhhhmm... no. A paladin can do PLENTY of things that would get people jailed IRL, without any negative consequence. For example, at least in my country, ANY deliberate killing of a born human is against the law, except in extreme cases of self-defense (as in, if I point a gun to the head of a cop and he aims and shoots directly to kill me, that's illegal, but if he shoots me a few times in the legs and arms first and I still try to kill him then it might be legal).
How is a paladin that can kill almost anyone it wants, because whatever it says goes, living up to a higher authority?
|
|
I think that's more LN. :)They are paladins not LG fighters.I think you mean, "They are paladins, not LG."
Because your version of paladins is "Lawful Evil, but standing for good ideals". They do good when they can, but if the law tells them to do evil through action or inaction, they have to obey.
Are you one of those people who believe it "evens out"? That if you wipe out an orphanage, then save another, you get to be Neutral?
Sorry if I've misunderstood, I've been dealing with that bizarre opinion a lot lately. If you're willing to do evil, you're evil. Neutrality is not "all of the above", it's unwillingness to commit either way.
Nah...I just see him as arguing from an entirely legalistic sense, with no real good or evil leaning. *shrug*.
I think that's more LN. :)They are paladins not LG fighters.I think you mean, "They are paladins, not LG."
Because your version of paladins is "Lawful Evil, but standing for good ideals". They do good when they can, but if the law tells them to do evil through action or inaction, they have to obey.
Agreed, but definitely not LG.
I mean . . . submitting to the authority of a city that requires baby eating upon entry to the city doesn't strike me as something a crusader of good should do. Especially since if they require eating a baby upon entry, who knows what other evil things that might have legislated.
Judge: Here begins the trial of Bill the paladin, charged with the heinous crime of not devouring a baby upon entry into our fair city. How do you plead?
Bill: Not guilty, on the basis that eating babies is not a good thing to do.
Judge: Now, Bill, you will continuously flog this innocent woman while speaking, or I will hold you in contempt of court!
Thus Bill was never seen again, all because he refused to fight against unjust laws.
Paladins without gods follow their own code, or the default code.
And which authority should they respect? If the only authority deity-bound paladins have to respect are their deities, and those without don't have to follow that, can they do whatever they want and just call it "ultimate authority"?
What I say is that the ideals that a paladin MUST live up to has a higher standard than most real or fictional system of government.Uhhhhhmm... no. A paladin can do PLENTY of things that would get people jailed IRL, without any negative consequence. For example, at least in my country, ANY deliberate killing of a born human is against the law, except in extreme cases of self-defense (as in, if I point a gun to the head of a cop and he aims and shoots directly to kill me, that's illegal).
How is a paladin that can kill almost anyone it wants, because whatever it says goes, living up to a higher authority?
You shouldn't apply paladins to the real world. It doesn't hold. The real world does not have a solid alignment system, nor does it have races of pure evil. Golarion is a world where Law does not reign supreme--there is wilderness, and there are small towns like Sandpoint where the priority is Good, not Order.
|
|
Who said that? Paladins follow their god's tenets...and unless that god is LN, those tenets ARE good. If he's not following those tenets, he's in trouble with his god...and the LN god's tenets are not as good, but incredibly legalistic.What god has "kill unarmed prisoners" as a tenet? I can see Torag but I don't think any of the other's have.
Also, if the god's tenet is the only thing the paladin has to obey, why even write out "respects legitimate authority" in the CoC? Why not simply write "respects it's god"?
And what happens with paladins without gods? Because you know, paladins don't have to have gods. They may if they want to but it isn't a direct part of the class.
He DOES have to respect legitimate authority. A paladin who kills for his god...because his god has indicated that someone must die...still has to answer to the legitimate law of the land. Yes, that paladin may go up for murder...but his powers WILL BE intact.
You shouldn't apply paladins to the real world. It doesn't hold. The real world does not have a solid alignment system, nor does it have races of pure evil. Golarion is a world where Law does not reign supreme--there is wilderness, and there are small towns like Sandpoint where the priority is Good, not Order.What I say is that the ideals that a paladin MUST live up to has a higher standard than most real or fictional system of government.Uhhhhhmm... no. A paladin can do PLENTY of things that would get people jailed IRL, without any negative consequence. *snip*
Agreed, but I wasn't the one who brought it up, note the quoted part from Kamelguru above. "higher standard than most REAL or fictional systems of government".
Now, it's hard to quantify fictional systems of government, but looking at the real world most countries have higher standards than appointing some people (or rather, having some people appoint themselves) to kill whoever they deem should be killed.
Paladins without gods follow their own code, or the default code.And which authority should they respect? If the only authority deity-bound paladins have to respect are their deities, and those without don't have to follow that, can they do whatever they want and just call it "ultimate authority"?
Paladins must follow Legitimate Authority--therefore, they do not have to follow evil laws, regardless of what Marthkus claims. And once again, paladins do still have to follow their code, and they still have to stay Lawful Good. It is very hard to be a psychotic, "holier-than-everyone" vigilante with those restrictions.
|
|
I think that's more LN. :)They are paladins not LG fighters.I think you mean, "They are paladins, not LG."
Because your version of paladins is "Lawful Evil, but standing for good ideals". They do good when they can, but if the law tells them to do evil through action or inaction, they have to obey.
Agreed, but definitely not LG.
I mean . . . submitting to the authority of a city that requires baby eating upon entry to the city doesn't strike me as something a crusader of good should do. Especially since if they require eating a baby upon entry, who knows what other evil things that might have legislated.
Judge: Here begins the trial of Bill the paladin, charged with the heinous crime of not devouring a baby upon entry into our fair city. How do you plead?
Bill: Not guilty, on the basis that eating babies is not a good thing to do.
Judge: Now, Bill, you will continuously flog this innocent woman while speaking, or I will hold you in contempt of court!Thus Bill was never seen again, all because he refused to fight against unjust laws.
Ewwww! Disgusting, you know. :p
Agreed. Gah.
Agreed, but I wasn't the one who brought it up, note the quoted part from Kamelguru above. "higher standard than most REAL or fictional systems of government".
Now, it's hard to quantify fictional systems of government, but looking at the real world most countries have higher standards than appointing some people (or rather, having some people appoint themselves) to kill whoever they deem should be killed.
Paladins are automatically better than basically anybody in reality. Why? Because paladins are the only people who are, beyond a doubt, completely and utterly Good. The Real World has no such rules, and therefore cannot provide an authority figure who can out-good a paladin--just like it would struggle to provide a human who can out-evil a Blackguard. ;D
Being a Paladin has a "Only Lawful Good" restriction. Being on the Supreme Court has no such restriction.
He DOES have to respect legitimate authority. A paladin who kills for his god...because his god has indicated that someone must die...still has to answer to the legitimate law of the land. Yes, that paladin may go up for murder...but his powers WILL BE intact.
Who said that? Paladins follow their god's tenets...and unless that god is LN, those tenets ARE good. If he's not following those tenets, he's in trouble with his god...and the LN god's tenets are not as good, but incredibly legalistic.What god has "kill unarmed prisoners" as a tenet? I can see Torag but I don't think any of the other's have.
Also, if the god's tenet is the only thing the paladin has to obey, why even write out "respects legitimate authority" in the CoC? Why not simply write "respects it's god"?
And what happens with paladins without gods? Because you know, paladins don't have to have gods. They may if they want to but it isn't a direct part of the class.
Ah, I think I see your point of view. So if he kills someone who he isn't allowed to kill by the law of the land but that he thinks should die (like, extrajudically killing a murderer), he has to submit himself to the law of the land and accept the sentence?
That kind of paladin I can buy. I wouldn't use that interpretation for a paladin I'd play, but it doesn't seem bad, especially not compared to the interpretation of "he is the ultimate authority so he takes precedence over the laws of the land".
Of course, if he doesn't see the law of the land as legitimate, all bets are off. Either he's just wrong and he'll lose his powers or he's right and he's now a paladin on the run, struggling to remain Lawful Good while resisting a corrupt regime. Rebel paladins are fun because their general reflex is to follow rules.