Relevant text. That said, working with a ghoul isn't evil in itself.
Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.
|
if a palden for a short time periode alies himself with a ghule does he need an attonement spell after
Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.
I believe so, yes.
Edit: Ninja'd
Whether a paladin should fall or not is mostly up to the GM to be honest. Some make you fall for small sleights, others don't really care. Some care about circumstances, others think suffering is part of the class.
I'd say no personally, probably not something you'll have to worry about in PFS to my knowledge, unless you want to personally.
|
|
The rules paragraph that you and I both quoted seems pretty clear that an atonement spell is required. It does not say that the paladin loses powers immediately, but I think it is certainly reasonable to say that an atonement is required ex post facto.
I am not a fan of GMs trying to make paladins fall, and I don't do so when I run games. But this seems pretty cut and dried.
I read it differently fox. Its when someone is persistently following an evil person. Working with a ghoul for a scenario isn't really working with someone for a long period, and depending on the scenario it may have been a short moment trying to help the person out without even knowing they are a ghoul.
Paladins and alignment are hot topics. Everyone and their cousin tends to have a different opinion on them.
|
It seems to me that, if you force a Paladin to atone for what (I'm guessing) were the acts of another, then you begin encouraging Paladin players to be difficult to play with. I don't know about you folks, but at my FLGS there are several players I would not be able to afford playing with if their Command Undead etc. would force me to pay for atonement every time I am mustered with them.
Don't we have enough instances of Paladins that are difficult to deal with already?
Just my 2cp.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It should be hard to play a Paladin. They are the pinnacle of virtue, honor and morality (within various subranges account for the differences between Paladins of different Gods). I sometimes feel dirty playing with other Paladins who are far less on the level than mine.
SIRHITMANHEART, could you say, maybe in a spoiler, which scenario this was?
Sounds like
It should be hard to play a Paldin.
Poor Paldins. Always hounded by grammar correction groups.
Personally, I usually like to err on the safe side of things and prefer the not fall, unless its a particularly egregious example. I think it chases people away from the class when you make it unnecessarily rough and make them tread landmines at every decision, and can take away some free will when they do have options.
|
|
It should be hard to play a Paladin. They are the pinnacle of virtue, honor and morality (within various subranges account for the differences between Paladins of different Gods). I sometimes feel dirty playing with other Paladins who are far less on the level than mine.
There's a difference between hard to play and impossible to play with. One is just good roleplay, while the other means there may be some nights either the Paladin player or the undead controller literally would not be able to play together. At some places, that may be fine, but not at a smaller location.
is the mod that if u r a paladen this could come up were the ghule sayss help I help u
If its the one i'm thinking of the ghoul will try to eat you well before you're in need of an atonement.
|
|
jcederberg: I cant speak for everyone but I will talk about my most recent game with my Paladin.
There was another Paladin the party: A Paladin of Sarenrae. A Cavalier/Cleric, a Ninja, a Bard and a Fighter / Witch. Now Im playing my Paladin of Iomedae as pretty noble. He is 'on loan' to the Pathfinder Society from the Mendevian Crusaders.
The other Paladin, should not of been a Paladin. He was often the first to loot, telling other players characters that because he was playing a Paladin he couldnt loot the bodies like he normally would but they had better pathfinder them quick. He had few issues with enslaving the people we had found (If I say sailors Im not really spoilering anything here), no problem with a Coup de Grace on someone who had fallen over. When asked why he was playing a Paladin. 'Oh thats easy, its for the mechanics'.
After that I kinda tuned out.
What scares me jcederberg is that I doubt he is the only one out there that plays a Paladin like that. Id love to believe he is the only one, but Id be a fool to think that. I call that difficult to play with in the same way that you just said its impossible to play with.
Not once did he think to lay on hands on another character whereas I did at least twice. I also attempted to make sure downed opponents didnt die If I could help it.
I got questions like 'What are you doing? They are enemies!'. I just went about my business.
Now If there is an undead controller in the party, that character would pull out. There is no way I could IC justify adventuring with a Undead controller. That might be just me.
That might be just me.
A lot of what you said was opinion tbh, and we only have one side. I'm sure there was a lot going on though.