Post the paladin's code that the GM and paladin player worked on before the start of the campaign and then we'll see if he has fallen or not. buttocks aside.
|
Gambling in itself isn't evil. Historically it was often considered a good sport, especially for the upper classes. The church didn't approve, but secular elites didn't mind. Small states have been founded based on casinos.
Playing with someone who can afford to lose the money he wagers, who's playing of his own will, why would that be wrong? If you're not forcing him, not cheating, not getting him drunk and so forth, then it's a game. If he's a normal adult, he's responsible for his own actions; you aren't.
However, cheating is obviously bad. And encouraging someone to wager more than they can afford is bad. These are things a paladin shouldn't do.
A paladin blowing off steam with some friends, playing poker on friday night, and winning: that's not evil. Arguably it's being community-minded to play games with friends.
But if a paladin senses (and they have Sense Motive as a class skill) that someone might be going too far, wagering too much, or actually having a gambling problem - then he shouldn't take advantage. Also, he should seek to set that person on the right track. Maybe by giving him a talking-to, or by alerting the man's wife or a local priest.
Gambling is a group activity that a lot of people enjoy, and there is nothing inherently evil about it. Losing money is part of the game so punishing a paladin for keeping the money is a real poor move on the GM part.
A friendly poker game like any other entertainment can strengthen the bonds of a group. From the sounds of it you have never gotten together with a bunch of friends for poker night. Even if you lose you end up bragging about it. As long as he is not cheating or betting on evil things he is good. Betting money for example is fine, betting that someone becomes your slave would not be ok.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're welcome to run your games however you want, however I agree with most of the people here that your expectations of what a paladin is and what's required of him are ridiculous.
I could very well see a paladin who's a drunkard or a lecher who has trouble controlling his earthly vices yet rises with righteous fury against those who hurt innocents.
These guys are real people, not angels. They're righteous arms of their god, but that doesn't mean they are perfect. Let the guy have a vice are two to make him seem like a full fledged personality instead of a cardboard caricature.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins are professional killers, essentially. They loot corpses and take goods to become better at killing.
In Pathfinder, this is not morally wrong. Anyone who had the capability to be the best at killing quintessences of evil like devils and demons wouldn't be doing his or her job if he wasn't killing them.
That being said, there needs to be a lot more leeway.
If you, and the rest of the players, are seriously considering the paladin having a Faith Crisis/Fall From Grace over a fairly played
8 gold piece poker game, it is time to re-think if it is even possible
for a paladin to be at the table.Let the paladin be the paladin. Why is he half-assing it? Because he isn't a theologian and philosopher thoroughly versed in theodicy and ethics theory? Stop putting undue burdens upon him.
Although dangerously flirting with the murderhobo fallacy, this is my point-of-view.
It is sad when GMs decide: "He's playing a paladin: so I must micro-manage and pick, pick, pick at his character."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This what I mean Rynjin, we've got a long moral debate of equally valid points of view. A true Paladin would not touch such a thing with a 10 foot pole, due to the severity of their good alignment.
First off, I'd like to point out that we've got a "No True Scotsman" fallacy floating around in this argument. Secondly, I'd like to point out that there are no degrees of goodness, and therefore, there is no "severity" of any good alignment. You're either good (in general), or you're not.
Characters of "good" alignment are not restricted from committing an act of evil any more so than members of a political party are restricted from voting along with their opposition party. Good men and women have, will, and continue to do things that are considered "evil" or "morally ambiguous", and your character is not restricted from having the occasional "oops" moment simply because it says "good" on your character sheet.
Then we come to the paladin, who is expressly forbidden from committing acts of evil. However, one could argue from a religious perspective that killing bloodthirsty, rampaging orcs that murder babies is an act of evil because you're killing. One could argue that it's not an act of evil because they're bloodthirsty, rampaging orcs that murder babies. When you devolve into those kinds of philosophical debates using modern (and presumably Christian) moral/social codes, nobody wins.
This is a game where death by the "sword" is not just a real possibility, it's a valid means of righting wrongs (else the paladin class would not even exist). Logically, it follows that swinging that sword (or mace, or shooting your bow) at one of those bloodthirsty, rampaging orcs that murder babies is an act of good. Rolling dice for money is far less morally complex.
You're attempting to blanket a moral code over a game that specifically uses alternative moral codes, at the same time that you're attempting to strip acts down into delineated values of good and not good in order to determine the rightness of a paladin's actions.
You're overthinking the entire situation, and I think that your game would benefit greatly from not overthinking the paladin's actions.
I find it highly unlikely that Erastil (or most gods) have the time and will to be cosmic bean-counters, just looking for their paladins to fail. It seems counterintuitive to the notion that they are (sometimes) kind, (sometimes) loving, (arguably) supportive and invested higher beings willing to lend their power to mere mortals (knowing full well that such mortals are fallible beings) in order to carry out their agendas throughout the world.
I firmly hope that you find this input useful in handling paladins in your games.
Best wishes!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think there seems to be a need in this campaign for you and the player of the paladin to sit down and discuss the nature of his/her code and the general outlok of their god (Erastil in this case from what I understand)
With several of the points you have made, I can see how a case can be made that Erastil could frown upon the activities engaged in... conversly I can see how Erastil, in another persons interpertation, could smile upon them.
Lets look at gambling. From one point of view gambling is a social ill that takes advantage of those who overindulge in alcohol and have weak will/poor judgement. In this case the Paladin should not partake in such activity. On the other hand one could argue that gambling is a celebrated social activity that builds comraderie and benefits the community through the gambling halls cut that goes to fund charitable causes, in which case the paladin may enjoy it freely.
Or prostitution. In some peoples view, and especially in some circumstances prostitution forces a disadvantaged person to commit acts that they find repulsive while most of the money paid goes to the betterment of someone else who may or may not treat the worker horribly, and in this situation it is certainly a vile thing to partake in. On the other hand, depending on the social dynamics of the land/setting it may be that this is a valued and respected profession, primarily engaged in by the priests/priestesses of a goddess (Calistria) who approves and empowers her clergy to control their own destinies and who engage in the enterprise for the enjoyment they get from it.
In each of these circumstances we can see how the GM and player may be working on widly different assumptions of the actions. It is important for them to discuss and come to an understanding with one another about how these activities are viewed by his/her god before impacting the character. Basicly... talk it out with the player and come to a mutual understanding of the paladins code.
|
Guys, just keep in mind that there is the Atonement spell. Its not like if you fall, you lose paladin forever.
Restore Class: A paladin, or other class, who has lost her class features due to violating the alignment restrictions of her class may have her class features restored by this spell.
~Primus
|
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
The complete dickery towards Paladins, and constantly drooling over the chance to have them fall, is the only reason I don't play Paladins.
The Paladin is not nearly as restrictive as everyone makes it out to be.
Prostitution, and gambling, do not break his code.
Not every society views these things as unsavory.
It is just stupid.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is a prime example of a GM attempting to be a dick to his player and trying to force rules onto a player that don't exist with any substantiation within the game.
As a GM, if a player wants to play a paladin you need to sit down with them and discuss what you both think is proper behavior for a paladin in your game, before play ever starts. You're pulling the rug out from under your player by making up rules that don't exist anywhere in the game.
This thread is a prime example of a GM attempting to be a dick to his player and trying to force rules onto a player that don't exist with any substantiation within the game.Unwritten rules? ;)
ROFL!!!!!!!! "Hands"!
But really, that ruling was about balance despite whether some people liked it or not and was from the game developers. This is a home GM telling his player "Screw you!" because he's not playing his character the way the GM wants.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The correct answer in any "Paladin" thread is..yes the paladin should fall. Serves them right for rolling up a paladin. Lawful stupid, amirite?
Seriously, if you have to ask, he shouldn't fall. But based on your posts, I would not play a paladin at any of your tables.
Because it is pay without work. Because the other men at the table may have bet more than they could afford, and it will harm their families and community. Because it is not inherently good, like raising a barn.
I guess he better not go adventuring either and apply for that desk job.
Legal and fair game. He took his rightfully-won earnings and left.
Nothing to see here.
Best guideline I ever heard for adjuciating paladins ... if you have to ask yourself if he falls, he doesn't.
|
|
Because it is pay without work. Because the other men at the table may have bet more than they could afford, and it will harm their families and community. Because it is not inherently good, like raising a barn.I guess he better not go adventuring either and apply for that desk job.
in that desk job you screw people over by sending out other adventuring parties, ergo, you are evil and should fall.
Honestly, if I were a paladin, I'd gamble and just give my winnings back to the other players, Or charity. Done.
Honestly, if I were a paladin, I'd gamble and just give my winnings back to the other players, Or charity. Done.
Taking money from someone else and giving them to the poor? Sounds like Robin Hood. Non-lawful, paladin falls.
Honestly, if I were a paladin, I'd gamble and just give my winnings back to the other players, Or charity. Done.Taking money from someone else and giving them to the poor? Sounds like Robin Hood. Non-lawful, paladin falls.
Correction. Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor. The paladin has made a verbal binding agreement with a group of people on a game of chance, whereby the victor gains the spoils. Ergo, lawful.
Like I give a f*+%.
Honestly, if I were a paladin, I'd gamble and just give my winnings back to the other players, Or charity. Done.Taking money from someone else and giving them to the poor? Sounds like Robin Hood. Non-lawful, paladin falls.Correction. Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor. The paladin has made a verbal binding agreement with a group of people on a game of chance, whereby the victor gains the spoils. Ergo, lawful.
Like I give a f#!&.
Spoilsport, everyone else is playing make the paladin fall :)
I think Erastil probably has more to worry about than stripping away powers over 8g and a drink at the bar, seriously. When he fails to protect his land or violates other serious tenants then we can talk about falling from grace.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only tipped ten percent?
That's a fallin'.
Talked during a bardic performance?
You better believe that's a fallin'.
/adjusts belt onion
(Now I want to play a Paladin who acts like Guy Gardner).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A Paladin is the best of the best morally speaking, "they adhere to ironclad laws of morality and discipline" (CRB P.60). If they view morality more as a guideline, maybe they'd be better off in another class. Or another diety.
I have a Paladin who behaves the same way. I have started taking away his SLAs. Realistically, he has no idea what is Good and Evil, so Detect Evil no longer functions. Since doing so he's used Lay on Hands to heal someone else. Just once so far. He will still coupe de grace prisoners, but it's a start.
It comes down to whether he plays the character or the numbers on the page. He can play a paladin who tries to be a paragon of virtue but stumbles from time to time and repents his transgressions, or he can play a paladin that adds his Charisma to his saving throws.
It's a home game and you are GM, so you can handle it any way you want. Crush the character, give subtle hints or let him do as he wants, it is entirely up to you.
So instead of talking to your player about how you define his alignment and code and letting him know how you personally view paladins in your game world, you are just screwing the player out of his character.
DM of the year here folks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not every paladin is going to be nice, kind, or lawful stupid. Heck, you couldn't make me play one even if you offered to pay me. Different from Lancelot doesn't necessarily mean bad wrong.
Ref: Sparhawk and Bazhell Bahnakson
Those two and Micheal from the Dresden files are the three best paladins in recent literature.
Just another he played a paladin? He must FALL!! Hard right now do not passgo do not collect 200g!
Then it becomes a alignment debate followed by morality debate...
Move along folks remember to read the do not feed the trolls signs...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm thinking a complete rewrite of the Paladin class that begins "you used to be a Paladin, then you fell" would solve all of these problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Other good examples are Paksennarion from "The Deed of Paksennarion" by Elizabeth Moon. Superman (classic, not New 52), & Captain America.
The Green Lantern Corps by DC comics always reminded me of an Order as well.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can be a strict DM in terms of enforcing limitations and restrictions to maintain balance at times, be it mechanical balance or societal or just setting and story.
But I just don't get the extreme views on paladins... on the one hand we have the "sneeze and don't say bless you so you fall" crowd, and on the other we have the "there are no rules if they upset the fun of playing my murder hobo armored jedi!" crowd.
The OP here seems to be firmly entrenched in the former group. Then after looking at his other recent posts, it seems he enjoys setting an environment to be adversarial to his PCs and to make their gaming lives as difficult as possible. While I certainly believe in having challenging games and not coddling players, I don't think a GM should take things to the point of "GM vs Players", which is where he seems to be.
Paladins are a rich, layered, interesting class with built in RP potential and mechanical advantages. Even at their minimum, they have a few basic restrictions built in that essentially say, "You must be one of the good guys!". They don't have to be saints... but they can be. They don't have to be friendly and nurturing... but they might be. They just have to do what is right and defeat the forces of evil without becoming a "bad guy" in the process.
You can get as in depth about specifics as the campaign calls for, but for every stricture you apply to the paladin because of his faith, be sure to look closely at the deity in question, because while one may frown upon a particular act, they may turn a blind eye or even support another. Don't make it a (wet)blanket restriction that makes the character unplayable.
A paladin should spend his time trying to support the cause of good and vanquish the forces of evil... not worrying about whether every minor miscue is going to strip his powers.
My basic test for if a deed would upset a paladin's status and abilities is:
"Does the act fall under one of the examples of behavior of Chaotic (Neutral) or (Neutral) Evil alignment write ups?"
If no, a warning or "feeling" should suffice... we all slip up, time to time.
If yes, then how does the paladin react to the act?
If he is contrite and realizes the error of his ways, again, a warning or feeling.
If he is dismissive of the fact that he is teetering, then a penalty of some sort... limited power or loss of an ability for a day or more.
If he makes a habit of behavior that is over the line or out of the ethos of the the class, well, then he probably doesn't want to play a paladin anyway.
I don't think the idea that a paladin should face the maximum punishment for any infraction is fair or realistic. Mistakes happen, how the paladin reacts to them is what separates his behavior from being a slip or establishing a pattern of misdeeds.
Of course the exception to this is, for me, if the paladin wantonly commits an act that is undeniably evil... slaughtering innocents, betrayal of his faith/friends, trucking with evil powers... then his status is revoked until he atones.
TL/DR: Minor issues should not cause a fall, only habitual bad behavior or a blatantly evil act should ever make a paladin lose his status.
Everytime someone posts in/or starts a "paladin fall" thread, a paladin falls.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well would you look at that
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
He hasn't even come close to deserving a warning. That's what we're trying to tell you. He's done NOTHING wrong, or even questionable.
I fell reading this thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did anyone else see when he put "Decadent Horse Brothel"? I'm naming a band that now, btw.
Did anyone else see when he put "Decadent Horse Brothel"? I'm naming a band that now, btw.Brony Band?
"Everypony, put your hooves together!"