Actualy what you all are really showing is that there is a contingent on this board dedicated to finding new ways to push the Paladin's red button.It's ultimately going to depend on how alignment is defined by the table, the GM, and the setting you're playing in. We forum folks could debate the alignment of such an action until the cows come home, but all we'd really do is show how undefinitive the alignment system is for characterizing the morality of one's actions.
All I can say is...I hope your Paladin enjoys their trip to the Boneyard.
There's truth to that. The two underlying reasons behind alignment questions I see popping up on the boards is:
1). Shenanigans in Pathfinder Society, where evil acts/characters/etc are strongly discouraged if not outright forbidden.
2). Alignment issues with character concepts with strict behavioral requirements The Paladin is usually seen as the strictest, and also has a high level of power against Evil stuff. It's not unusual for a lame GM to seek out the Paladin's "red button" to bring the character down a notch.
The actual answer to the original question, however, is going to hinge on
A) What the code of the Paladin and their deity is.
B) How big of a violation of said code the action is.
C) How non-good/non-lawful the action is.
WWCAD?
(What Would Captain America Do?)
Nah kidding. I find the situation rather dicey and questionable. If I were a paladin, I would absolutely ask why I am being requested to do sexual favors and what good it serves, regardless of if it's from a God or a person. That's just it; if an unquestionably good person asked this of you, would you do it without question? Why would the fact that a God is the one asking change things?
She's a deity--if she's of good alignment she is going to have considered the consequences and she's in a far better position to see them than he is. There's also no question she's competent to be a single parent and she's no doubt intending to be a single parent. Thus it doesn't matter if he rides off into the sunset.
Thus we are only left with undue influence situations (if she's his deity) and in the case of a good-aligned goddess I don't think that would be a problem; whether his code prohibits such things and whether he finds sex with her an acceptable act.
*Woosh*
Completely missed my point. It's the 'why' that I was emphasizing. It's not about the god or her abilities, for the reason you explained. Any sane person would ask WHY. WHY DO YOU NEED ME TO DO THIS? It would be ridiculous to accept such an offer without any curiosity or caution. That's my point; the fact that the request is from a god should not change the fact that a person SHOULD ask WHY.
What would you do? If a god asked you to do this in an equivalent setting, would you just say "OK." and nothing else? I reject the idea of "Well, a good person/god is asking for it, so it must be a good thing that I would inherently agree with." Paladins should be ESPECIALLY concerned when it comes to the good in the output of their own actions, and even MORE so if the paladin is predisposed to care about or for any hypothetical offspring that they may have.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stick with the "not until the third date" rule and you should be fine.
|
What I find most amazing about this thread is that the concept is that a demi-god wants to have a child with the party's paladin; but there is a 25 to 30 post argument on how paladins having sex is okay if magic contraception is used; and whether that magic might fail should be a consideration. I think contraception defeats the concept here.
The other thing I find amazing is that everybody expects the paladin to be a dick after the conception and walk off having no relationship with the demi-god or the child. What? There are not parental visitation rights on Golarion? Is the demi-god going to whisk the child off the heavens and get a restraining order against the paladin?
We were given a minimal picture of what's going on and everybody is auto-inserting a preconceived notion of what will happen. This is actually an awesome chance to role play something you wouldn't normally get to role play. Hey, if I'm a paladin and a demi-god tells me that s/he wants to have a child with me I tell them, "I can do an arranged marriage if Sarenrae approves. We'll have to work out all the appropriate visitation rights and contractual obligations. I expect at least one weekend a month and two weeks during the winter. And our child spends every other Sunwrought festival with me. I also prefer that you send a couple of lantern archons as escorts if you cannot accompany the child when s/he is visiting me. We must protect our joyous little bundle from heaven."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The other thing I find amazing is that everybody expects the paladin to be a dick after the conception and walk off having no relationship with the demi-god or the child. What? There are not parental visitation rights on Golarion? Is the demi-god going to whisk the child off the heavens and get a restraining order against the paladin?
Best episode of Maury ever?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Sir Attenbough of Westlake, YOU ARE NOT THE FATHER!"
*Guy in full plate stands up and starts dancing*
"Sir Attenbough of Westlake, YOU ARE NOT THE FATHER!"
*Guy in full plate stands up and starts dancing*
GM: "Your armor check penalty applies to that Perform(Dance) check!"
GM: "Your armor check penalty applies to that Perform(Dance) check!""Sir Attenbough of Westlake, YOU ARE NOT THE FATHER!"
*Guy in full plate stands up and starts dancing*
Player: "Nah-uh! Armor check penalties only apply to Str and Dex-based skill checks. Perform (dance) is modified by Charisma!"
I think as long as it furthers your goals as a paladin it's fine. So long as it gets you closer to god *wink*.
|
Why do so many people seem to think that paladins have weird hangups about sex?Because historically (game wise) many people ...
I know the OP's question probably concerns a PF game, which treats paladins and their code of ethics differently than the earlier editions, but those earlier editions of D&D are where the thoughts of "paladins don't have sex" come from...
2nd Edition AD&D actually clarified and defined the paladin's code in much more detail.
Relating specifically to sex (Emphasis mine):
Celibacy. In addition to remaining chaste, the paladin vows never to marry.
Chastity. The paladin avoids even the appearance of impropriety, remaining pure in word, deed, and thought.
Here's the definition of Chaste:
chaste
adjective:
1. abstaining from extramarital, or from all, sexual intercourse.
synonyms: virginal • virgin • intact • maidenly • unmarried • unwed •
2. not having any sexual nature or intention:
"a chaste, consoling embrace"
synonyms: nonsexual • platonic • innocent
Note that "impropriety" is under the heading of "Chastity" (and it was already made clear that the paladin remains chaste); so it would seem that a paladin (under 2nd edition rules anyway) would go to great lengths to remove himself from anything and everything that would make it look as though he was even remotely thinking about having sex (with anybody)...