| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether or not a paladin can or cannot lie -- or how much (is a white lie ok? A lie to a child? A slight change of words to protect someone's feelings? Should they be like a Vulcan and blurt out a harmful truth?)Vulcans take the logical position that sometimes silence is the best answer.
But I don't think I'd fall a Paladin who when asked by a woman who's been blinded, and disfigured from a terrible disease, when asked, tells her that she still looks beautiful.
That one is iffy.
Mostly because it is subjective and requires a lot more information.
A Paladin might respond, "I think that you are."
And not fall, because in his opinion she, and all living things, are beautiful.
However, if she were to clarify that, "Am I beautiful by the standard assumption of physical beauty that is largely accepted in society."
Then the Paladin might have a problem.
Either way, you can do that, but by the strictest sense, a lie, any lie, is grounds for a fall.
HWalsh will make a Paladin fall for not being a huge tool, confirmed
Behaving dishonorably is grounds for a fall. While lying is listed as an example of dishonorable behavior in the CRB, I find it rather hard to believe that anyone who is familiar enough with RPGs to find the Paizo message boards can't image a circumstance where a paladin should lie.
"A quick, painless death? Actually, I'm afraid your son was eaten alive by goblins, and by the end he was hysterically shrieking 'Mommy, mommy, make it stop!' Oh, zounds, I apologize, what can I say, Paladin code."
The main discussion seems to be this:
One side is:
Paladins are just a class, and as such anyone can claim to be a Paladin as the title, and/or there is no Paladin title so that not even Paladins know they are Paladins. There is no way to ever disprove this because there are archetypes. Thus, the written comments about Paladins being respected never refer to the class but more to a nebulous order because there is no way to tell a Paladin apart from anyone else.
The other side is:
That doesn't seem right, nor does it seem fair, to anyone who actually plays a Paladin because there are restrictions in place and Paladin codes are a thing...
Now... Lets take this away from even the discussion of should people know what Paladins are and be able to identify them...
Lets say I concede that it is totally logical that the Paladin title is completely divorced from the Paladin class and that there is no litmus and that not even Paladins can identify that they, themselves, are Paladins.
So... Lets say we have three characters with the title of Paladin...
Here is where confusion would hit:
Paladin A is a Warpriest.
Paladin B is a Fighter.
Paladin C is a Paladin.Paladin C: "I cannot ever break my code, if I do, I lose all of my Holy powers."
Paladin B: "I don't. I've had to break it on occasion."
Paladin A: "So have I. I told a lie the other day, I told a noblewoman that she wasn't bothering me, when she was."
Paladin C: "Well I can't."
Paladin B: "You must be cursed because you are a terrible person!"
If B is a zealot paladin they are kind of a fighter who believes they are a paladin. They might say,"I was forced to lie once, I had to recite the entire legend of my glorious deity with my forehead pressed against the floor of the sacred temple before the priest absolved me. It must have worked because I still had the powers to serve my glorious deity."
To tell he or she isn't the paladin they think they are, you would have to beat their bluff(which they don't know they are using) or make the knowledge check, religion or the planes. This is very situational and a lot depends on how the GM describes things. Neither GM nor players should act on meta gaming knowledge. If there is a necromancer in the party, they may humor them just so they can say,"Dudley Do Right will vouch that I'm necessary."
Behaving dishonorably is grounds for a fall. While lying is listed as an example of dishonorable behavior in the CRB, I find it rather hard to believe that anyone who is familiar enough with RPGs to find the Paizo message boards can't image a circumstance where a paladin should lie.
"A quick, painless death? Actually, I'm afraid your son was eaten alive by goblins, and by the end he was hysterically shrieking 'Mommy, mommy, make it stop!' Oh, zounds, I apologize, what can I say, Paladin code."
This looks like a job for the Zealot. "I'm deeply sorry, we had to cut a few parts out of the goblins stomachs, but I hope to die as bravely as he did, and I swear to put this evil to rest in his name."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a world where Paladins and their mechanics are not well known, my point about the Aura of Good still applies. The only class that has any chance of making a Cleric who casts detect good believe the person theyre looking at is a genuine Paladin is an actual Paladin or another Cleric (or a good aligned outsider i suppose)
It's not about how difficult it is to reproduce an Aura of Good, it's about how independent that is from actually being good.
A CN Cleric of Desna will have just as much of an Aura of Good as a Paladin, assuming they're the same level. He cares about serving Desna in her role of facitating Travel and Liberty. He respects her existence as a CG deity, but that's not what he cares about contributing to. If he does good in the world for its own sake, its ultimately incidental. And his Aura of Good is just as shiny as any Paladin's.
Heck, a 5th-level CG Rogue with a faint Aura of Good is more good than a 2nd-level CN Cleric of Desna, who is only bumming his moderate Aura of Good off of his CG goddess.
And as for Good-Subtype Outsiders, being Good-Subtype means you register as Good for any effect that that keys off of. 100% independent of whether the Good-Subtype Outsider in question even is good. Now, Outsiders with specific subtypes such as Demons, Devils, Angels, etc., will be the alignment they register as because that's part of their specific subtype. (If you're a Devil, then you will be lawful evil. Your Lawful and Evil subtypes are a separate matter.) But generic Outsiders with alignment subtypes will register without correlation to what their alignment actually is.
IMO, Detect Good isn't Detect Good. It's Detect Good Energy, which may completely, partially, or barely correlate to what the person actually is.
IMO, Detect Good isn't Detect Good. It's Detect Good Energy, which may completely, partially, or barely correlate to what the person actually is.
Hitting the nail right on the head this one is.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
HWalsh and Baval, you seem to be missing the idea that paladins can be deceived - maybe not as easily as everyone else, but a paladin who is honestly mistaken can relay a falsehood without falling because they aren't lying.
A world where a paladin's word is always taken as absolute truth would be a fantastic playground for evil masterminds. If I want to frame someone, convince a paladin. If I need an alibi, trick a paladin. Illusions, high Bluff checks, and other fabrications create a world where the paladin believes what I want her to, and apparently whatever the paladin believes, so does everyone else. From a villain's point of view, the paladin's trustworthiness becomes my trustworthiness, because I can control the information by which the paladin creates her worldview.
So in the trial example, it's very likely that the crowd believes the paladin is speaking the truth as she knows it...but a canny magistrate will take into account that the paladin may not know the whole story.
Spoiler for "let me tell you about my character" story:
Every mastermind should have a pet paladin.
Behaving dishonorably is grounds for a fall. While lying is listed as an example of dishonorable behavior in the CRB, I find it rather hard to believe that anyone who is familiar enough with RPGs to find the Paizo message boards can't image a circumstance where a paladin should lie.
"A quick, painless death? Actually, I'm afraid your son was eaten alive by goblins, and by the end he was hysterically shrieking 'Mommy, mommy, make it stop!' Oh, zounds, I apologize, what can I say, Paladin code."
This kind of absurd answer is why your argument isn't working. I presented a realistic situation.
Intelligent villain trying to refute the claims of a Hero. Something that totally happens in the genre. You mock one aspect with an unrealistic argument in hopes that it refutes the whole.
If someone asked the Pallie, if their loved one died quickly, a Paladin, if it were not the case, would not respond in such a flippant manner.
He likely wouldn't answer.
"He is at peace now."
"The monsters that did this can hurt him no longer."
You've also proposed that a paladin can fall from telling a single lie. I can't speak to the specific codes of the deities in Faith of Purity, but the code is the CRB just isn't that restrictive.
With those inarguable facts printed here plainly, I would like you to use your "logic" to explain to me the circumstance that allows a Paladin to lie and not lost his class abilities.
You are aware of only one starting premise? Look at your other assumptions -- there are a number of them -- and, if you're unaware of even making them, that says something too.
Inarguable is sort of like "undisputed champion". If it isn't in dispute, why are these guys boxing?
ryric is correct, the way that this is being put forth is candy for any GM with a design strategy above Scooby Doo-level. For that matter, I'm not sold that a single lie is a one and done fall. The code needs to have more than a straight reading to it -- much like many things in the book -- and slavishly insisting that it MUST be this way or else is a throwback to the old AD&D days of falling forever.
The code is more complex than that, and should be tailored not only to individual paladin orders but to the world you are playing in.
Inarguable is sort of like "undisputed champion". If it isn't in dispute, why are these guys boxing?
Fame and money usually...
Which book there was that illustration with Seelah enrage besides a tree with two signs "This way to Antipaladin Castle" and "This way to orphanage on fire" pointing to opposite directions and the antipaladin laughing hidden behind the tree ?
I'm going to guess either Ultimate Campaign or Pathfinder Unchained.
I found a copy of the picture online HERE.
Edit: Ninja'd by Knightnday? More like Antipaladin'd!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Which book there was that illustration with Seelah enrage besides a tree with two signs "This way to Antipaladin Castle" and "This way to orphanage on fire" pointing to opposite directions and the antipaladin laughing hidden behind the tree ?I'm going to guess either Ultimate Campaign or Pathfinder Unchained.
Pathfinder Unchained page 101 in, appropriately, the alignment section and right after the picture of Seelah in a John Woo movie (lots of doves.)
@Hitdice: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Hitdice: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Saying "MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH" is dishonorable and grounds for immediate Falling. You are now an ex-paladin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Hitdice: MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!Saying "MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH" is dishonorable and grounds for immediate Falling. You are now an ex-paladin.
No way! I have atonement on speed dial. I'm back in business!
unchained or ACG I think.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder Unchained page 101 in, appropriately, the alignment section and right after the picture of Seelah in a John Woo movie (lots of doves.)Which book there was that illustration with Seelah enrage besides a tree with two signs "This way to Antipaladin Castle" and "This way to orphanage on fire" pointing to opposite directions and the antipaladin laughing hidden behind the tree ?I'm going to guess either Ultimate Campaign or Pathfinder Unchained.
No one puts ranks in Perception anymore!
As far as I'm aware, the most common source of commercially available curative potions is a temple, so I'm going to say Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion.In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not?Not necessarily.... It could be Hedda the wise woman who's a witch. Could be Sal the mad Necromancer whose potions might not be that restorative. (especially if it's a potion of magic missle; target=drinker .:)
That's... exactly what I was trying to point out? Thanks for reiterating what I said?
In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not? Even if said person is actually an Investigator or a Wizard who took Brew Potion.
Hedda and Sal both experiment, research formulas, and craft their own potions right? Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion do the same? An Underground Chemist Rogue makes alchemical weapons to augment their arsenal? An assassin dabbles in poison-making and augmentation? All of these characters are practicing alchemy of one form or another, at least by definition, which would make them all alchemists - not the class, the trade.
As far as I'm aware, the most common source of commercially available curative potions is a temple, so I'm going to say Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion.In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not?Not necessarily.... It could be Hedda the wise woman who's a witch. Could be Sal the mad Necromancer whose potions might not be that restorative. (especially if it's a potion of magic missle; target=drinker .:)That's... exactly what I was trying to point out? Thanks for reiterating what I said?
In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not? Even if said person is actually an Investigator or a Wizard who took Brew Potion.Hedda and Sal both experiment, research formulas, and craft their own potions right? Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion do the same? An Underground Chemist Rogue makes alchemical weapons to augment their arsenal? An assassin dabbles in poison-making and augmentation? All of these characters are practicing alchemy of one form or another, at least by definition, which would make them all alchemists - not the class, the trade.
Well, yes, but also the vice versa. An Alchemist (the class) who sticks to curatives and restoratives would also stand just as much of a chance to be known as a Cleric or Adept (the trade, not the classes). I wasn't disputing what either of you said.
Well, yes, but also the vice versa. An Alchemist (the class) who sticks to curatives and restoratives would also stand just as much of a chance to be known as a Cleric or Adept (the trade, not the classes). I wasn't disputing what either of you said.As far as I'm aware, the most common source of commercially available curative potions is a temple, so I'm going to say Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion.In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not?Not necessarily.... It could be Hedda the wise woman who's a witch. Could be Sal the mad Necromancer whose potions might not be that restorative. (especially if it's a potion of magic missle; target=drinker .:)That's... exactly what I was trying to point out? Thanks for reiterating what I said?
In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not? Even if said person is actually an Investigator or a Wizard who took Brew Potion.Hedda and Sal both experiment, research formulas, and craft their own potions right? Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion do the same? An Underground Chemist Rogue makes alchemical weapons to augment their arsenal? An assassin dabbles in poison-making and augmentation? All of these characters are practicing alchemy of one form or another, at least by definition, which would make them all alchemists - not the class, the trade.
Ah, didn't catch that. Thanks for clarifying. I've never heard Cleric or Adept used as professions, although in-universe I can see Cleric being used often. Adept though? Eh. I suppose it would come down to semantics and the local history and culture which profession term was used. Wouldn't be many people calling themselves Clerics in Rahadoum for instance due to the banning of religion for instance.
Wouldn't be many people calling themselves Clerics in Rahadoum for instance due to the banning of religion for...
Chirurgeon, barber, healer, alchemist, doctor, herbalist....
Whether or not a paladin can or cannot lie -- or how much (is a white lie ok? A lie to a child? A slight change of words to protect someone's feelings? Should they be like a Vulcan and blurt out a harmful truth?)Vulcans take the logical position that sometimes silence is the best answer.
But I don't think I'd fall a Paladin who when asked by a woman who's been blinded, and disfigured from a terrible disease, when asked, tells her that she still looks beautiful.
That one is iffy.
Mostly because it is subjective and requires a lot more information.
A Paladin might respond, "I think that you are."
And not fall, because in his opinion she, and all living things, are beautiful.
However, if she were to clarify that, "Am I beautiful by the standard assumption of physical beauty that is largely accepted in society."
Then the Paladin might have a problem.
Either way, you can do that, but by the strictest sense, a lie, any lie, is grounds for a fall.
I'm assuming that the person in question is a sick woman who talks like a human being not a metagaming rules lawyer. And you pretty much confirm my assertation that I'd never play a Paladin under a GM I don't know.
Immanual Kant, playing Sir Imperitus Level 10 Paladin.
"He once lied to save a child from an evil orc. He still feels badly about it to this day."
Wouldn't be many people calling themselves Clerics in Rahadoum for instance due to the banning of religion for...Chirurgeon, barber, healer, alchemist, doctor, herbalist....
Doesn't matter what they call themselves, if the Pure Legion catches them casting divine magic or carrying a holy symbol. Rahadoum's rejection of the divine is not something to get around with a simple Bluff check. Even an Atheist Life Oracle isn't going to be welcome.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The question is what you see as your primary identity or social role.
A cleric or adept or alchemist who sees their role primarily as caring for the sick or injured would be more likely to introduce themselves as a "healer."
In contrast, if they see their role as ministering to the members of a particular church and providing spiritual guidance, they might instead introduce themselves as a "priest" or "cleric." (Of course, if they're in a country hostile to religion they may well claim a role they don't really identify with.)
Clerics are more likely than alchemists to see the priesthood as their primary role, but not everyone has to identify with the role their class is named for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clerics are more likely than alchemists to see the priesthood as their primary role, but not everyone has to identify with the role their class is named for.
The only Paladin I ever enjoyed playing was no knight in shining armor... he was a traumatized veteran living in an alleyway because being able to detect evil (and being told by the Voices that you must not associate with evil) is a really horrible burden to bear in an organized society.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, I wrote a post a few weeks back titled The Paladin in Name Only. The idea wasn't new; a character who looks, acts, and sounds like a paladin, but who has no paladin levels. Maybe it's a dedicated fighter, a righteous cavalier, or even a born-again ranger, but the point is you don't HAVE to take paladin levels to play a knight in shining armor who follows a code and always tries to do the right thing.The peasant-pretending-to-be-a-samurai is a standard trope in Japanese fiction (see The Seven Samurai for an iconic example); the warrior trying to be a paladin should have no such problem -- except for the minor little "how do you respond when someone asks if you're a paladin?" problem, since you're not allowed to lie under the code you're trying to follow.
I agree, nothing in the text makes knightly orders paladin-only, and one of the most famous/iconic paladins (Sir Galahad) was part of a order that most definitely did not restrict itself to paladins (Sir Mordred, please pick up the black discourtesy phone...)
Okay, now I have to make a gunslinger. Mysterious Stranger archtype, probably. Assuming I have the book that's in. Dresses in black breaches with black jacket and tie. Wears a fedora, also black. Gun at his hips, carries little parchment slips as his calling card. His name?
Paladin: Have gun, will travel| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A knight without armor in a savage land . . .