Yes, you're right, Antipaladin. Sorry, had a bit of 3.5 flashback. Quite so. If the DM is making a Paladin fall, he has no right to complain about how far he falls. Moreover, the Ex-Paladin should go over-the-top in his Evil. Just let the DM complain. I Dare him.
This is really bad advice.
Remember the whole group supports the GMs take on the situation. This will end only as 1 PC vs the party if this bad advice is followed. And as a new person to the group he will likely get kicked out.
As for the game...
This has all the hallmarks of a "story gone wrong" it looks like these black blade duels are a plot element and can violate normal game rules. There is probably only one way to fix this; make a new character. Apologize to the GM for causing a disruption in the flow of the game as well. You are a new player and it would smooth things over.
I would think calling him an idiot would be a bit much.The Black Blade wanted the Dragon dead because the Dragon turned out to be infused with a Black Blade of her own in her claws. Said Black Blade forced her to attack the Magus as well. Both combatants had solid black eyes as they shouted "To the death!" and "There can be only one!"Forget everything else. How did a young Silver Dragon with Bladebound Magus levels fail the pathetically low Will save to have its mind taken over by a Black Blade?
For a young Silver Dragon with 5 Magus levels, it's a CR 15 encounter, so let's cap it there for now. Its Black Blade will have an ego of 8, meaning it's a DC 8 Will save to avoid being dominated ... and it has a Will save of +16. Unless the DM rolled a 1, it's not possible for the dragon to fail its save. Just saying.
Also, I wouldn't have your paladin fall for such an action. And saying "bros before foes" as the justification for making your paladin fall when you were trying to save both lives ... makes me think that your GM is probably an idiot. Since you can't bring up online response anyway, I don't feel too bad saying that.
Im usually pretty chill and understanding with these things but in this case i'm going to have to agree with Cheburn on this one. If your gonna use a line like "bros before foes" you kind of have it coming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, your DM is totally wrong.
Find another group.
Bam.
Right on the money.
^ so much thisApologize to the GM for causing a disruption in the flow of the game as well. You are a new player and it would smooth things over."I'm sorry you f&+#ed me over."
Um no, this is definitely bad advice, don't apologize to other people being douchebags to you.
Wrong. Which is more important; being right all by yourself with no group or swallowing your pride and spreading a little good will at the cost of an apology?
Besides nobody was being a "douchebag". I read what the OP posted and it sounds like they just have VERY different takes on the paladin code. It was nothing more nasty than a bad GMing call, no personal attack at all. So the best thing is to avoid playing a paladin from now on.
No, your DM is totally wrong.
Find another group.
Bam.
Right on the money.
~sigh~
Take a deep breath. All GMs make mistakes and most don't even realize it. If we throw out any GM after one mistake then soon there won't be any GMs left.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's making a mistake, and then there's intentionally being a douchebag to new players, or any players for that matter.
And this isn't a case of "swallowing your pride" especially when the OP has absolutely nothing to apologize for. This is about not being bullied which your response would only encourage.
"I should apologize to the person being a douchebag to me so he can continue to be a douchebag to me." F$$@ no.
This isn't about a GM accidentally applying an extra +1 to an attack, it's them being a dick. OP would be better off finding a new group, much better in the long term for their mental well being.
|
I think the Gm made the wrong call. You tried to avoid bloodshed, when you did slip in a lethal attack you responded to the looks fro others and changed you strategy again. And I teckin your lethal attack wouldn't have been lethal anyway given the mechanics of the game. You tried everything to save those involved and chose a complete innocent over someone who chose a path where the possession was a (very slim) possibility.
Yeah Its a game meant to have fun if their using it as an excuse to bully one then why play? If this was the only issue that was at contention I would say just make a new character. If they find some new way to terrorize the new character then you might want to find a new group.
It might not be as extreme as it seems but from what was read I would already be done with them, if they were close friends I would talk to them. I'll assume the player can decide on what will work for him by himself.
so to answer the question (not that everyone else hasn't already) no I would say that doing non-lethal to a party member to keep them from doing something against their alignment is a service to that party member not an affront. if that wasn't the case then saving a Good aligned stranger from an evil attacker is still the good choice. I mean you did non-lethal above and beyond I say.
Technically the magus was acting with evil intent and would have pinged as positive on the Detect Evil radar... So...
Serously, no. Evil is always selfish, either directly or indirectly. I seeno selfish actions here.
Were the Palidans behavior lawful? Less clear depending on the scenario but lethal damage in and of itself is not evil.
Not all evil is selfish. Some can be quite self-sacrificing for an evil cause (and may believe it is good).
Who cares if it's lethal or nonlethal? It only really becomes lethal if it kills him. Bang him down to next to no hit points and then do the nonlethal damage to knock him out. No way should a paladin fall for this.
Oh but if we go into subjective evil and subjective alignments we will be here all week. I could say from a subjective standpoint that Asmodeus is a good guy on a subjective level. good example the book: Paradise Lost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am the only evil. Fite me.
I wouldn't dream of ruining that alabaster face.
I wish i could go back and edit that post before last I put Subjective standpoint in there 1 to many times.
any one can make a situation were no matter what the paladin falls real cunning would be situations were the paladin wont fall but will have his morals and mental fortitude heavily put to the test and a different grizzly outcome no matter what path is chosen, the only time a paladin should be forced to fall instantaneously is when the player asks it of the dm to do not on the dms whim and a dm should give plenty of nodice about if a paladin is wavering and has the potential to fall.
for the most part sure I agree with some exceptions such as the following.
Well I did have a player running a paladin murder a bunch of orphans (group of kid thiefs granted but definitely not deserving murder.) and I had him fall on the spot and if you say that was wrong then I don't know how we could find common ground.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The last time a paladin of mine fell was because a gnoll cut one of his legs off.
Damned critical tables!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Would you not have fallen if you just let the Magus slay an innocent being?That's what I felt. But apparently, I wasn't supposed to be concerned with the wellbeing of a "random dragon". In the GM's own words "bros before foes".
To be blunt: your GM is an idiot.
The actions of your paladin were completely appropriate and could not have been further from violating the paladin's code of conduct.
It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends.
I think any GM who intends to punish a paladin's actions with a fall, for anything else than the most indisputably evil acts, should warn the player beforehand of the consequences. Yes, blood was drawn, but the intent was never to kill.
Knowing one's GM and his stance on the paladin code is probably a good thing before playing one in his games.
All GMs make mistakes and most don't even realize it. If we throw out any GM after one mistake then soon there won't be any GMs left.I respectfully disagree. I have been playing D&D ever since 1988, and have DMed in many of those sessions. All of the DMs I have known were highly competent. Mistakes are generally skipping a player's actions or taking actions out of order. No. It is my humble opinion that this is a well-orchestrated PC "fragging."
I fail to see where he says he is being bullied. If you and Rysky are seeing something there I don't then please enlighten me. The worst thing the OP talks about is falling for something he shouldn't have fallen for. And that is due to different interpretations of the paladin code. The only other fault I could see is the GM plot device which would bother me but doesn't seem to bother the OP.
The GM is final authority on alignments and codes. If the whole world thinks the GM is wrong it doesn't matter. Inside his own game the GM is right. As a player you really have just four options:
1- Reject the GM and leave the game. Pretty drastic and it sure won't make you any friends.
2- Avoid the issue by avoiding classes with specific code or alignment issues. It won't solve anything but it won't cost you anything either.
3- Accept the GMs interpretation and start playing by his rules. This will make the GM happy but may be a bitter pill to swallow especially after a heated argument.
4- Smooth Talk your GM into seeing things your way. This is best used with friends though and since he is new it is highly unlikely to work.
Options that will do harm:
5- Argue endlessly about it. NOBODY wants to hear someone whine and the group already is behind the GM on this.
6- Become a problem player till you get your way. Like the earlier bad advice about going antipaladin in a good group. This throwing a tantrum option is highly likely to get him tossed unceremoniously from the group.
I recommended option 2 as his best course as a newbie.
But why apologize if he did nothing wrong? I may be wrong but it sounded like there already was a heated argument which he lost. The group dynamic will be far more inclined to support him in the future if he falls on his sword here. And the group dynamic is FAR more powerful than being right or wrong. If he apologizes for the disruption of play rather than his stance he can win hearts without going back on his earlier arguments.
|
stopping your ally and destroying his blade is priority 1. Do what ever it takes then atone. The innocent lives your group are slaying is unacceptable, don't waver in doing what is right. Falling doesnt mean you are wrong, just that you took a less than perfect path to your goal.
Edit: diplamacy first, the pc should feel remorse for killing a good creature. Use it as a wedge to get him to destroy his weapon on his own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Accept that your God's definitions of Law and Good seem to be far beyond your comprehension, because you were sure you were in the right. Retrain all your levels into inquisitor or fighter. Keep worshiping your God, but without as tight of a leash around your neck.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Accept that your God's definitions of Law and Good seem to be far beyond your comprehension, because you were sure you were in the right. Retrain all your levels into inquisitor or fighter. Keep worshiping your God, but without as tight of a leash around your neck.
That's not a leash, that's a noose.
|
|
There's not much to talk about Aranna since you seem to have come into this conversation on the position that the OP is in the wrong and should apologize... for being bullied.
Add that with any attempts for OP to stand up for themselves is seen as "needlessly arguing" and, yeah...
The GM is final authority on alignments and codes. If the whole world thinks the GM is wrong it doesn't matter.
...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Would you not have fallen if you just let the Magus slay an innocent being?That's what I felt. But apparently, I wasn't supposed to be concerned with the wellbeing of a "random dragon". In the GM's own words "bros before foes".
I'm sorry, but how is a Silver Dragon (which is good-aligned, by the way,) an enemy that you, as a Good-aligned party, supposed to be a foe that you're meant to face? Is he possessed? Is he about to commit a very bad atrocity among the people (in which case he'd probably be an Evil dragon, but he isn't)? If he is none of these things, then how is he any more an enemy than, say, the town guard of a well-respected village?
As a Paladin, Good-aligned Dragons are a powerful force for the side of Good; purposefully felling them for the personal gains of the party, or more specifically, a party member (who appears to be extremely chaotic and lacks the will to be his own master, as evidenced by him appearing to constantly fail his Will Save against his Black Blade, which is silly since he should have a Good Will Save progression), would likewise be grounds for falling, even if he is your "friend," because you're purposefully destroying the forces of Good for something that is clearly not "The Greater Good."
Your GM either lacks the big picture concept of Paladin Alignment (which would be a big red flag for playing a character with alignment restrictions in the first place), or he decided to throw a "Gotcha!" situation at you, where, no matter what you did (either kill the Magus, kill the Dragon, or did nothing to aid or hinder either combatant), you'd fall, in which case, you're better off not being a Paladin at his table if he's going to be throwing impossible situations at you just to punish you for playing a specific character.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll put my opinion on this matter quite simply: If you were not aware beforehand that violating "bros before foes" was a falling offence, you should not fall.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just to expand that a bit: the GM seems to have after-the-fact inserted "bros before foes" into his headcanon for paladins. He seems to have an idea of how paladins should behave, and it's at odds with the OP. This should never be a problem. A GM should either agree a code in advance (the fact that we're talking a paladin of Iomedae tells me we're probably looking at her code), or disallow paladins, and the social contract between player and a GM is such that if the player has agreed to play by that particular code, the GM has no right whatsoever to spring changes on him during play (except as a plot point, I guess),
Now, if the rules of the campaign say "no PVP", then we can have a very different conversation, but that doesn't seem to be the case here (I might be wrong). The reaction of all the other players and the GM suggests to me that they think there's a no PVP rule, though.
And a Paladin of Iomedae to boot. Aren't they a little more hard lined than your avg Paladin? Smite first, ask questions later?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm honestly wondering why a CG Magus and LG Silver Dragon would be compelled to fight their Black Blades...given that said blades are supposed to share their wielders alignment.
Overall, your GM sounds like he's being a dick about things...and kind of sucks at conflict resolution.
Paladins falling is there as an interesting story hook when both larties are in agreement, not for a GM to use as part of a hissyfit over how he thinks things should go.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't an evil action. If anything it was a good act. Sure you did lethal, but that's because you had no choice. Now a paladin would feel grief, and would pay to raise dead his companion. That is what a noble paladin would do. So long as you didn't kill the Magus that is ok. Not only that, but you can actually open up a new code of conduct for yourself. You may have used a lethal attack, but meh. Good isn't always nice.
You would be a good worshipper of Damerrich, LG Archon Empyreal Lord. His obedience is reciting all the names of those who have died by your hand. Mediate upon their faces and the circumstances of their deaths and evaluating your actions.
If he makes you fall, take up a cause under him. Turn this around, and make this something flavorful. :)
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, your DM is totally wrong.
Find another group.
Bam.
Right on the money.
~sigh~
Take a deep breath. All GMs make mistakes and most don't even realize it. If we throw out any GM after one mistake then soon there won't be any GMs left.
Mistake:
GM: Ok, you take a -4 on your ranged attack roll because you have an ally fighting the target.
Me: Actually I have Precise Shot.
GM: Oh you're right, my bad.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Not a mistake:
GM: You can let an innocent die, or you can let your friend die.
Madokar: I decide to save both without even mortally wounding anyone.
GM: I see you're trying to save two people but you gave your Magus a boo-boo so now your class is useless, kthxbye.
See how making a mistake is not the same as being a right cunt?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I fail to see where he says he is being bullied. If you and Rysky are seeing something there I don't then please enlighten me. The worst thing the OP talks about is falling for something he shouldn't have fallen for. And that is due to different interpretations of the paladin code. The only other fault I could see is the GM plot device which would bother me but doesn't seem to bother the OP.
The GM is final authority on alignments and codes. If the whole world thinks the GM is wrong it doesn't matter. Inside his own game the GM is right. As a player you really have just four options:
1- Reject the GM and leave the game. Pretty drastic and it sure won't make you any friends.
2- Avoid the issue by avoiding classes with specific code or alignment issues. It won't solve anything but it won't cost you anything either.
3- Accept the GMs interpretation and start playing by his rules. This will make the GM happy but may be a bitter pill to swallow especially after a heated argument.
4- Smooth Talk your GM into seeing things your way. This is best used with friends though and since he is new it is highly unlikely to work.Options that will do harm:
5- Argue endlessly about it. NOBODY wants to hear someone whine and the group already is behind the GM on this.
6- Become a problem player till you get your way. Like the earlier bad advice about going antipaladin in a good group. This throwing a tantrum option is highly likely to get him tossed unceremoniously from the group.I recommended option 2 as his best course as a newbie.
But why apologize if he did nothing wrong? I may be wrong but it sounded like there already was a heated argument which he lost. The group dynamic will be far more inclined to support him in the future if he falls on his sword here. And the group dynamic is FAR more powerful than being right or wrong. If he apologizes for the disruption of play rather than his stance he can win hearts without going back on his earlier arguments.
This is unrelated to Pathfinder, but very related to the OP and your comment above. While it can be smart to swallow your pride and drop grudges for the sake of keeping friendships, going full beta and apologizing for someone else having wronged you sets a bad precedent, especially if you're new to the group as OP says he is. Once you've established with the group that you're willing to forgive what crap they sling at you (and there really isn't any other reasonable way to interpret this, unless the GM's just completely incompetent) just so you can keep hanging out with them, you've pretty much given up being considered an equal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree, that was probably a bit harsh on my part. However, I had a weak moment and his GMing behavior was pushing all of my buttons:I would think calling him an idiot would be a bit much.The Black Blade wanted the Dragon dead because the Dragon turned out to be infused with a Black Blade of her own in her claws. Said Black Blade forced her to attack the Magus as well. Both combatants had solid black eyes as they shouted "To the death!" and "There can be only one!"Forget everything else. How did a young Silver Dragon with Bladebound Magus levels fail the pathetically low Will save to have its mind taken over by a Black Blade?
For a young Silver Dragon with 5 Magus levels, it's a CR 15 encounter, so let's cap it there for now. Its Black Blade will have an ego of 8, meaning it's a DC 8 Will save to avoid being dominated ... and it has a Will save of +16. Unless the DM rolled a 1, it's not possible for the dragon to fail its save. Just saying.
Also, I wouldn't have your paladin fall for such an action. And saying "bros before foes" as the justification for making your paladin fall when you were trying to save both lives ... makes me think that your GM is probably an idiot. Since you can't bring up online response anyway, I don't feel too bad saying that.
- Significantly (stealth?) houseruled the behavior and power of Black Blades: (1) the dragon failing a saving throw it should only fail on a natural 1, (2) the amnesia, (3) the CG* (and LG**!) Black Blades having as their mission 'destroy all other Black Blades,' which goes against their alignments, (4) the frequent attempts (and successes!) at having the Black Blade dominate your Magus, when (A) this should be a very rare event at most, and (B) the saving throw is not very high and the Magus should generally succeed, (5) the Black Blade insanely demanding immediate death to all other Black Blades irrespective of circumstances, when this goes against how Paizo says to run intelligent items with a Special Purpose. Also:
- Recurring involuntary Highlander
- Making your Paladin Fall without warning, when you were trying to save lives
- Giving as a reason for the fall that your character shouldn't be concerned with the life of another sentient Good creature
- Phrasing the reason as "bros before foes," which is a parody of a misogynistic meme
*Chaotic Good Core Concepts: Benevolence, charity, freedom, joy, kindness, mercy, warmth
**Lawful Good Core Concepts: Duty, fairness, honor, property, responsibility, right, truth, virtue, worthiness
I agree, that was probably a bit harsh on my part. However, I had a weak moment and his GMing behavior was pushing all of my buttons:I would think calling him an idiot would be a bit much.The Black Blade wanted the Dragon dead because the Dragon turned out to be infused with a Black Blade of her own in her claws. Said Black Blade forced her to attack the Magus as well. Both combatants had solid black eyes as they shouted "To the death!" and "There can be only one!"Forget everything else. How did a young Silver Dragon with Bladebound Magus levels fail the pathetically low Will save to have its mind taken over by a Black Blade?
For a young Silver Dragon with 5 Magus levels, it's a CR 15 encounter, so let's cap it there for now. Its Black Blade will have an ego of 8, meaning it's a DC 8 Will save to avoid being dominated ... and it has a Will save of +16. Unless the DM rolled a 1, it's not possible for the dragon to fail its save. Just saying.
Also, I wouldn't have your paladin fall for such an action. And saying "bros before foes" as the justification for making your paladin fall when you were trying to save both lives ... makes me think that your GM is probably an idiot. Since you can't bring up online response anyway, I don't feel too bad saying that.
...
- Significantly (stealth?) houseruled the behavior and power of Black Blades: (1) the dragon failing a saving throw it should only fail on a natural 1, (2) the amnesia, (3) the CG* (and LG**!) Black Blades having as their mission 'destroy all other Black Blades,' which goes against their alignments, (4) the frequent attempts (and successes!) at having the Black Blade dominate your Magus, when (A) this should be a very rare event at most, and (B) the saving throw is not very high and the Magus should generally succeed, (5) the Black Blade insanely demanding immediate death to all other Black Blades irrespective of circumstances, when
Side note: "bros before hoes" isn't really misogynistic. Both the "bros" and "hoes" terms are used to refer to both men and women, and all it really means is, "close friendships > sex".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That may be the underlying meaning, but it's a huge stretch to say that "brothers before whores" isn't misogynistic.
That may be the underlying meaning, but it's a huge stretch to say that "brothers before whores" isn't misogynistic.
"Bros before hoes" =/= "brothers before whores". For one, "hoe" isn't generally used as an abbreviation of "whore" (which in itself is not a misogynistic word, since it refers to a profession). Second, as I mentioned above, "bro" and "hoe" can both refer to men and women, so you're comparing apples and oranges.
This is getting vitriolic. I wonder if it's worth pinging it for FAQ consideration?
"Should the Paladin fall" topics often get heated. This thread doesn't seem to have a ton of vitriol, relatively speaking, as the vast majority of posters feel your Paladin should not have fallen for the actions as you described them. Some reasonable guidelines from a forum post in 2012. As far as "does attacking an ally cause a Paladin to fall," the actual answer is "it depends." Thus, it's not really a good FAQ candidate.
As far as the rest of my commentary on the Black Blade goes, it's more that he's ignoring non-questioned game mechanics, I'm assuming (which could be making an ass out of me), without having discussed it with the group. There's no need for a FAQ; he should just be clear that in his campaign Black Blades will function following his house-rules.
Unfortunately not.
This is one the topics the design team won't touch with an 11-foot pole, since it's table specific.
You might have some luck asking Mark Seifter in his AMA thread, but only in terms of how he would personally run it.
