Paladins always follow the Law--where "the Law" is defined as the principles of their paladin code.
Local governments depart from those principles at their peril.
The Paladin code is a code of personal behavior. Part of that code is obedience to legitimate authority. Local authority is always legitimate until overridden by a greater authority.
You are describing a neutral good alignment/chaotic good alignment at best. Paladins are not do-gooder mercenaries. They cannot act under the authority of their own whims and inflict their own personal code on others.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins always follow the Law--where "the Law" is defined as the principles of their paladin code.
Local governments depart from those principles at their peril.
The Paladin code is a code of personal behavior. Part of that code is obedience to legitimate authority. Local authority is always legitimate until overridden by a greater authority.
You are describing a neutral good alignment/chaotic good alignment at best. Paladins are not do-gooder mercenaries. They cannot act under the authority of their own whims and inflict their own personal code on others.
I believe Calybos1 was being hyperbolic.
I believe what they were really trying to get at it is that a paladin who comes into potential conflict with local laws will choose to adhere to their own personal code and the "laws" of the their deity and religion over local laws.
As in this case, the local authority cannot be trusted to mete out punishment appropriately, so the paladin will do so instead. The paladin derives authority from their church and deity to do so, even if others don't wish to recognize it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin steps into River Kingdoms.
Realizes that he must now follow the local authority of being chaotic.
Slips on mud and falls.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Simple fix. Local laws are not considered legitimate if they are not in accordance with the Paladin's code and can be safely ignored without repercussion.
Doesn't mean he must not adhere to local laws or customs, but he need not be bound by them. This makes more sense to me as the Paladins powers and by extension authority are derived from their Code god and Conviction not from the prevailing system of government.
Simple fix. Local laws are not considered legitimate if they are not in accordance with the Paladin's code and can be safely ignored without repercussion.
Doesn't mean he must not adhere to local laws or customs, but he need not be bound by them. This makes more sense to me as the Paladins powers and by extension authority are derived from their Code god and Conviction not from the prevailing system of government.
Make this an edict from your Kingdom/Church/God and you are golden.
All a paladin needs to do to go murder hobo in foreign territory is get permission. Permission is not implicit in his code.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a fairly recent PFS adventure where a lot of players have complained that the final encounter is a "Paladin trap."
which AP is that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simple fix. Local laws are not considered legitimate if they are not in accordance with the Paladin's code and can be safely ignored without repercussion.
Doesn't mean he must not adhere to local laws or customs, but he need not be bound by them. This makes more sense to me as the Paladins powers and by extension authority are derived from their Code god and Conviction not from the prevailing system of government.
Make this an edict from your Kingdom/Church/God and you are golden.
All a paladin needs to do to go murder hobo in foreign territory is get permission. Permission is not implicit in his code.
Given that a Paladin does not need any of those things to be a Paladin adhering to their own code would be sufficient, specifically the part that says:
So if a Authority does this they are not legitimate and they can be ignored deposed at leisure. Also straight up killing Evil people is entirely permissible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Call it Orderly Good instead of lawful, and rectifying breaking chaotic laws is a bit better
punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
And a lawful creature believes that the punishment must fit the crime. A paladin can't go murder hobo just because he's in Cheliax. He's likely to get himself as well as all those innocents he's pledged to protect killed in the process.
You will also notice that punishing comes last in the things that are part of the code and respecting legitimate authority is first.
So, in a "among equals" type of comparison, respecting authority is first, punishment is last.
This means that the paladin is a servant above all else, and acts with that the foremost in his mind.
Humility, not murder hobo rage is his primary concern.
So if a Authority does this they are not legitimate and they can be ignored deposed at leisure. Also straight up killing Evil people is entirely permissible.
Or you could argue that the authority IS legitimate, so you have to ignore or rules lawyer the part about punishing those that threaten innocents, the same way legitimate authority is being rules lawyered into a null set. The mayor of bloodcove saying "hey, lets keep the murders to a dull roar here" is acting in the legitimate capacity of his office.
Or you can argue that the paladin has to both find an honorable way to punish those who threaten innocents, AND respect legitimate authority: is an absolute contradiction with the other one or he falls...
Or better, the paladin needs to strike a balance between punishing the guilty , protecting the innocent, and not wrecking the society while he does so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No murdering people is literally the oldest law on the books. It predates books. Right back to stone tablets. The idea that people not liking outright strangers showing up and ganking people in the middle of their town is a modern invention is inane. A paladin especially draws on the codes of chivalry, in which killing a prisoner under your care is a HUGE no.
You're basing your opinion on what the norms are here on earth in modern times, not what they would be in a medieval-ish setting like Golarion.
And yet we do it all the time in Pathfinder. Orcs invade a town so you go to their cave and slaughter them is the exact same scenario we have here. An evil threatens innocents so you kill them is the basis for 90% of all Pathfinder adventures.
And this isn't a case of "prisoner under your care" this is a case of "do I want to make this enemy combatant a prisoner or kill them" A paladin is under no obligation to show mercy to someone who is still a threat to innocents... just ask Sarenrae.
Not all adventurers are good.
Not all good people are lawful good
Not all lawful good people are paladins
So no. It is not okay for a paladin just because other adventurers do it. Paladins have a higher standard than your typical murderhobo.
On top of that an orc cave in the wilderness is not remotely the same as the middle of a city. Old timey frontier justice works im the woods. Downtown hive of scum and villiany? Not so much.
It was a prisoner under thebpaladins care.the were helpless, conscious, and defiant. If they had lwtbher bleed out before that there wouldn't be a problem
Bring paladins into pirate murder town at your own risk.
Department of lawful good is not liable if they begin to kill violent marauders at once.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not all adventurers are good.
Not all good people are lawful good
Not all lawful good people are paladinsSo no. It is not okay for a paladin just because other adventurers do it. Paladins have a higher standard than your typical murderhobo.
On top of that an orc cave in the wilderness is not remotely the same as the middle of a city. Old timey frontier justice works im the woods. Downtown hive of scum and villiany? Not so much.
It was a prisoner under thebpaladins care.the were helpless, conscious, and defiant. If they had lwtbher bleed out before that there wouldn't be a problem
There is no way to argue this with you. You agree that the paladin code is flexible but it can only flex in the way you want it to. The paladin can disobey legitimate authority but only the orders you have decided are worthy of being disobeyed. A paladin can dispatch a threat to innocents, but only in locations, again, you deem worthy.
What's funny is even in your Star Wars reference, frontier justice was the way things were done.
I'm going to back up Wolf on this one. Some of you posters keep trying to make the situation Yes or no when the field is a creative answer not true or false. There is not going to be a perfect answer for every situation. You will need to do the best you can.
Side note: One of the problems with the alignment system is the cut off between one alignment and the next really morality should be a sliding scale of grey but because of the nature of the alignment system you have to force a situation into black, white, red, and blue (red chaos blue law in this situation) When really all the colors come in shades.
There is no way to argue this with you. You agree that the paladin code is flexible but it can only flex in the way you want it to.
Outright murder of a helpless prisoner in the middle of town without due process is not flexing the code it's shattering it into a thousand pieces.
you're taking the punishment thing and not flexing it at all. That's a problem. You can arbitrarily pick which part of the code you're not going to flex at all and use that to justify breaking all of the other parts.
The paladin can disobey legitimate authority but only the orders you have decided are worthy of being disobeyed.
The order has to be evil. (If you're so evil Eat this puppy)
No murderating in the middle of town is not evil. Its inconvenient. Yes, LG and the paladin code are going to be inconvenient sometimes.
A paladin can dispatch a threat to innocents, but only in locations, again, you deem worthy.
In accordance with laws, customs, traditions, and honor codes of a sanitized medivily setting.
What's funny is even in your Star Wars reference, frontier justice was the way things were done.
They're a plucky misfit band of rebels fighting against the evil empire. That's the recruitment poster for CHAOTIC good.
lawful good is not extra good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to back up Wolf on this one. Some of you posters keep trying to make the situation Yes or no when the field is a creative answer not true or false. There is not going to be a perfect answer for every situation. You will need to do the best you can.
Actually, the Yes or No question is in relation to "Does the Paladin fall if he does X?"
And with all of the answers provided so far, you have the differing opinions of "Yes he does because Y," and "No he doesn't because Y."
So, all you're doing backing up the side of "Yes he does fall" if the Paladin does X (which can be whatever the Paladin does, even if it is "the best that the Paladin can do," also subject to personal interpretation and ingenuity). Which is promoting a "Gotcha!" scenario (whether inadvertantly done by the GM or not).
Which, by most every player's standards, is a dick move to do, since it's quite clear here that there is no "correct" answer.
So no, it's as much of a "shade of gray" as you want it to be.
Personally, I would've just thrown the boss somewhere in the woods to fend for herself, and hope the Gods see fit to curse her with death from the forests' denizens. Even if the boss frees herself to pursue the Alchemist's family, it's out of your power; you left her fate up to the Gods to decide, since you didn't have the authority (though you certainly had the power) to decide her fate for yourself, and they found that the Alchemist's family had to suffer for some past life or something.
After all, the Gods work in mysterious ways...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not all adventurers are good.
Not all good people are lawful good
Not all lawful good people are paladinsSo no. It is not okay for a paladin just because other adventurers do it. Paladins have a higher standard than your typical murderhobo.
If common, fundamental assumptions about game setting and adventure premises caused the Paladin to fall, than that would be a fundamental design flaw in Paladins. The morality of the act for other adventurers isn't the end-all, be-all, but it's very relevant.
On top of that an orc cave in the wilderness is not remotely the same as the middle of a city. Old timey frontier justice works im the woods. Downtown hive of scum and villiany? Not so much.
The orcs acted in perfect accordance with the edicts of their chieftain, duly ascended to their throne according to their traditions. If a government that exists to allow the Aspis Consortium to ignore its edicts and promote their ruthless and deeply evil agenda is legitimate, than surely so is the orc chieftain whose laws apply to all within his territory? Yet the Paladin would almost surely not fall for lethally deposing the chieftain in his own throne room, and killing every orc warrior he encounters in responding to the raid
As for the Downtown Hive of Scum and Villainy--let us note that it was the Space Paladin who *chopped off a man's arm* in the Mos Eisley Cantina, despite having far less lethal options available. Just as it was an entire order of Space Paladins who
sought to assassinate the duly elected Supreme Chancellor of the Republic, because he wasa manipulative Lawful Evil bastard about to abolish democracy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Firstly, the DM is a donkey-puncher...
Dude, he's not. He's in the thread. And the situation was resolved without anyone falling.
I'm going to back up Wolf on this one. Some of you posters keep trying to make the situation Yes or no when the field is a creative answer not true or false. There is not going to be a perfect answer for every situation. You will need to do the best you can.Actually, the Yes or No question is in relation to "Does the Paladin fall if he does X?"
And with all of the answers provided so far, you have the differing opinions of "Yes he does because Y," and "No he doesn't because Y."
So, all you're doing backing up the side of "Yes he does fall" if the Paladin does X (which can be whatever the Paladin does, even if it is "the best that the Paladin can do," also subject to personal interpretation and ingenuity). Which is promoting a "Gotcha!" scenario (whether inadvertantly done by the GM or not).
Which, by most every player's standards, is a dick move to do, since it's quite clear here that there is no "correct" answer.
So no, it's as much of a "shade of gray" as you want it to be.
Personally, I would've just thrown the boss somewhere in the woods to fend for herself, and hope the Gods see fit to curse her with death from the forests' denizens. Even if the boss frees herself to pursue the Alchemist's family, it's out of your power; you left her fate up to the Gods to decide, since you didn't have the authority (though you certainly had the power) to decide her fate for yourself, and they found that the Alchemist's family had to suffer for some past life or something.
After all, the Gods work in mysterious ways...
I think you quoted the wrong poster because your post has nothing to do with mine. Like I literally have no idea what you were trying to say there.
I think you quoted the wrong poster because your post has nothing to do with mine. Like I literally have no idea what you were trying to say there.I'm going to back up Wolf on this one. Some of you posters keep trying to make the situation Yes or no when the field is a creative answer not true or false. There is not going to be a perfect answer for every situation. You will need to do the best you can.Actually, the Yes or No question is in relation to "Does the Paladin fall if he does X?"
And with all of the answers provided so far, you have the differing opinions of "Yes he does because Y," and "No he doesn't because Y."
So, all you're doing backing up the side of "Yes he does fall" if the Paladin does X (which can be whatever the Paladin does, even if it is "the best that the Paladin can do," also subject to personal interpretation and ingenuity). Which is promoting a "Gotcha!" scenario (whether inadvertantly done by the GM or not).
Which, by most every player's standards, is a dick move to do, since it's quite clear here that there is no "correct" answer.
So no, it's as much of a "shade of gray" as you want it to be.
Personally, I would've just thrown the boss somewhere in the woods to fend for herself, and hope the Gods see fit to curse her with death from the forests' denizens. Even if the boss frees herself to pursue the Alchemist's family, it's out of your power; you left her fate up to the Gods to decide, since you didn't have the authority (though you certainly had the power) to decide her fate for yourself, and they found that the Alchemist's family had to suffer for some past life or something.
After all, the Gods work in mysterious ways...
Read the posts again.
Your post said it's not a "Yes or No" question. I pointed out that it is at least on some scale (most importantly, the scale that actually matters in relation to the thread), so suggesting that it isn't is just blatantly false.
Your post said that it's a creative field. I pointed out that even if it is, you're still boiling down to the question of "Yes, he falls" or "No, he doesn't," because that's the question being posed. (Actually, it's "What does the Paladin do?", but characteristically, the follow-up question of "Does that make the Paladin fall?" is the real question at hand.) Binary questions like "Does X happen" or "Is Y correct" are, in fact, Yes or No questions.
You then said that there isn't a perfect answer for every situation. Remember that perfect and ideal are synonyms in this case, and saying that there isn't an ideal answer means that you're basically setting the Paladin up for a "Gotcha!" moment. If there's no one ideal answer, then it doesn't matter what the Paladin chooses in relation to the situation, the answer to the binary question of "Does the Paladin Fall?" will always be "Yes." Why? Because there's no ideal answer, which means the Paladin is screwed no matter what he does. That's what a "Gotcha!" moment is, and saying that there isn't an ideal answer to the problem means the Paladin has a one way ticket to be subject to the biggest Trip maneuver of his life.
And lastly, doing the best that you can (your words), clearly isn't enough to warrant a Paladin the ability to maintain his powers, as evidenced by the adamant viewpoints of the posters in this thread (myself included). After all, as evidenced by the previous point I made, even if the Paladin isn't making the ideal choice, he'll still fall because he needs a choice that is better than ideal (which is where the superfluous term "perfect" comes from) to consider himself worthy of the rank of Paladinhood. Anything less than that, he loses his powers because of the "Gotcha!" moment that said Paladin should've seen coming (i.e. let them bleed out).
The funny thing is that, even if the Paladin had access to time travel to go back in time and let the bad guy bleed out, that's still grounds for falling because A. You're altering the course of history which can have dire consequences for the forces of Good in the future, and B. You're purposefully and with knowledge, letting a person, even if they're evil and horrible, die out. If you can't execute them due to their threat to innocents, then you sure as hell can't leave them to die, either, since that is similarly a death sentence that you have no authority to carry out. (Which means my personal plan to leave them to fend for themselves in the wilderness would've also made me fall as a Paladin; now I know why I don't play them in any campaign except as an NPC as a GM, because they're more Plot Devices/Holes than anything.)
So your saying unless that paladin makes the absolute perfect decision he falls? or are you accusing me of saying that?
My ruling would be as long as the paladin is trying to make the best choice I'm not going to make him fall for it. (as long as its reasonable.)
If you start dealing in absolute binary yes or no then the paladin falls 99.999 of the time because your saying their is only one correct answer. and infinity wrong answers. Heck I'm willing to bet if what you think is the right answer is just a wrong one because there is a better option out there.
In reality most evil deeds are not all considered the same level. theft versus murder for example both are bad but most people will say murder is evil every time while theft is kind of meh.
Good deeds would be the same way. there might be a meh ok choice and a A Oh that is super perfect LG choice. so oh he saves family and relocates them to keep them safe meh not bad. alternatively he spends the next 5 years of his life changing the system that the bad guy comes from and making him and all his people realize that they are on wrong and that only through his example can they be happy and righteous thus saving everyone and creating more good in the world. Now do I make the paladin fall because he didn't convert an entire city to his cause? heck no that is ridiculous.
like most human scales its a continuum if we compare average people we might be able to put them on a scale of good to bad say 3 5 7 however say we throw Ghandi mother Teresa and... heck Pelor with them. now they look super evil in comparison. any act is going to seem that way.
paladin kills bad guy not evil
paladin converts bad guy to his side good!
paladin turns society that raised bad guy into society that creates good guys and forever brightens the world creating world peace for all time. well now the first paladin kind of looks like crap.
So your saying unless that paladin makes the absolute perfect decision he falls? or are you accusing me of saying that?
My ruling would be as long as the paladin is trying to make the best choice I'm not going to make him fall for it. (as long as its reasonable.)
If you start dealing in absolute binary yes or no then the paladin falls 99.999 of the time because your saying their is only one correct answer. and infinity wrong answers. Heck I'm willing to bet if what you think is the right answer is just a wrong one because there is a better option out there.
In reality most evil deeds are not all considered the same level. theft versus murder for example both are bad but most people will say murder is evil every time while theft is kind of meh.
Good deeds would be the same way. there might be a meh ok choice and a A Oh that is super perfect LG choice. so oh he saves family and relocates them to keep them safe meh not bad. alternatively he spends the next 5 years of his life changing the system that the bad guy comes from and making him and all his people realize that they are on wrong and that only through his example can they be happy and righteous thus saving everyone and creating more good in the world. Now do I make the paladin fall because he didn't convert an entire city to his cause? heck no that is ridiculous.
like most human scales its a continuum if we compare average people we might be able to put them on a scale of good to bad say 3 5 7 however say we throw Ghandi mother Teresa and... heck Pelor with them. now they look super evil in comparison. any act is going to seem that way.
paladin kills bad guy not evil
paladin converts bad guy to his side good!
paladin turns society that raised bad guy into society that creates good guys and forever brightens the world creating world peace for all time. well now the first paladin kind of looks like crap.
Actually, I said that the word "perfect" is (ironically) a flawed premise, and presumed that the synonymous term "ideal" was the intention. (After all, perfection has no actual manifestation.)
If there's no "ideal" answer, which is the expectation of a Paladin to seek out and acquire, then he falls regardless of his choice, because there is no choice that fits the criteria required. That's just how the Paladin code works, and is how a GM creates a "Gotcha!" situation. (And as I've said before, it's also why I don't like playing Paladins than as anything more than NPCs via GM Tools, because playing them as anything else is precisely what spawns threads like these.)
Even so, after you boil out all of the minutiae, you're still left with the same bare bones as always, which is "What's the Paladin doing, and does it make him fall?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what you don't do is judge him against perfect but you can judge him against the best he can do. If the player takes the time to think and comes up with the best they can and it is at least falling into the least good action that is still good.(I can't really put that into words its more of an intuition to be honest.) I say give it to them then expect a little more next time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So what you don't do is judge him against perfect but you can judge him against the best he can do. If the player takes the time to think and comes up with the best they can and it is at least falling into the least good action that is still good.(I can't really put that into words its more of an intuition to be honest.) I say give it to them then expect a little more next time.
PFS has a rule that you have to warn someone BEFORE they up and violate their alignment. (and 99% of dms will read that as codes as well). This is WHY that rule exists: because you never know what a DM is going to consider an alignment violation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is a good rule of thumb for any game. I usually drop big hints myself.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quentin Coldwater wrote:
There's a fairly recent PFS adventure where a lot of players have complained that the final encounter is a "Paladin trap."
which AP is that?