| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And threads like this remind me why before allowing a player to take a Paladin as a PC they send me a copy of their Paladin's Code and we thrash things out before play begins. I try and include a half dozen things that will cause a Paladin to fall (in my view) also.
We then all have an expectation then on how each of us roleplay that particular Code. No 'GOTCHA!' moments.
I'm not super up on Ragathiel lore but isn't that PC arc basically what Ragatheils story is?
What sounds like the honorable thing? A foe is defeated and so surrenders. They are no longer fighting you, they are no longer a combatant. Accept their surrender, be it just for questioning about the area or taking them to a legal authority (assuming they are a criminal)? Or kill them? It shouldn't be a hard question. It is clearly honorable to accept a surrender. Are there reasons why you shouldn't or are unable to at any specific time? Of course, but the basic answer is,stabbing(forget that) 'killing' someone who is not a threat is not honorable. You have the option to take them prisoner or knock them unconscious or restrain them.It's also not clearly dishonorable to execute them.
Executing someone who's surrendered can definitely be honorable so long as you are not being sadistic about it.
Refusing quarter to an enemy is dishonorable (at least for default Paladins). There can be exceptions, of course, case by case.
Execution is a different story, but that assumes the Paladin has the legal authority to condemn someone to death (a person who hasn't been legally condemned can't be executed, that's just normal killing), so it depends on the specifics of the situation and the laws of the land.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How is it dishonorable? I defeated him and i'm granting him a swift and merciful death, as well as giving justice to those they have wronged. Nowhere in the Paladin code (or class write up) does it say I must show mercy to foes.
Legality is not and should never be a factor, ever. A Paladin's authority derives from their code/god not from whomever is defacto leader of the patch of dirt he's standing on. Divine powers gave me the ability to smite evil, not go check with your local bureaucrat then apprehend evil.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Firewarrior44 is right, what a Paladin is allowed to do without falling shouldn't be dictated by whose borders they just happened to cross. People take lawful too literally, being lawful good doesn't mean you're obsessively focused on doing the exact letter or the law regardless of where you are and what the law says.
It means being honourable (this can be different for different people) and truthful, your word meaning something and believing in justice and systems of government or monarchies being effective and not a hindrance. Not being obsessed with the small print all the time.
To extrapolate, how do you determine weather or not an authority is legitimate? It's simple you look and see if their ethos and ideals are in line with your Paladin code. A Government that condones, actively participates in and, encourages torture for example should not have any bearing on how a Paladin must act.
So you would be forced to say well that government isn't legitimate. And the reason for that lack of legitimacy to the Paladin? It is because it fly's in the face of his code. therefore his code and ethos takes precedent over all others including governments wishes.
He's still lawful as he has a set of ideals that he upholds and rigidly adheres to even in the face of a legal entity that would hinder or inconvenience him. He will not bend his knee he will not adapt he will stick to his principles regardless of what local law enforcement thinks of his actions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well I don't know about that one, Paladin of Iomadea should probably be allowed to engage in a little bit of torture. After all iomadea isn't above kidnapping people who help her and blasting them if they rub her the wrong way. If she can do it don't know why her Paladins can't.
/totally not bitter.
/totally haven't ever ranted about this.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sure your wrath is of the righteous sort :P
|
How do you, the GM, think it is breaking the code ?
It might be dishonorable or even illegal in some societies to kill someone who surrendered
Maybe in others it is the opposite way
The Paladin should first rigidly follow the tenets of his own culture and when feasible follow the rules of the country they are in, at least the letter of it
A Lawful person will always avoid openly breaking a law if they can avoid it
Well I don't know about that one, Paladin of Iomadea should probably be allowed to engage in a little bit of torture. After all iomadea isn't above kidnapping people who help her and blasting them if they rub her the wrong way. If she can do it don't know why her Paladins can't.
/totally not bitter.
/totally haven't ever ranted about this.
I really enjoyed that thread about Iomedae, jolly good fun, that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your excuse for killing people, whether that's against the law or not, is that... you're above the laws that apply to everyone else? And your reasoning for this is because...
you can summon a warhorse and cast divine spells?I think we are just at two different places on what you consider to be respecting legitimate authority is. You claim that ignoring the laws and governments that everyone else abides by is acceptable... I think it's not. I am not going to persuade you otherwise, but I cannot follow your logic that you are upholding the law, honor, and Justice by taking it upon yourself to be a vigilante, that would be Chaotic Good, at best.
Those are my feelings on it.
You have been ordered by legal counsel to hunt down and execute man x, you find and chase man x as he runs. Unbeknownst to you man x and yourself cross a border into a land that your masters have no authority in, in this land the death penalty is illegal. You execute the man. You broke the law, you fall.
This is why Paladins being ruled by the laws of the land doesn't work, you powers divine source is not a legal document, it is a god who has their own ideas about the law that my not match the local city council, they are not going to punish you for doing the right thing in the wrong place because they are not mindless computer programs.
... snip ...It's also not clearly dishonorable to execute them.
Executing someone who's surrendered can definitely be honorable so long as you are not being sadistic about it.
Part 1. - So long as your reason for killing / executing them is for a Just and Righteous cause then yes it's fine, motive matters. Wanton murder for the sake of furthing the mafia's influence is not.
I never have claimed nor intended to claim that the act of killing the priest could be viewed as illegal, just that killing the priest in no way would cause the Paladin to fall.
I also never claimed that the Paladin is a representative of the government or law enforcement, nor that he is impersonating them. He is bringing Law yes, but it is his law not the local authorities. In fact impersonating and claiming to be an arm of the government when you are not would be a much more valid reason to fall in my opinion.
Part 2. - As I have previously stated to be a Paladin you must be lawful good and follow a god who is lawful good or lawful neutral or neutral good. If I am another brand of paladin who follows a god of murder then I am an anti-paladin or a Blackgaurd.
I don't need to give the criminal a fair trial if I don't feel it is warranted no. I can or I cannot, it's up to my judgement to decide as my code does not dictate what I must do in that situation.
If I allow a local government to dictate what I can and cannot do then I very quickly will no longer be a Paladin as if their ethos is at odds with my own I will be stuck in a no win situation, given that such a contradiction and interpretation would make my divine mandate as a Paladin untenable it cannot be the correct interpretation.
If a government is benevolent then I will view them as legitimate respect them to the best of my ability while still adhering to my code, if they are not then I will not view them as legitimate and ignore them. And any combination in between. The Paladin Code trumps any and all local laws.
Your excuse for killing people, whether that's against the law or not, is that... you're above the laws that apply to everyone else? And your reasoning for this is because...
you can summon a warhorse and cast divine spells?I think we are just at two different places on what you consider to be respecting legitimate authority is. You claim that ignoring the laws and governments that everyone else abides by is acceptable... I think it's not. I am not going to persuade you otherwise, but I cannot follow your logic that you are upholding the law, honor, and Justice by taking it upon yourself to be a vigilante, that would be Chaotic Good, at best.
Those are my feelings on it.
You have been ordered by legal counsel to hunt down and execute man x, you find and chase man x as he runs. Unbeknownst to you man x and yourself cross a border into a land that your masters have no authority in, in this land the death penalty is illegal. You execute the man. You broke the law, you fall.
This is why Paladins being ruled by the laws of the land doesn't work, you powers divine source is not a legal document, it is a god who has their own ideas about the law that my not match the local city council, they are not going to punish you for doing the right thing in the wrong place because they are not mindless computer programs.
Bonus points you're a Paladin of Torag and the man is a Dwarf Priest of your faith
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Being lawful does not turn you into a robot unable to contextualise and it doesn't make arbitrarily beholden to every single law of every land you inhabit unthinkingly. You're a follower of a code of conduct usually set out by a god. Not every single legal document ever passed out by every single city ever in history and said legal documents have nothing to do with the origin of your powers and therefore cannot facilitate your fall.
You seem to have confused lawful person with unthinking Robot.
I honestly can't understand how you would think that was a reasonable way to run a class in a game about killing evil people.
Oh and stop throwing insults about arrogance and vanity around, there are plenty of names I can think for your way of thinking which I am refraining from employing because this debate is already frustrating enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pizza Lord, how do you discern when the authority is and isn't legitimate?
To throw your "god requires you to murder" argument back at you you enter a town who's laws require you to commit dishonorable or evil acts. Now you're in a position where any arbitrary local law can strip you of your powers.
Respecting an authority I consider legitimate and being forced to follow that authorities rules to whom I inherently have no allegiance or duty other than my immediate location less I lose my divine powers are two very different things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have been ordered by legal counsel to hunt down and execute man x, you find and chase man x as he runs. Unbeknownst to you man x and yourself cross a border into a land that your masters have no authority in, in this land the death penalty is illegal. You execute the man. You broke the law, you fall.
Actually, that works perfectly fine. That's how it should work when a paladin breaks laws and acts as their own law without regard to the rights of others. You are warned by your god that you made a mistake. That is a blessing for you. You are being directly informed that you're being an asshat. No other class gets that connection with their faith, code, or beliefs. It's always... well... a couple more of those and you might... maybe change alignment... or feel bad... Not for you, paladin. That is one of the features of your class and you cherish that kind of attention that you get, even when you do wrong, because you also know that when you make your wrong right, you can be forgiven.
Here's the thing though by your logic you had no choice you fall regardless, as the first authority mandated to chase the man down, and saying no or not hunting him down / giving up chase would be disrespect and thus cause you to fall anyways.
If you followed someone beyond the jurisdiction of the law and powers you have been granted (in this case to hunt down and execute someone) then if they make it to another legitimate area of authority where you hold no such power, then you cannot exercise the authority from the other location. It's not a hard concept to grasp. If a town makes you the sheriff and you have the power to arrest (or even execute legally) people, that doesn't mean you can go to any town or any kingdom and start arresting or killing people doing things that are not illegal there. It doesn't matter if it's against the law to spit on the street in your town, if you go to where it isn't against the law, you cannot legally punish people for it.
You're not legally punishing them your rendering divine judgement. And My power is not derived from the local government or a sheriffs badge it's from my faith.
You don't get to cover your eyes and ears when you ride into town so you don't read that area's laws or not make an effort to learn the laws and rules of the land. You don't get to just go "La-la-la! I'm not listening to you!" as you enter new areas and claim you didn't know it was okay to wear red on Thursday and that people actually think jailing people for that (like they do in that othervillage over in the other kingdom that you come from) is kind of absurd sounding.Don't claim that your ignorance of the law gives you immunity to it or that your failure to know and understand the legitimate rule of the location you are in gives you the right to act with impunity. It does not. You are held to a higher standard. You are meant to be the embodiment and beacon of justice and morality. You don't half-ass your pursuit, you take it seriously (that is not to mean you just kill everyone because bringing someone to justice or obeying legal and rightful laws is inconvenient to you.) You do things the right way.
Not claiming legal immunity or immunity to any potential legal repercussions just that there would be no divinely mandated repercussion (losing powers).
Unless you think it's not absurd for a Paladin to lose all his powers for riding into town wearing the wrong colour.
Having said that, in the case where you chase a subject into another territory (that has laws, not the wilderness), and you do commit a crime (killing them when you have no authority or standing) then as soon as you realize what you did, you turn yourself into the proper authorities (and you can explain your mistake) but you give them the chance to rule on your crime (and you aren't denying you committed it.) Maybe they see the mistake as reasonable and wave it off (maybe there is a legal 'in hot pursuit' legality,) or maybe they're complete sticklers for the laws and justice and you serve your sentence (whatever that may be) lawfully and justly.
It was stipulated that we did not know we were in another territory. And presumably turn around and head back after he is slain, never finding out. Would you just lose your power at some random time after that?
If the sentence for what you did is death, you uphold that and if you believe your deity agrees... then he's perfectly within his rights and powers to smite everyone around and spirit you away to a paradise of magical pleasures as a reward... or do it after you die.
I wasn't aware deities interceded every time a terrible or unjust law was passed that harmed their divine agents.
You do not get to compound you arrogance and vanity by deciding that not only did you violate a lawful law and authority once, that you get to determine that their judgement is going to be and whether it will inconvenience your adventuring life. You are a paladin, own up to your actions, make what you did right. Otherwise you are dismissing and trampling the rights and dignity of everyone else that agrees to follow the law, that is you being a tyrant, not a paladin.You must atone for what you did. You acted outside the law and your authority. That atonement can take many forms that suit the situation, but facing the consequences of what did, will always be a part of that,
If all of the Paladins Authority to slay evil and do justice in the name of [Good] is predicated on adhering every single edict that is passed in the land he is currently inhabiting then the Paldin cannot do his job.
What if the Paladin Crusades into hell to rescue someone / slay devils, but there's a sign that says "No Paldain's Allowed - signed Asmodeous". He Now by your logic cannot go there without losing his powers.
The position is just too precarious to be tenable or a correct interpretation.
If all of the Paladins Authority to slay evil and do justice in the name of [Good] is predicated on adhering every single edict that is passed in the land he is currently inhabiting then the Paldin cannot do his job.
So what does the Paladin do when he's arrested for breaking the laws ie not adhering to the edicts (aka laws) of the land? Go on the lam? (chaotic) Attack the LG constabulary? (evil)
Most characters have some leeway if they find themselves on the wrong side of the law, but for Paladins it's a choice between jail and falling. Not to mention breaking the law is a violation of the Paladin's Code.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Surrender is a request.
It's a privilege, not a right. It may be granted, it may not.
The Cleric took his chances, and lost.
If failure to grant quarter is an auto-fall, that would be an easy way to get rid of all those pesky Paladins.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If all of the Paladins Authority to slay evil and do justice in the name of [Good] is predicated on adhering every single edict that is passed in the land he is currently inhabiting then the Paldin cannot do his job.So what does the Paladin do when he's arrested for breaking the laws ie not adhering to the edicts (aka laws) of the land? Go on the lam? (chaotic) Attack the LG constabulary? (evil)
Most characters have some leeway if they find themselves on the wrong side of the law, but for Paladins it's a choice between jail and falling. Not to mention breaking the law is a violation of the Paladin's Code.
At that point it's down to his judgement. I'm only asserting he's free from divine repercussions. I'm not asserting that's he free from other repercussions.
1. I personally think it should be up to the paladin to make the decision. If he chooses wrongly more people could die, and that will also be on him.
2. From a real life perspective I think a GM should decide how much leeway paladins have before the game starts and explain this to the player. Also, if a GM comes here asking what should happen he definitely shouldn't make the paladin fall. The GM is the voice of the deity that the paladin worships. If he doesn't know what to do then there is no way the player will know.
I would say no. It might rate as a warning letter depending on his deity though. Not taking a surrender is pretty dishonorable, unless the paladin had good reason to think it wasn't in earnest.
Given that their is a lawful good deity who explicitly outlaws accepting surrender I'd say that's a pretty questionable statement.
Given that their is a lawful good deity who explicitly outlaws accepting surrender I'd say that's a pretty questionable statement.
Oh, if it was ragathiel that execution comes with a horn and trumpet party to celebrate the commendation.
Torag too, but there'd be more ale
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just call him orderly good and most of the alignment problems are solved.
Lawful doesn't mean you follow every law. It means you promote order.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to mention breaking the law is a violation of the Paladin's Code.
Paladins are required to respect legitimate authority and maintain a lawful alignment. Neither of those things require that the paladin never break any laws - though a just law from a legitimate authority should be harder for the paladin to disregard than an unjust law from an illegitimate authority.
OP: I suggest you resist the urge to 'make it a RILLY KEWL REDEMPTION STORY'. I have *never* seen one of those work according to plan, and in fact can drive players away from a table.
I've seen it work, but only when the thing the character is seeking redemption for something happened before the start of the campaign, in which case their choices during the campaign express and hopefully fulfill that desire for redemption.
In this case I took the decision to make the evil priest (a cleric a few levels higher than the paladin) surrender for the following reason. The player involved has been crafting a detailed back story about the character that involves his lineage being corrupted by evil outsiders at some point, giving his character the impetus to do more good in the world (and a cool reason for Eldritch Heritage: Infernal). This was to be a moment of importance to the character, either the beginning of a downward path to embrace that family history or as a "moment of weakness" that serves as a stark self-inflicted warning of what might happen should they look down that path. The player has taken it as the latter of those two and we will work from there. So not quite a full "Fall and Redemption" arch, but a roleplaying moment that makes sense for that character that will give the players something cool to chat about.
This sounds like one of those "redemption from backstory" concepts.
Though to clarify - you're saying that after the paladin refused to accept the cleric's surrender you asked the player if they wanted this to be the beginning of a fall arc or a reminder to restrain their bloodthirsty impulses? That sounds like a good way to handle it. Hope it goes interesting places.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No one has claimed this. That would be more akin to being Lawful Neutral. Even then, I don't see how you equate consideration and respect for laws as being an unthinking creature
Nope Lawful neutral people have minds and can think too. I equate making incredibly stupid and life threatening decisions based on the letter of the law without considering the actual situation you're in. Like putting handcuffs on the magical leader of a dark cult and then taking them a to a village to hold them, assuming nothing will go wrong with this plan along the way and that the village can hold them whilst knowing that they have powerful magic = unthinking, or maybe oblivious.
No one says a paladin has to follow or agree with every law, but they must respect a legitimate authority, that means respecting their laws and their right to pass them and enforce them.
how exactly does that intercede on the fact that they're divine warriors empowered by the gods, not the city council exactly? Being respectful and being beholden are different things.
If you don't think that you can, in good conscience, co-exist or interact with a town or a group of people merely because they decide that they're sick of horse manure in their streets and they've passed an ordinance to that effect, you can either keep your horse out of town, not summon it in town, or not go into that town and take yourself elsewhere. You don't have a divine right to claim that because your deity gives you the ability to do something illegal, like summon a horse, that that is a divine declaration that their laws are worthless.
what an incredible disingenuous argument. Everyone else is talking about whether Paladins have the right to kill great forces of evil and you take this to mean they run ruff shod over every single rule. Remember when I talked about context? This is why its important.
I want to park my horse where I want =/= It is best that a kill this powerful evil force whilst I have the chance.
Just like it may not be illegal to walk on the grass anywhere else in the world, if there's a patch of grass in one spot in a town where it is forbidden, you will not just trample over it because your god's decree isn't 'Keep of the Grass.'
That is not respecting authority.
These situations are not 'just like' eachother, two of them are ridiculously petty nonesense one is not.
Similarly, if a there was a law in town that said divinations (such as as detect evil or reading thoughts) were violations of privacy and are illegal, a paladin doesn't get to say that because they have the power to do it, that means they can ignore the law.
actually if it gets in the way of them conducting their divine duty in a war against evil then yeah. Sure they shouldn't go round breaking the law willy nilly but if they believe that person in house number 4 is in fact a evil high priest spreading corruption throughout the land it is more important to them, their god and their duty that they check that.
It doesn't matter whether your detect evil comes from a deity, a magic spell, a magic item, or an in-born talent. It also doesn't matter whether it can even be detected that he's using it (that may make it harder to be caught) but a paladin does not break laws because he feels like it.
No he breaks the Law because he feels that it is necessary and the fact his power comes from a god who wants the this cultist dead and has no devotion to the city council is exactly why he will not fall for this.
Even if his code requires him to hunt down evil, there are numerous was to do so without using invasive divination magics. They may take longer, require Sense Motive, observation, or actual investigation, but the fact that it's inconvenient does not allow one to flaunt the law. Otherwise you have a situation where the paladin is saying, "Well, it's against the law to invade someone's privacy and learn personal information... but that's only if I use the detect evil in this wand... or it's cast be a cleric. If I invade their privacy and break the law with my Paladin detect evil that makes it okay.
No what makes it okay is every minute he waste's doing things the mundane way, more people can die. The potential risk that he is invading one innocent persons privacy (with minimal consequence I might have) is outweighed by the fact innocent people will die if he doesn't.
That is not the same as if you rode into town and someone says, "Hey, horses are not allowed in town, by law." Technically you are breaking a law, that doesn't make you fall or lose your paladin status, you either make a reasonable effort to abide by the law or you go elsewhere. If you do break the law, you face the consequences or decision of the legitimate authority of the area. Your god (in most cases) grants you those power because this is how you act, not so you can use them as an excuse not to follow your Code of Conduct (which specifically says to respect legitimate authority.)
You seriously think that Torag would choose that their Paladin who broke the law by doing detect evil on a notorious Dwarf murderer is going to make you fall because Detect evil was illegal? I don't. If you haven't realized I'm ignoring your ridiculous walking on the grass examples because they have none of the important contextual factors or cases of two duties of a paladin contradicting eachother that the arguments people are actually concerned with have.
Again, this thread has never mentioned any tangent or variant paladins or Codes of Conduct. Do they exist, probably, but I don't think any of them specifically say to not respect legitimate authority.
So what about the ones that explicitly state you're not to accept surrender? Like Torag or the Crimson templars. A Lawful good group of Assassins working directly for a lawful good god.
It does matter if those laws are just and apply fairly to those they pertain to, escpecially when its your Code of Conduct that says to respect legitimate authority. It doesn't matter where your power comes from, whether its from magical study, a sorcerous bloodline, or granted by a deity like a cleric. The laws have no way to 'facilitate your fall.'
You either don't understand the argument people are making or you're strawmaning. People aren't saying he can disregard the law because a god gave him magic, people are saying he won't fall because he broke the law if whilst doing so he was doing what his god would have wanted him to.
Your own actions are what make you fall. You may be tricked into something that violates your code, you may be in a bad situation where you must break your code, but ultimately it is a choice the paladin makes, even if it's a bad choice that seems like it will lead to a fall regardless.
His magic is granted by a god, Gods like having magical super soldiers they're useful, therefore the fact that on paper they have to brake a rule and therefore fall doesn't mean they actually will because Gods have minds and can see, oh look either way he was screwed, but he was doing the best he could in an impossible situation. I guess I'll keep my super soldier, there was nothing he could do. Gods have minds, they're not computer programmes with the master programming 'paladin code'
(The assumption here is not that the GM is being spiteful or just pulling a gotcha, but that there are in fact situations that are difficult and require thought, dedication, and a willingness to face them. Bad GMing does happen, but let's not assume that every bad situation is the GMs fault. Players make mistakes and sometimes do things that make no sense as well.)
Writing a plot that forces a player to brake the rules whether they take option X or option Y and ruling that the god doesn't care that they were still acting in the gods best interest in an impossible situation is never good GMing unless you already planned it with the player.
If the Code you chose says that you cannot kill a rabbit (because your god loves rabbits), if you kill a rabbit you have violated your code and you lose your powers.
another ridiculous example.
Whether you accidentally killed it by trampling it with your horse, or you thought it was something else and you shot it by mistake, or you killed it because you were starving and needed to feed yourself or others, or even if it was an evil rampaging bunny and you did it to protect someone. You broke you Code, the hows and whys of it may mitigate or determine the penance and atonement you must go through, but there is no debate that when you violate your Code of Conduct you lose your powers.
are you being serious Lawful good deity of rabbits is mad because you killed Chaotic evil rabbit monster that was killing innocent people? Again I repeat the gods have minds. They're good they're not petty morons they will not punish their soldiers for saving the innocent and smiting chaotic evil beings.
No, every description of a paladin's actions that I have described indicate that they are considerate of others, think about their actions, take time to learn the proper methods for dispensing justice and working within the law, and consider the consequences and whether they are willing to risk falling (and having to atone) when they must make a difficult choice. That is not an unthinking robot.
You've described Paladins that will knowingly let innocent people die because following the law to the letter is more important to them than being a warrior fighting for a Lawful good god saving the innocent. You're describing a Lawful Robot.
That may be the crux of the difficulty. For you, you may enjoy just running around smashing bad-guys and racking up kills.
No the crux of the issue is that you think the code and falling mechanic is ran by a computer programme that sees infractions out of context and Paladins fall constantly in the line of their duty as I result of it. I believe gods have priorities can see decisions paladins made in the context they made them and make informed decisions about whether they fall or not because Paladins are useful to them and making them fall literally because they're doing their job in the gods best interest is ridiculous.
Your assumption about me is wrong.
That's fine, but don't make the assumption that you are in the majority (though there's probably a lot of people that enjoy smiting bad guys in addition to enjoying this game for other reasons.) Some people enjoy the socialization, some enjoy the challenge of playing a character (especially one like a paladin that isn't free to act how they wish), Some like puzzles, or exploring, or designing tactics, some just like designing characters. I am not saying that defeating bad guys isn't fun or a part of it, but you've stated multiple times that killing bad-guys is what the game is about and called people 'obtuse' if they didn't understand that. I think you need to pause and consider that, while some people might agree with you, your idea of what the game is about is not the real or whole reason others do.I do understand that if you think all that Pathfinder is is a game about killing bad guys, that would explain your reluctance to view the paladin class as being one with restrictions that other classes don't have. I would suggest then, that you are missing out on a lot of things that make great stories (and not just ones about your paladin falling.) There's political intrigue, court schemes, diplomacy, converting an enemy to a friend... If you're happy with your games being about slaying evil, run with it. Just trying to rationalize why you can kill every creature that comes into conflict actually stifles the true potential of a game. Again,if you like it that way, not saying that's wrong.
You are wrong, this is a strawman and the most patronizing thing I have ever read on this forum. Stick to what people are actually debating not guessing the motivations.
I'm here to make an announcement.
Having mulled the situation over, we've concluded that the paladin, having killed a creature that was most certainly evil but had surrendered to the paladin in an act begging for mercy, has violated code.
Which code? Well, we don't know which code actually. But we definitely know that given certain circumstances, in some regions, following some gods, that the paladin has fallen from grace. But, in other circumstances, they would not have.
What we are proposing is a paladin dishonour/honour regional instigation, where the paladin will be considered fallen in areas primarily venerating a particular god who possesses a paladin order who would have abhorred the idea of their paladins killing a surrendered foe. In instances where the code would have allowed the execution, they have instead not fallen and can continue to operate as normal within this region. In areas without such deities in power, the paladin is to operate on the presumption that they have fallen, but they are allowed their divine powers should the need arise.
We believe, or at least the higher ups believe, this will ensure confusion is kept to a minimum but punishment is just and fair where applicable.
Personally I just want to throw this paladin into jail, but apparently my opinion doesn't matter. Honestly, I'm not paid enough for this s&!#....
Oh s$##
I'm stuck in a thread about Paladins falling, I always said I'd never let it happen to me ... but I have.
S$~$.
How do you, the GM, think it is breaking the code ?
It might be dishonorable or even illegal in some societies to kill someone who surrendered
Maybe in others it is the opposite way
The Paladin should first rigidly follow the tenets of his own culture and when feasible follow the rules of the country they are in, at least the letter of it
A Lawful person will always avoid openly breaking a law if they can avoid it
In my opinion the paladin didnt break cross the line. I do think they came close however.
Not to mention breaking the law is a violation of the Paladin's Code.Paladins are required to respect legitimate authority and maintain a lawful alignment. Neither of those things require that the paladin never break any laws - though a just law from a legitimate authority should be harder for the paladin to disregard than an unjust law from an illegitimate authority.
OP: I suggest you resist the urge to 'make it a RILLY KEWL REDEMPTION STORY'. I have *never* seen one of those work according to plan, and in fact can drive players away from a table.I've seen it work, but only when the thing the character is seeking redemption for something happened before the start of the campaign, in which case their choices during the campaign express and hopefully fulfill that desire for redemption.
In this case I took the decision to make the evil priest (a cleric a few levels higher than the paladin) surrender for the following reason. The player involved has been crafting a detailed back story about the character that involves his lineage being corrupted by evil outsiders at some point, giving his character the impetus to do more good in the world (and a cool reason for Eldritch Heritage: Infernal). This was to be a moment of importance to the character, either the beginning of a downward path to embrace that family history or as a "moment of weakness" that serves as a stark self-inflicted warning of what might happen should they look down that path. The player has taken it as the latter of those two and we will work from there. So not quite a full "Fall and Redemption" arch, but a roleplaying moment that makes sense for that character that will give the players something cool to chat about.This sounds like one of those "redemption from backstory" concepts.
Though to clarify - you're saying that after the paladin refused to accept the cleric's surrender you asked the player if they wanted this to be the beginning...
As a GM I am keen to let players have as much control over their story as possible. As I have said i didnt think this as was enough to make them fall as a paladin. But it could have been enough to start them down that path.
In this case the player is all aboard for the "must do better" feeling from their god and renew their efforts to do good things in the world. Also the paladin has a Hippogryff mount which is too cool to give up.
That's how I feel of a GM asking the message boards if a paladin should fall - if he has to ask it's no.1. I personally think it should be up to the paladin to make the decision. If he chooses wrongly more people could die, and that will also be on him.
2. From a real life perspective I think a GM should decide how much leeway paladins have before the game starts and explain this to the player. Also, if a GM comes here asking what should happen he definitely shouldn't make the paladin fall. The GM is the voice of the deity that the paladin worships. If he doesn't know what to do then there is no way the player will know.
In this case, as it was the first time i have GM'd a group with a paladin that even came close to doing something "bad", i asked because i was curious as to what other people thought.
I also feel that way, there just wasn't enough there to get a sense of the paladin's motives or intent. It's probably for the best you didn't try and go into any more details of the story, though.
What lands, laws, rulers, authority or religion the paladin had or what was actually said between the paladin and cleric, or how the player stated his character was acting. It makes it hard to be thorough when objectivity is probably best... You've got a lot of grit sticking it out this long.
There are quite a few details that I had left out, including the race of both paladin and cleric (homebrewed winged albino elf and a hybrid deep one respectively). I also didnt mention that a legal entity of the crown had given them some legal powers directly related to the swift end of the deep one cult within the city. I also didnt go into the fact that paladin had done the significant portion of the damage the cleric had taken so far. Then there was the fact that the cleric had just hit the paladin with Fearful Touch, thud removing her immunity to fear. Or that the party wizard had inflicted Blindness on the cleric. All relevant i guess :)
@ Pizza Lord You misunderstood my first point and then proceeded to argue for it.
My first point was how do you consider an authority legitimate and by extension how do you tell which laws you must abide?
You then go on to state arbitrary/unjust laws can be ignored without a penalty however other arbitrary laws cannot be ignored without penalty.
There's a dissonance here.
A paladin can jaywalk, for instance, to push someone out of the way of a cart or to rush to someone's aid. The fact that they broke a law does not make them fall.
The above is an instance of you stating ignoring a law to do good and the repercussions being only financial. but him not losing his powers despite breaking a law.
You've also stated it's OK to break laws when you feel they are unjust. Like paying a mandatory 'tithe' (bribe) to judges and officials which is no more arbitrary than a toll to cross a bridge (pay or lose powers by your argument).
Your argument/positions has not internal consistency and is totally subjective over what is and isn't just.
==========================
On the issue of atonement.
You're honestly saying that a Paladin can expect to Pay 500 - 3000 gold (spell-casting services are not free, and knowingly breaking a law by your logic automatically adds 2500 gp to the cost) for a 5th level spell more or less every time he goes out to fight evil in addition to losing his powers at the first arbitrary legal obstacle he encounters.
You're also in a position where knowingly killing an Evil high priest who is directly working against your faith (raising hoards of undead / blood sacrifice of orphans what have you) will instantly cost you all of you powers and abilities to fight evil until you can find a 9th+ level cleric and pay 3,000 gold for atonement as you willingly broke a law of the city that say do not kill Priests (city is LN).
The Padadin is being PUNISHED BY HIS GOD for saving orphans / people souls / carrying out his will, for the sole reason that he broke a local mortal law
Or even more absurd entering the castle of an evil vampire king (who is the legitimate authority of the land) who murders his people and raises them as undead causes instant loss of powers as the decree of the land is no one but those the king has designated may enter the castle. instant 3,000 gold tax and loss of powers.
(or even my previous enter Hell example)
It's by your logic impossible for a Paladin to overthrow a Tyrant (without divine penalty) by your logic unless you arbitrarily decide he's not a legitimate authority.
At no time have I ever said a paladin will knowingly or willingly let innocents die because they must follow a law. I am quite sure that a paladin will break a law to protect an innocent or save a life. Such as walking on sacred, forbidden ground to quickly reach a person in danger or knocking someone out of the way of a charging horse or wagon even if that class or type of person is deemed 'untouchable' (because of royalty, station, or holiness.) Again, as stated many times, the Paladin Code of Conduct does not state Break No Laws, it states Respect Legitimate Authority. If you are protecting a life (and this means imminent danger or threat, not some potential fear of a future threat), then your actions are justified, you still suffer the consequences of your actions (whatever those may be, either from the law or whatever authority, even your deity, has jurisdiction over you.
So we're basically arguing the same point with a different perspectives.
I read your quote as:
"A Paladin can break any law so long as they think they are Justified in doing so. The Paladin will not fall as a result of breaking that law if their motive for doing so is in adherence to the Paladin's code and ethos. It does not make them immune to legal repercussions but, it does mean they would not Fall as a result."
What confuses me is your position seems to omit the very last part (not falling). The notion that upholding/sticking to your principles and values would cause you to fall is patently absurd to me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lawful has nothing whatsoever to do with the law. That is to say, it can, but it never has to. Even a Lawful Neutral person might have no regard whatsoever for the laws of, say, the King of Taldor--they might be Lawful Neutral because they themselves are faithful agents, right or wrong, of Taldor's enemies in Qadira, obedient to the rules of their organization and the orders they are given, even as carrying out those orders breaks Taldor's laws and destabilizes it's government. Or they may have been raised in Thieves Guild, illegal, but possessed of an organizational code which they faithfully adhere to.
Lawful means order, discipline, consistency, a firm belief in universal principles. None of that means following every rule that may be imposed on you. Hell, in some cases, a Lawful person might well be more likely to break the law than a Chaotic person, who might have the flexibility to insincerely go along with something that offends their principles that a Lawful person simply cannot countenance, even temporarily.
A Paladin is Lawful not because they over any temporal law--though they certainly don't break them casually, either--but because they keep to he unyielding principles of their Code, as dictated by their Paladin order, God, or potentially their own consistent set of principles. Now, absent any further context, I'd say most versions of the Paladin Code at least strongly encourage accepting the cult leader's surrender, but there's also no shortage of those that allow denying it, and perhaps even require it. And while I favor merciful Paladins, assumptions of both the game in general and their particular mechanics make comparisons to modern expectations of policing imperfect at best. So, if expectations about how the paladin should view surrender weren't properly calibrated before all this, I'd say make sure an understanding is reached going forward, but leave this one alone.