Non-Violent crimes sounds firmly neutral and possibly evil. I concur with Balkoth, needs more information.
Paladin doesn't have to go around punishing every wrongdoer they see. A simple *tsk* *tsk* while refusing to directly participate in malfeasance while gently shepherding those around him to hopefully make better choices in the future.
A lawful character doesn't have to go around advocating everyone follow the rules all the time, any more than a chaotic character has to go around telling everyone to break the rules all the time. Mostly your alignment describes how you organize your own life, not the lives of those around you.
I've been in lots of mixed parties with Paladins and I've never found it to be an annoyance if the Paladin is played well (admittedly sometimes I'm the Paladin so I obviously wouldn't find it annoying, but I'd like to think I'm okay at it.)
Think about it this way - most people, just being people, are Lawful Good. You do your best to not break the law while doing what you think is right.
The paladin is beholden to the basic code / code of deity / oath of charity. Law of the land should be respected, but it doesn't supercede.
Refuse to participate in theft, but only try to stop it if it's a malicious act: stealing from the poor, threatening the livelihood of the target, etc. Depending on the paladin's deity, it may be of utmost importance to protect your friends/traveling party. You may go with them on a heist, refuse to help commit the actual crimes, give them a short lecture before, about how chaos is not the way, then accompany to "watch over them" ensuring they neither succumb to too much greed or commit a truly evil act.
I have a hard time imagining good characters, even chaotic good, would be stealing from a benevelont person, lawful good society, etc. If you're robbing the poor, stealing from a temple of a good god/goddess, etc, you're looking at that character jumping into evil.
Here's an example: a Lawful good paladin is walking down the streets of Cheliax - a land that is ruled by evil. Does the paladin put following evil law above doing good and following the paladin code/code of the god? Maybe I'm more lax with Paladin rules, but IMO their highest authority is their deity/paladin code, then the oath of charity, then they should do their best to observe the laws of the land that are good and just. Let's assume the paladin follows Seranrae.If the party is stealing and the paladin goes along to keep things from going bad, protect friends, etc, but it still seems unlawful or non-good, maybe your paladin gets a little scorched or sunburnt, showing the goddesses disfavor, and must do a minor repentance or community service act.
As long as you're not doing something bad enough to fully shift alignment or fall, toeing the line shouldn't break your game. Committing one minor neutral or chaotic act, such as looking the other way while your rogue steals from a slimy loan shark, doesn't undo a lawful character. If you rob the local food stores or temple, different story.
Assuming the DM is not an extreme code-enforcer, it's all about the player.
I have played with some paladins (and an anti-paladin, too) and never had any problem. Of course if you mix paladins and hopless troublemakers in the same group, something bad is bound to happen; but otherwise just relax, play your characters and let the paladin player enjoy his class.
I have played a paladin too: my deity was Shelyn, and while I never bothered to read specific codes, my goals were clear and I sticked to them.
When two members of my group, a cleric of Pharasma and her equally-faithful brother, met some people who worshipped Pharasma too, but were doing strange experiments with undeath, they screamed at the heresy and wanted to execute them on the spot.
Those people didn't ping as evil, so I told my companions that I wasn't going to be involved in their holy wars and convinced them to escort them to the nearest temple of Pharasma and discuss the matter with the authorities there.
Everyone was reasonable and it worked out very well; you don't have to exacerbate every possible conflict just because there's a paladin in the group.
What if my buddies attacked anyway? Well, I would have walked away and maybe rejoin them later, as my character did know that holy wars are a thing although he didn't like them, and there was really no need to break the group at the first difference of opinions.
My opinion is this: don't work around your friends, talk to your friend and GM and try to find a solution that will be fun for everyone. It is ok for your character to work around your friends character if he enjoys that kind of role play, but some players might not enjoy that. The GM may have a very rigid view on the paladin code, or they might be rather lenient.
I usually see Pathfinder as a cooperative story telling game, although I have played with very experienced gamers that would strongly disagree. You mention that your friend is playing LG again, is this their favorite alignment and if so has this made the game less fun for you and if so could you provide a few examples?
It seems odd to me that you give beating someone up as a non violent crime, beating someone seems like the definition of violent. :P Having said that to me most of the things you mention seem like common Pathfinder activities, like vigilantism (taking the law into your own hands) is common because for the game to work there are often several tropes to empower the players, such as the authorities are all totally incapable of doing anything for themselves, so if a villain must be stopped, then the PCs must do it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really hate seeing threads like this (second one this week that I've seen). It isn't that party's CAN'T work with paladins, it's that parties assume stuff of paladins that are not nessissarily true.
1)Lawful bit. In pathfinder terms, 'lawful' doesn't mean 'follow the law.' It means organized. It means that your character is ruled by order, likes stuff being orderly, likes lists, and likes plans. You go with your plan vs. your gut. A thief who plans all his heists well in advance and has multiple contingencies is lawful in pathfinder terms.
2) Good bit. In pathfinder terms, good is respecting the sanctity of life when possible.", being selfless, and helping those in need. That's it.
3) Paladin code. Don't kill a surrendering foe (if he means it, that's what sense motive is for), don't lie, cheat, and/or steal. Done.
The real problem here is that some players want to have complete freedom and refuse to role-play the consequences of that. Give you an example:
I played a half-orc ronin once, who's village was killed for the crime of 'being half-orc' even though they were peaceful. Accordingly, one of her Ronin code was 'Judge everyone based on their actions, not their associations.
Then we came upon a group of cultists who were asleep. Now they were probably evil cthulian cultists, but they could have been brainwashed or whatever. Point is they didn't do anything to us. The rest of the party decides to murder them in their sleep. I try to convince them not to, don't participate in the fight, and then role-play trying to chastise them afterwords. My friend's response is to take it personally, then make plans to kill my character in his sleep because 'he was a bad character that limited his role-playing.'
Sometimes people just don't like it when other characters have codes that they stick to. And that's THEIR problem.
I feel like if your adventuring party needs to go around beating up low-lifes and stealing from especially rapacious merchants, you might find yourself having an easier time managing the Paladin if you provide something slightly more heroic for the party to do.
Which is to say, the Paladin works fine in a "break up the organized crime syndicate" story and may end up smashing up a number of appropriately ethnic restaurants in the process of seizing wealth gained through illicit behavior. The Paladin doesn't really work that well in "shake down Jimmy the Pickpocket" sorts of games.
The key to dealing with Paladins is less "how can I deal with the alignment" and more "how can I provide something this character can feel heroic about doing."
In my current campaign, I am playing a LG character (a spellcaster, not a paladin). I went in fully expecting most of the rest of the party to be CG or CN and made plans for how to deal with any conflicts that might arise.
Fast forward a few months, and it appears that the party is all over the place in terms of non-evil alignments and tends to work very well together. I have very little trouble persuading my allies to take the heroic option whenever possible.
Most people are TN. That said, I don't think 90% of people would commit some crime, people aren't evil overall.
90% of people on this forum may have committed a crime today. Personally, I both exceeded the speed limit and jaywalked on the way to work.
90% of people on this forum may have committed a crime today. Personally, I both exceeded the speed limit and jaywalked on the way to work.
Most people are TN. That said, I don't think 90% of people would commit some crime, people aren't evil overall.
I think alignments should allow for hypocrisy though. The person who believes that law enforcement can basically do no wrong, and that law and order is paramount is no less LN because they habitually ignore the speed limit, they're just a hypocrite.
90% of people on this forum may have committed a crime today. Personally, I both exceeded the speed limit and jaywalked on the way to work.To the best of my understanding, neither of those is a crime -- they're civil offenses (or traffic violations). Breaking the law and committing a crime are two different things.
A crime is literally breaking any law that you can be punished for. If there's a fine, or imprisonment, or corporal punishment, it qualifies.
90% of people on this forum may have committed a crime today. Personally, I both exceeded the speed limit and jaywalked on the way to work.
Most people are TN. That said, I don't think 90% of people would commit some crime, people aren't evil overall.
You monster.
One of the fastest ways for a paladin to fall is for them to break their code of conduct. While one evil act also causes a paladin to fall, it's usually more clear about what is an evil act vs an act that breaks the code of conduct (although that also depends on how the GM views the evil alignment). To work well with a paladin you need to know the GM and players stance on the paladin code IMO.
One rather inexpensive item that can help is the Phyactery of Faithfulness. This item is a lot more powerful than I remembered, it's main ability is this: "The wearer of a phylactery of faithfulness is aware of any action or item that could adversely affect his alignment and his standing with his deity." I had thought this was a once per day item, but there seems to be no limit to how often it can be used per day. The character in question will be able to make much more informed decisions on how to proceed with this item IMO, and it's only 1000 gold.
Concerning the paladin code, one important thing is that they must respect "legitimate authority". Therefore if you intend to oppose a certain government official, city, country and so on. The first step could be to convince the paladin character that they do not have legitimate authority.
For example, perhaps it's ok to break into the mayor's residence because he's secretly a member of an evil cult, the city freely allows the slave trade (either openly or does nothing about the slave trade if it's done behind closed doors) and what respectable city would do that? The country is Cheliax, dedicated to the Asmodius religion (a devil). These accusations could be true that you uncover through research and info gathering, or just told from a pC with a good bluff, I would guess some leg work would be preferred, but in a pinch having a PC that is good a the bluff skill would be great in a pinch.
Concerning the honor part of the code: just don't ask him to be dishonorable, have a different member of the group do that. Have some other PC talk to the city watch when they question you (for lying as an example).
Helping those in need is part of a paladins code, so bring that up early and often. You have to do chaotic things to help those in need, say it's for the greater good, the ends justify the means (although that sort of saying usually applies to evil acts it's not so or hopefully not so in this case).
As a final thought you may want to keep a scroll of atonement on hand, it's expensive though as a 5th level cleric / druid spell with a 500 gold component will set you back 1625 gold (standard price) and finding a 9th level cleric / druid to make it may be difficult depending on magic item availability. Finally you'd need to keep 2,500 gold in case the offending deed was done willingly. If the deed is done unwittingly this extra cost is waived. So in a previous example if you break into the mayor's house and you told the paladin he was a cultist, but he has actually a really nice guy and the paladin falls I'd hope the GM would count it as an unwitting offense and save you some money.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the fastest ways for a paladin to fall is for them to break their code of conduct. While one evil act also causes a paladin to fall, it's usually more clear about what is an evil act vs an act that breaks the code of conduct (although that also depends on how the GM views the evil alignment). To work well with a paladin you need to know the GM and players stance on the paladin code IMO.
One rather inexpensive item that can help is the Phyactery of Faithfulness. This item is a lot more powerful than I remembered, it's main ability is this: "The wearer of a phylactery of faithfulness is aware of any action or item that could adversely affect his alignment and his standing with his deity." I had thought this was a once per day item, but there seems to be no limit to how often it can be used per day. The character in question will be able to make much more informed decisions on how to proceed with this item IMO, and it's only 1000 gold.
Concerning the paladin code, one important thing is that they must respect "legitimate authority". Therefore if you intend to oppose a certain government official, city, country and so on. The first step could be to convince the paladin character that they do not have legitimate authority.
For example, perhaps it's ok to break into the mayor's residence because he's secretly a member of an evil cult, the city freely allows the slave trade (either openly or does nothing about the slave trade if it's done behind closed doors) and what respectable city would do that? The country is Cheliax, dedicated to the Asmodius religion (a devil). These accusations could be true that you uncover through research and info gathering, or just told from a pC with a good bluff, I would guess some leg work would be preferred, but in a pinch having a PC that is good a the bluff skill would be great in a pinch.
Concerning the honor part of the code: just don't ask...
I just wish that the phylactery of faithfulness didn't look so stupid. You're literally tying a box to your head. How is anyone supposed to take you seriously?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just wish that the phylactery of faithfulness didn't look so stupid. You're literally tying a box to your head. How is anyone supposed to take you seriously?
For just 3,000 gold you can get the better looking version (with a few other benefits).
Ventnor: I can see how you could feel that way, perhaps a custom slightly oversized helmet could be made that could conceal the box? It depends on the size of the box too, how big is it, perhaps the size of a mobile phone 5" X 2" X 0.5"? A slightly oversized helmet should do, I'd guess.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Being Lawful does not mean you obey all laws, what it means is that you obey your own laws. Every culture and religion has its own laws. I am pretty much a lawful good person. I have to admit I broke the laws of three different religions at lunch yesterday. I ate at Carl’s Jr. and had a western bacon cheese burger for lunch. Eating bacon broke the laws of the Jewish and Muslim religions about eating pork. Since the burger was beef that broke the Hindu law against eating beef. I am sure I probably broke a few more laws of other cultures that I am not aware of at the same time. Was eating a burger from Carl’s Jr. a chaotic act? Did this cause my alignment to shift?
The same is also true with respect to respecting legitimate authority. I am a citizen of the United States of America. I will obey the laws and government of my country, but I feel no need to obey those of other countries. While Khamenei may be considered the supreme leader of Iran, I don’t give a rat’s ass about what he says. I will freely ignore anything he says and would not lift a finger to help him in any way shape or form. A member of the American Military would also ignore anything he said if it conflicted with the orders of their superiors or the laws of united states.
The same will be true in the game. A Paladin from Andoran will not be concerned with the laws of Cheliax that require worshiping Asmodeus. He will not fall for failing to worship an evil deity, or disrespecting the authority of the church of Asmodeus. If some of the laws of Cheliax happen to be the same as the ones from Andoran he will obey those laws, but if the laws of the two countries conflict he will obey his own laws.
I really hate seeing threads like this (second one this week that I've seen).
This is why I NEVER play a paladin and try not to play with one. It's asking for trouble IMO. Between some DM's seeing a paladin and thinking it's their sacred duty to try to make them fall to no two people seeing alignment actions the exact same way. It's WAY easier to just say no. :P
Honestly, when it comes to alignments and roleplaying properly there is only one rule in my opinion: Don't mess with other party members. Let the LG paladin save the orc babies and let the CN throw a pie at the king. Make compromises if necessary but ALWAYS have your fellow players backs.
I ate at Carl’s Jr. and had a western bacon cheese burger for lunch. Eating bacon broke the laws of the Jewish and Muslim religions about eating pork. Since the burger was beef that broke the Hindu law against eating beef. I am sure I probably broke a few more laws of other cultures that I am not aware of at the same time.
Depending on how kosher you wish to keep, you also violated the Jewish law prohibiting eating the mixture of meat and milk. You horrible, horrible rulebreaker, you!
I really hate seeing threads like this (second one this week that I've seen).This is why I NEVER play a paladin and try not to play with one. It's asking for trouble IMO. Between some DM's seeing a paladin and thinking it's their sacred duty to try to make them fall to no two people seeing alignment actions the exact same way. It's WAY easier to just say no. :P
Graystone, this criticism is not directed at you in any way.
I don't understand why people go so bananas over paladins and lawful good alignment. Almost any character (antipaladins, barbarians, druids and hunters aside) can be lawful good, and it's not a problem for them. The notion that a GM is going to restrict the play of a class simply because they must follow a particular alignment is absurd. If that's the case, then all classes that have alignment restrictions (such as the aforementioned antipaladin, barbarian, druid and hunter classes) should also be banned for the same reason.
I've played paladins before countless times with no problems, mostly because I don't play the Holy Pain (i.e. Lawful Stupid) or Vindicator roles. I've not had problems as a GM with them, either, but that's largely due to the fact that I feel that the gods that paladins are apt to follow are generally benevolent beings that aren't cosmic beancounters looking for opportunities for their servants to fail them. If a paladin does something particularly egregious, sure, they're going to fall, and they can have the opportunity to atone for their sins. I don't avoid it, but I'm not the jackass GM that explicitly looks for it, either.
It may be easy to say no to paladins, but then you're also saying no to player agency and player fun. That's something that's banned at my gaming table if it doesn't violate established rules (or mutually-agreed GM/player modifications).
Best wishes!
I don't understand why people go so bananas over paladins and lawful good alignment.
You may have missed my point. I avoid them BECAUSE other "people go so bananas over paladins and lawful good alignment" and not because I personally have an issue with the alignment.
Almost any character (antipaladins, barbarians, druids and hunters aside) can be lawful good, and it's not a problem for them. The notion that a GM is going to restrict the play of a class simply because they must follow a particular alignment is absurd. If that's the case, then all classes that have alignment restrictions (such as the aforementioned antipaladin, barbarian, druid and hunter classes) should also be banned for the same reason.
If it was a ban, that would be simple. No, it's the inevitable argument after the paladin has been put in the catch 22 scenario that requires him to fall no matter what he does. I've seen FAR, FAR too many issues like this, so I'm in no mood to see it again. That's why I just don't play in games with a paladin: it's not worth the hassle.
As to the other classes, those don't have the issues paladins do. SOme DM's just have a sadistic glee in trying to make a paladin fall or at least making his life hell if he doesn't. No other class see this: No one goes 'hey, that barbarian has been too lawful lately...' or 'that druid has been too CG...'.
I've played paladins before countless times with no problems, mostly because I don't play the Holy Pain (i.e. Lawful Stupid) or Vindicator roles. I've not had problems as a GM with them, either,
I've played paladins and Gm'd them before and sometimes there has been no issue. The times it IS an issue have be big enough blow-outs that I just steer clear. it's just not worth it: the game manages just fine without paladins.
It may be easy to say no to paladins, but then you're also saying no to player agency and player fun.
I'm taking my "player agency" to pick games without that class for an extremely good reason. My fun[a player]. I'm not asking anyone to not play a paladin: I'm just saying if one is in a game, I'm not playing in it.
It's weird for me to constantly read these paladin horror stories.
In games I've played in the paladin has never been that annoying or disruptive and pretty let the other players do their thing. Hell, I was flat out playing a Chaotic Evil wizard in one game with a paladin in the party and we got along pretty well letting me do whatever the hell I wanted. I think that had a lot to do with fact that our GM didn't bother with enforcing the oath and never held fear of falling over the paladin player's head.
I think that had a lot to do with fact that our GM didn't bother with enforcing the oath and never held fear of falling over the paladin player's head.
LOL Yeah, if you throw out alignment, falling, oaths and consequences then paladins are awesome! :P
I think that had a lot to do with fact that our GM didn't bother with enforcing the oath and never held fear of falling over the paladin player's head.LOL Yeah, if you throw out alignment, falling, oaths and consequences then paladins are awesome! :P
Exactly!
One of my favorite characters was a paladin. His general attitude was that he would lead by example. Whenever he saw something evil he went after it. Other than that he was just a laid back dude who healed anyone who was hurt. Whenever the party started doing something foolish he would just sigh and try to make things right. He didn't chastise or try and control anyone; he simply did what he thought was right. He really didn't mind anything anyone did that wasn't evil. Basically so long as the party weren't being murder hobos everything was a-ok
I think the problem of paladins is all in the mind of the players and GMs.
As graystone said, there are GMs who think: "How can I make her fall?" as soon as they see a paladin.
At the same time, there are players who think that playing a paladin means being lawful stupid and constantly messing with the rest of the group.
These behaviours can lead to interesting roleplaying and difficult choices that the group will remember for years, but could equally bring the campaign to disaster.
In most cases, I think you can just let the paladin enjoy her character and her class features (which could be exactly what the group needs, by the way), while keeping in mind that she's a champion of good.
Of course if the player abuses the class, wanting to smite evil while committing deliberate evil acts herself, a fall is in the air.
I say: treat paladins like any other class. If you challenge a paladin's morality, do the same with the other characters. Make a wizard have doubts about arcane magic, or create a situation where the barbarian needs to forget her chaotic instinct and resort to some kind of balance to solve the problem.
Do they 'fall'? Does the wizard disbelieve magic and lose her spells? Does the barbarian become lawful and lose her rage?
If you are willing to do something like this in your campaign, then of course give the paladin the same kind of attention.
Just don't center everything on her, just because of her class choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I say: treat paladins like any other class. If you challenge a paladin's morality, do the same with the other characters. Make a wizard have doubts about arcane magic, or create a situation where the barbarian needs to forget her chaotic instinct and resort to some kind of balance to solve the problem.
Most GMs don't do this.
Of course, most GMs don't treat alignment any differently for any other character class. If you have a lawful good fighter, they don't get challenged or punished for acting lawful good in a party with a chaotic neutral thief (mostly because there's no restriction for the class, but that's beside the point), nor does that chaotic neutral thief get challenged or punished for acting chaotic neutral in a party of lawful characters.
The druid in the party of good characters doesn't get dinged for always doing good works or always going along with what lawful characters in her party want to do. She might never act chaotically, or evil, and so she's effectively being lawful and/or good, despite bearing the neutral qualifier in her alignment, yet no one at the gaming table says a word because "neutral" characters can effectively be played just about any way you want as most GMs don't enforce balance for neutral characters. That druid who teaches her druidic language to someone else loses her class features too, but I've seen it happen at gaming tables with no word from anyone. The same druid, who spends years of in-game time away from nature (running around in cities and hanging out on in dungeons) doesn't become an ex-druid because the GM doesn't challenge the fact that the druid is no longer "revering nature". Totally different treatment than a paladin. How many threads do you see pop up about druids losing their class features and having to seek atonement? I've found less than a dozen on these forums, and they're all from years ago.
Monks acting outside of their "laws" or "code" or "rules" don't come up for discussion a lot, as they could end up being ex-members of their class, being unable to gain more monk levels. Don't see that happening too much, even though it's entirely possible.
I agree with Megistone that paladin + lawful good is only a problem for players or GMs because they explicitly make it so.