|
After all the problems I have had with a Paladin using Bluff (see this thread).
I really should know better than to ask this... but,
IN PFS play, if you were the table judge,
Can a Paladin use the spell Disguise Self? (Such as from a Potion, or an item (Hat of Disguise), or even from casting it from having a level of Wizard.) Basically, would using this spell violate the "tell no lies" rule?
|
|
First at a PFS table I would have fewer problems with it than I would at a regular table, for a multitude of reasons with how such games are structured. My default is it would take something pretty egregious to cause a paladin to fall at a PFS table.
Second it depends a lot on the deity and the deity code. Some are far more forgiving than others.
Third depends on the reason why they used the spell.
|
|
First at a PFS table I would have fewer problems with it than I would at a regular table, for a multitude of reasons with how such games are structured. My default is it would take something pretty egregious to cause a paladin to fall at a PFS table.
Second it depends a lot on the deity and the deity code. Some are far more forgiving than others.
Third depends on the reason why they used the spell.
thanks for the prompt reply...
so, you feel it would be situational and not an auto-fall situation?
I'm (mostly) trying to decide about buying a Hat of Disguise and whether I would be able to use it.
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Central & West
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off... *marks down to take a drink when not at work*
Second, it's all based on intent in using such an item. My paladin has a hat of disguise. He doesn't use it to fool people or even fake his finery. He does it more to illustrate his points better. People usually know he's "in disguise" and there's no deceit to it at all. For example, a recent interaction was trying to get some info from some "less-than-bright" townsfolk, as we were chasing a man who went by several aliases.
Paladin: Have you seen a man who looks like this? *hat of disguise to take a similar shape to the person we're looking for, and follows it with a pretty decent disguise check*
Townsfolk: Yep! That's him!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin: Have you seen a man who looks like this? *hat of disguise to take a similar shape to the person we're looking for, and follows it with a pretty decent disguise check*
Townsfolk: Yep! That's him!
You forgot the obvious next line, "Hey! Wait! That's YOU!."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's absolutely nothing in the standard paladin's code, in PFS or anywhere else, that says paladins can't resort to lies or other forms of deception (though I suppose certain archetypes or faiths may add additional restrictions/expectations).
If you had a PFS GM tell you otherwise, you should ask him point out the rule (it doesn't exist). If he continues to torment paladins without any evidence to support his claims, you should report his behavior to the Venture Captain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's absolutely nothing in the standard paladin's code, in PFS or anywhere else, that says paladins can't resort to lies or other forms of deception (though I suppose certain archetypes or faiths may add additional restrictions/expectations).
If you had a PFS GM tell you otherwise, you should ask him point out the rule (it doesn't exist). If he continues to torment paladins without any evidence to support his claims, you should report his behavior to the Venture Captain.
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Disguise Self doesn't have to involve lying to people though, as Harley Quinn X brought up above, so Paladins should be able to use it as long as they remain within their Code of Conduct.
Yes, so long as the paladin does not violate her code.
Also, if this is a PFS-specific question, there's a forum for that.
The generic code is NOT a blanket prohibition on lying, or against poison usage. There is blanket prohibition on acting dishonorably and lying and poison are mentioned insofar as they are examples of that, but that doesn't mean ALL possible lies and poisons are dishonorable. Lying when asked "are these children the slaves our demon master ordered for torture sacrifice?" is not dishonorable, it is exactly in line with the code. Using a CON drain poison on one's weapon, or a Cloudkill spell/effect in the heat of battle is not more dishonorable than non-poison means of killing your opponent (possibly debuffing them along the way). If all poison use was banned, any savvy villain would just apply poison to a Paladin's weapon, preventing him from using it vs the villain without falling. If one wants to roleplay a Paladin as excessively conscious of such things, that is fine, but it is not strictly mandated by actual code.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that people could fall for casting disguise self is honestly insane to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The generic code is NOT a blanket prohibition on lying, or against poison usage. There is blanket prohibition on acting dishonorably and lying and poison are mentioned insofar as they are examples of that, but that doesn't mean ALL possible lies and poisons are dishonorable. Lying when asked "are these children the slaves our demon master ordered for torture sacrifice?" is not dishonorable, it is exactly in line with the code. Using a CON drain poison on one's weapon, or a Cloudkill spell/effect in the heat of battle is not more dishonorable than non-poison means of killing your opponent (possibly debuffing them along the way). If all poison use was banned, any savvy villain would just apply poison to a Paladin's weapon, preventing him from using it vs the villain without falling. If one wants to roleplay a Paladin as excessively conscious of such things, that is fine, but it is not strictly mandated by actual code.
No, lying and poison use are explicitly against the default code. There are no exceptions for "unless you really really have to". I recommend a different paladin code.
Edit: The correct answer to the posited question is "*smite*".
As an example of using Disguise (the skill) or the disguise self spell, a paladin cannot try to pass himself/herself as one of the castle guards to sneak in and capture the evil assassin who owns the castle in order to prevent the needless bloodshed of the guards (who in this case are not aware of how evil their boss is)?
CB
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had a GM in PFS who said he was uncomfortable with my paladin using Use Magic Device.
Because I was lying to the wand about my class.
Nevermind that I was using the code of conduct for Sarenrae...
What.
Yeah, that wins it for "How My Paladin Fell" for sure.
As an example of using Disguise (the skill) or the disguise self spell, a paladin cannot try to pass himself/herself as one of the castle guards to sneak in and capture the evil assassin who owns the castle in order to prevent the needless bloodshed of the guards (who in this case are not aware of how evil their boss is)?
CB
Does it violate the paladin's code of conduct?
Does it violate the paladin's code of conduct?As an example of using Disguise (the skill) or the disguise self spell, a paladin cannot try to pass himself/herself as one of the castle guards to sneak in and capture the evil assassin who owns the castle in order to prevent the needless bloodshed of the guards (who in this case are not aware of how evil their boss is)?
CB
That's the important question - and I am not entirely sure. Because the concept of honour is partially dependent on the society the individual is a part of and partially dependent on their personal values.
The lying part though is more straightforward, unless we are getting into the realm of "lying" by omission of truth or by not correcting the assumptions of others.
If the paladin just dresses up as one of the guards but manages to avoid protracted conversations without lying to anyone on the way to capture the evil assassin, does that count as "lying" because he/she avoided being identified as an intruder?
I can see the arguments being made for either position on it.
CB
Finding this thread has just made me realize what it is that is wrong with paladins...
Yeah! Screw principles! ; )
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can Paladins use hair dye or makeup?
Paladin goes to a fancy dress party...Falls
Threads like this just confirms why I will never run a Paladin with a GM who I don't know.
Personally, I agree that paladins should not necessarily fall at using a disguise, unless they are using said disguise in pursuit of an evil or truly dishonorable act.
They are supposed to be the best of noble heroes, not, for a lack of a better term, robots that must adhere strictly to an absolute literal interpretation of their code of conduct. The latter leads to some rather absurd scenarios.
For home games, this is less of an issue, but for PFS games, the table variations can deter some folks from otherwise choosing a paladin to play.
CB
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of GMs seem to have Favored Enemy: Paladins, don't they?
A lot of players seem to have favored enemy: code of conduct. I've seen maybe a tenth as many threads whining about wanting their druid to wear metal armor.
I feel like if a GM's interpretation of "what causes a Paladin to fall" would involve a Paladin necessarily falling if they took a role in a stage play and had to pretend that they are Hamlet or Mercutio or whoever, that should cause to re-examine that interpretation.
After all, the Paladin is not saying "I am this person who is not myself" they are simply acting; the context makes it entirely clear that this is not a literal statement of truth.
I feel like if a GM's interpretation of "what causes a Paladin to fall" would involve a Paladin necessarily falling if they took a role in a stage play and had to pretend that they are Hamlet or Mercutio or whoever, that should cause to re-examine that interpretation.
After all, the Paladin is not saying "I am this person who is not myself" they are simply acting; the context makes it entirely clear that this is not a literal statement of truth.
Yes, this is clearly silly. Fortunately, most GMs that would do that (or "you lied to that wand!" above) usually have other tells that would warn you to go to another table before this happens.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A tip: If you're a GM, treat your player's paladin (and other code of conduct types) as if she had a constant phylactery of faithfulness. It should never be a surprise whether an action would constitute a willful violation of the CoC.
I feel like a god needs to have their remote control taken away if they have an issue with a paladin disguising himself as a bandit to sneak into their camp and get the bandits' hostages to safety, ensuring they are in no danger before he springs into action.
What you do and why you do it should matter. Falling is supposed to be the consequence for a serious breach of your values as a paladin, not because you didn't answer honestly when the bad guys asked where the macguffin was.
Great example.
However, as many great examples do, it expands the question. Could the paladin have quaffed a Potion of Invisibility to sneak into the bandit's camp to rescue the hostages? That could count as a lie that no-one is standing where the paladin is standing. How about planning a military distraction, an attack at the other end of the camp, as part of freeing the hostages unseen? Or must the paladin walk up to the bandit camp and announce himself, "I am here to free the hostages!"
I think we need a simple test. Suppose the paladin's lie or disguise is discovered in mid-ruse. Would the paladin be caught in dishonor? "Yes, I was trying to get the senior discount at the general store by disguising myself as an old man." "You should be ashamed of yourself." "I am." Or would the worst consequence simply be that his plan did not work: "Idiot paladins cannot fool the bandit king!"
It isn't a great example, because there are so many ways to not lie in that situation. Like, say, smiting the bad guys. Or not answering. Or "I'll never tell you, evildoer!" if you like over-the-top, Major Glory-type paladin personalities. A CRB paladin doesn't lie.
|
Sarenrae, what was your opinion on this again?
The best battle is a battle I win. If I die, I can no longer fight. I will fight fairly when the fight is fair, and I will strike quickly and without mercy when it is not.Oh gosh, look at that, one of the primary gods of good points out that queensbury rules are for fair fights and when you already know your opponents are dishonorable you are not obligated to be sportsmanlike in stopping their evil.
Her code does not say I will poison willy nilly either
It just says that bad guys trying to game the Lawful Stupid angle against her Pallies are in for a painful surprise
It is not a blanket statement to allow all tricky, devious, dishonorable or even Evil acts to her Paladins
Sarenrae, what was your opinion on this again?
The best battle is a battle I win. If I die, I can no longer fight. I will fight fairly when the fight is fair, and I will strike quickly and without mercy when it is not.Oh gosh, look at that, one of the primary gods of good points out that queensbury rules are for fair fights and when you already know your opponents are dishonorable you are not obligated to be sportsmanlike in stopping their evil.
Sarenrae has her own code. And nobody said "sportsmanlike", merely "honorable". Seems to be a lot of arguing against points nobody is making in this thread.
Because the code is more like a guideline.
Sure, exactly inasmuch as the rules for Smite Evil are a guideline. The GM can tweak or toss as she likes.
Because they have a secret desire to become just a fighter...?
I do not understand why so many people want to play a Paladin that gets away with breaking the CRB code
People who want to play a paladin in good-faith just want to be able to avoid being railroaded by dogmatic interpretations of the paladin code. Especially since "evil act" is completely vague and necessarily open to judgment and interpretation - interpretation that's going to be defined by where a GM's ethical framework lies. If a player's sense of ethics is different than the GM's then 'breaking the CRB code' may be more of a disagreement of ethics than the player trying to get away with ignoring the code.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK, I have said this before on one of the former retread threads.
The Paladin Codes will always be a problem so long as GMs and, by extension, module designers keep setting up artificial narrowing of options, and discourage any reasonable attempt to widen those options. This could be malice, but most likely you can lay it off to lack of imagination or laziness. It could just be an unfortunate and inflexible devotion to a clever idea.
Players can, of course, have the same failings. Add to it avarice, since, we wants more toys we does, that's why whys we is here.
Or it could just be they don't care about such things at all.
OK, I have said this before on one of the former retread threads.
The Paladin Codes will always be a problem so long as GMs and, by extension, module designers keep setting up artificial narrowing of options, and discourage any reasonable attempt to widen those options. This could be malice, but most likely you can lay it off to lack of imagination or laziness. It could just be an unfortunate and inflexible devotion to a clever idea.
What?