If he only uses it against evil in the service of his god i don't see a problem with it.
Why fight at every gate and checkpoint if your mission is to slay the BBG?
|
Yes, you can use bluff, but only if necessary to do good or fight evil. You can't use it gratuitously or for your own selfish reasons. You should try to be truthful and straightforward as much as possible. Lying should be very unusual for you, and you should care about always having a reputation for honesty.
You can absolutely use it to feint in combat. Nothing dishonorable about that whatsoever, in my opinion.
Out of curiosity, if you were worried that this was going to be a problem, why did you take ranks in bluff in the first place?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course he could. He (or she) would only need to use it on a case by case need. Emphasis on need. For a paladin, personal honor should not hold sway over the greater good. That would be lawful but not good.
Bluff in combat to feint - no problem.
If you wanted a RAW answer, then you highlighted it in your original post.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
For argument's sake:
When a paladin lies, she loses her class powers. That has nothing to do with being Good, or Lawful, or even honorable. It's part of the paladin's oath.
The Bluff skill can be used for three purposes:
- To deceive someone
- To feint in combat
- To pass along secret messages.
Deceiving someone is lying, "You know how to tell a lie. Bluff is an opposed skill check against your opponent’s Sense Motive skill. If you use Bluff to fool someone, with a successful check you convince your opponent that what you are saying is true. Bluff checks are modified depending upon the believability of the lie."
So, that use would require a paladin to Atone.
Passing along secret messages isn't lying. A paladin should be able to do that just fine.
What about feinting in combat?
Well, if a paladin annouced "I'm going to hit your head" while aiming a blow at the opponent's legs, and expected the opponent to believe her and guard his head, then that would be a lie. And feinting in combat is doing the same thing with body language: looking at an area, or adjusting a weapon grip, to suggest one target, while planning to hit another.
That doesn't strike me as unlawful, or evil, or even dishonorable. But it does strike me as a lie.
Feinting in combat is a normal part of combat. You do not 'tell' someone that you are going to hit their head. You make a motion to hit one part and then redirect the motion to hitting another part. There is no lying involved, just physical misdirection.
- Gauss
I'd say Chris got the RAW of it correct. I don't agree with the RAW, but there it is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
you can bluff but you have to technically be telling the truth. SOmetimes the literal truth can be misleading.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with paladins is that the restrictions vary by GM, and unless you are running with the same GM every session you might run into problems. RAW the GM can tag you for any lies, and some would even say RAI, so you may want to talk with your local PFS GM's.
|
(thanks for the reply!)
His background is as a halfling servant (old family retainer) in Cheliax - and the flavor for that area gives bonuses to slave/servants avoiding problems with overlords by fast talking their way past problems. So it's sort of a RP thing. He talks a lot, kind of like the funny uncle at family gatherings. Good guy, give you the shirt off his back (the first guy into the burning house to save someone) and famous for telling tall tales...
I love the idea of a Paladin telling tall tales.
I think the key is for the Paladin to believe the story while he's telling it -- because then its not really lying.
I'm actually rather surprised that so many people in this thread think that "lying for good" is not an inherently dishonest or immoral act. It's classic "ends justify the means" Machiavellian philosophy and it definitely does not jive with being a Paladin.
Bluffing to fool someone is, under my judgement when I DM, definitely against the Paladin code.
Bluffing to pass a secret message is totally legit.
Bluffing to feint is very un-Paladin (fight with honor, face your enemy head on, skill against skill with no tricks, etc), but unless a player was feinting early and often I would probably allow it.
That's me ... and as said above, every DM is different. I would, however, strongly disagree with anyone who states that it's ok to "lie for good".
Bluffing to feint is very un-Paladin (fight with honor, face your enemy head on, skill against skill with no tricks, etc), but unless a player was feinting early and often I would probably allow it.
So just to check in your games Paladins could fall for which of the following?
Attacking during a surprise round or agains a flat-footed opponent.
Flanking.
Using any combat manuever.
Casting any spell that makes them better than their opponent.
Smiting against a foe not superior to them.
As an aside to all this where does the line get drawn? Can a paladin use disguise to sneak past a guard? Can he lie by ommision? Can he let someone else lie and simply no correct them?
And at what point does evil just win by getting to put the paladin into situations where if they tell the truth horrible things happen but not doing so even by speaking means something just as bad will happen?
So just to check in your games Paladins could fall for which of the following?Attacking during a surprise round or agains a flat-footed opponent.
A proper Paladin would face their enemy head on without undue advantage. A Paladin is the epitome of the honorable knight and is not afraid of a fair fight.
Again, however, please note that I stated already that so long as a Paladin did not make a habit of it, I would let feints occur. The same would go with surprise attacks.
Flanking.
A proper Paladin prefers to face his or her foe head on, but should they be involved in a flanking situation I would think nothing of it -- as long as they were not the individual running all over the mat just to create flanking situations.
Using any combat manuever.
Combat maneuvers are not dishonest, deceitful, or dishonorable by themselves. I don't see anything wrong with them at all.
Casting any spell that makes them better than their opponent.
Just as someone trains to be better than others or buys better armor or gets a better weapon, they may also use magic. Nothing even remotely dishonorable here.
Smiting against a foe not superior to them.
Smiting a child who is punching a Paladin would indeed be evil, but there are very few other cases when an IC Paladin would actually know whether or not the foe was inferior or superior. Even then, smite is meant as an attack against evil ... so why would a Paladin not smite evil whenever fighting against it?
where does the line get drawn?
Paladins are not stuffy, no-fun-having, zealots ... but they have a code of honor and it is very serious to them. Think of it in the sense of a mythical knight or samauri. The Paladin does not think about what is most likely to give them advantage over an opponent, they think about what will most likely enhance their position of honor.
Can a paladin use disguise to sneak past a guard?
I would say that a Paladin would hate doing such a thing and consider it a stain upon their honor. Playing it out that way I would not make a Paladin lose their abilities, but they sure as hell wouldn't do it willingly without good argument for why they must be deceitful or look forward to doing it again. They may even regret doing it for some time afterward and wonder if there was a more honest way.
Can he lie by ommision?
The answer to that one is all in the situation. Sometimes omitting all of the facts is an act of compassion, "Your mommy had to go away so I need to take you to your uncle's house" (really mommy was killed by goblins ... so did 'go away' ... but the child doesn't need to know the whole store)
Can he let someone else lie and simply no correct them?
The Paladin may defer to the person telling the lie during the moment, but then confront them after. If the Paladin is particularly offended by the lie, they might speak up during the telling.
And at what point does evil just win by getting to put the paladin into situations where if they tell the truth horrible things happen but not doing so even by speaking means something just as bad will happen?
A Paladin does not fear facing evil or the consequences evil threatens to bring on them. They do, however, fear staining their honor or abandoning their code and/or their god.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually rather surprised that so many people in this thread think that "lying for good" is not an inherently dishonest or immoral act. It's classic "ends justify the means" Machiavellian philosophy and it definitely does not jive with being a Paladin.
That's me ... and as said above, every DM is different. I would, however, strongly disagree with anyone who states that it's ok to "lie for good".
I don't think you realize just how wrong that is, and how much even you disagree with it, so here's a simple scenario to illustrate.
You're a paladin who's protecting a family of innocents from a tyrannous lord. You've stopped and holed up in a house for a bit while you think about what to do next. Stopping here seems fairly safe because nobody in the village looks like they're going to give you up to the authorities, and you've got the family well hidden so that even if the house was given a once over they wouldn't be found. Then a bunch of heavily armed, shady looking characters that are part of a very large military division that's searching the town knock on your door and ask if you've seen the family (the one you're hiding). Fighting isn't going to work, you're quite outnumbered and outgunned, and they would probably guess that something's up if you attacked them. So what do you do: lie, or tell the truth?
"I do not recognize your authority, and I will not speak to you on this subject. Be off with you, lest you find something you're not looking for in this house." Intimidate should be a class skill for paladins.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with paladins is that the restrictions vary by GM, and unless you are running with the same GM every session you might run into problems. RAW the GM can tag you for any lies, and some would even say RAI, so you may want to talk with your local PFS GM's.
Worse, in my games the restrictions vary by the god the paladin follows. The paladin in my current game serves Iomedae, goddess of valor, rulership, justice, and honor. She is strict about honor, especially military honor. On the other hand, a paladin of Erastil, god of farming, hunting, trade, and family, would have more relaxed standards. Building strong community would be more important than honor.
I'm actually rather surprised that so many people in this thread think that "lying for good" is not an inherently dishonest or immoral act. It's classic "ends justify the means" Machiavellian philosophy and it definitely does not jive with being a Paladin.
Bluffing to fool someone is, under my judgement when I DM, definitely against the Paladin code.
Bluffing to pass a secret message is totally legit.
Bluffing to feint is very un-Paladin (fight with honor, face your enemy head on, skill against skill with no tricks, etc), but unless a player was feinting early and often I would probably allow it.
That's me ... and as said above, every DM is different. I would, however, strongly disagree with anyone who states that it's ok to "lie for good".
Iomedae would not tolerate lying for good. However, a bluff check is not necessarily for lying.
A story as an example. The paladin, who helped spirit away the rightful heir to the throne, has been captured by the usurper's forces:
INTERROGATOR: Where is the prince?
PALADIN: I shall never tell you.
INTERROGATOR: Did you send him north? To Castle Haven?
PALADIN: I shall not say.
GM to PALADIN PLAYER: Roll a bluff check.
PALADIN PLAYER: Why? I'm not lying.
GM: The interrogator is trying to read the paladin's reaction to his statement with Sense Motive. He has terrible penalties, but you need to roll a bluff check to oppose.
PALADIN PLAYER: I rolled a 9. With untrained bluff, I get to add my Charisma bonus. That makes 13.
GM: The interrogator frowns in frustration. He cannot read the paladin's reaction.
Furthermore, to Iomedae using superior battle tactics is perfectly honorable, even if the battle tactics rely on fooling someone. An ambush from hidng is good use of terrain in preparation for battle. A feint in combat is fancy swordplay so that the opponent has no idea where the sword will strike and thus has no idea where to dodge. Stabbing the BBEG in the back by sneaking into his lair would be dishonorable, but stabbing the BBEG in the back because he turned his back on the paladin to attack the burly fighter would be honorable, even when the paladin and fighter deliberately charged the BBEG from opposite directions.
The classic use of bluff in the real world is in Poker. A paladin playing Poker would lose no honor by bluffing in the game. He would not be lying, he would merely be betting on his hand despite the odds not being good because he expects the other players to fold in face of his courage.
The paladin of Iomedae in my campaign benefits from his code. Everyone knows that they can trust his word. Likewise, Mergy's answer to Thunderbird8804's scenario is the reaction that the thugs would expect from a paladin of Iomedae, even if the house were empty. Even if the thugs were not intimidated, the paladin's answer would give them no clues. In fact, the paladin might have been clever enough to conduct his lookout from the empty house nextdoor.
It really depends on the bluff.
Also when it comes to smiting and adventagous tactics (like flanking) I think that there is a real difference between a fair fight and the realities of war in which surprize and stratagy might call for a bit of sneakiness.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do find the notion of a character who has become a paladin, and, by dint of his origin story / previous life experiences, is particularly good at something that he really shouldn't be doing any longer.
"It's a shame, really, I was a brilliant liar."
"On the other hand, the vow of chastity is probably for the best. I already had seven illegitimate children that I knew of. Apparently, I was good at that, too..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Klingon quote: There is nothing more honorable than victory. (Worf on DS9 when commenting on klingons lying in wait to ambush rescuers.)
- Gauss
The pleasure of playing a Paladin is inversely proportional the the Douche-level of your GM. If your GM is one of those all-too-common 'riding the Paladin and trying to make him fall is a guilty pleasure' then sure, expect completely unreasonable treatment and a pedantic and knee-jerky response to even the slightest possible error on your behalf.
It's like playing a game of 'Gotcha' where they get to make up all the finer rules and subtle nuances and are the perpetually offended who are looking for something to be offended by.
On the other hand, a reasonable GM will let you use your Bluff skill in a variety of ways, once again, may I recommend using the great 2nd Ed Paladins Handbook as it goes right into vows and codes in detail. By having such detail ready to hand and clearly laid out you will fair much better than having the really vague and subjective paragraph and a half you are working with that tries to cover a massive range of potentialities.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seem like the live of a paladin is a tough one, Full of dificult choises and moral complications and evil DMs.
I wonder how the poeple in this forum who dump wisdom play their paladins?.
Mine has charged through fire to get to his enemy multiple times. He's also accepted his enemy's surrender. While on fire.
I don't dumpstat Wisdom on Paladins, just can't bring myself to do it.
My only current Paladin has Wis as his primary stat.
A paladin is also a soldier, and while lying is strictly prohibited by RAW, and I beleive RAI, feinting which is a combat based manuever should not be. Neither is fighting with an advantage.
If that is the case paladins can't accept buffs or fight debuffed enemies. There is also the issue of not knowing how strong an enemy is.
Other issues are that the pally is supposed to protect people, and if his honor(which is a very subjective thing) gets in the way people will die.
Let's say the paladin is in charge of an army. Does he forego the use of any tactics that give him an advantage?
All of which get down to why you need a reasonable GM, and not one who is looking to trip the Paladin up for 'teh lulz'.
At the same time, there is also an obligation on the player to also make a serious attempt at doing the right thing. Whilst I have seen some GM's that really went to town trying to fault paladins, I have equally seen enough players tring their level best to twist and wiggle as hard as they can to maintain the LETTER of the law whilst doing very little to keep within the spirit of it.
There is no wiggle room in the land of paladin code threads.
Which is to say that there is but one way to play a paladin? I know you're not saying that. Even outsiders without choice of alignment have personality. It is a strict code, but the high road is paved with difficult choices, not simple ones with one choice.
I think he is inferring that in Paladin Code Threads there is no wiggle room because all the troglodytes come flooding forward to 'Hurr durr' Paladins as hard as they can.
What about feinting in combat?
Well, if a paladin annouced "I'm going to hit your head" while aiming a blow at the opponent's legs, and expected the opponent to believe her and guard his head, then that would be a lie. And feinting in combat is doing the same thing with body language: looking at an area, or adjusting a weapon grip, to suggest one target, while planning to hit another.
That doesn't strike me as unlawful, or evil, or even dishonorable. But it does strike me as a lie.
Feinting in combat isn't necessarily doing that, though. Sometimes it's about getting your opponent to over-extend, or to aim where you have no intention being. By this use of not being where you lead the enemy to think you will be, using Dodge or your Dex bonus to AC is also lying.
Personally, I think that's a load of old hogwash. It's not a lie, it's just fighting intelligently. Applying 'lying' to feinting is hyperbolic and, as you say, it is not 'unlawful, or evil, or even dishonourable' and therefore the paladin has not violated his code.
Even if he did, it wouldn't result in a loss of powers, just need the odd confession now and again.
I think he is inferring that in Paladin Code Threads there is no wiggle room because all the troglodytes come flooding forward to 'Hurr durr' Paladins as hard as they can.
Even more interesting to me than troglodytes coming forward and flooding Paladin threads with a hardcore case of 'hurr durr' is the belief by those of the opposite persuasion that there is a whole bunch of 'hurr durr' where it's not.
So far in this thread I have seen a bunch of people talking about how Paladins are honorable and honest and then discussing the finer points of when honor and honesty potentially get in the way of doing good and how one might react to that.
I think everyone -- even the one person who stated that feinting was lying -- admitted that Paladins should be allowed to feint.
I think everyone agrees that Paladins can use bluff actions that are not specifically lying.
I think everyone agrees that Paladins do not have to randomly spout off every detail of everything they know to the enemy.
In the end, it's all about the player working to ensure his character acts with as much honor as possible. When doing so, 99.999999% of DMs are going to let a Paladin engage in many activities that are not purely straightforward. The other minute quantity of DMs just want to see Paladins burn and there's nothing you can do about that.
In the end ... the biggest difficulty with Paladins -- at least in my experience -- has been with players trying to treat them as fighters with some additional cool abilities instead of as 'knights' with a strict code of honor that is of extreme importance to their character to hold to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mine has charged through fire to get to his enemy multiple times. He's also accepted his enemy's surrender. While on fire.
And that ... is what being a Paladin is all about. I love it.