Paladin Code Debugging


Prerelease Discussion

201 to 250 of 251 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Wayfinders

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have made a groundbreaking discovery. Good bicarbonate and chaotic lemon juice react with each other. The paladin chemical reaction happens with CG character! I want my Nobel prize!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Grey Star wrote:
I have made a groundbreaking discovery. Good bicarbonate and chaotic lemon juice react with each other. The paladin chemical reaction happens with CG character! I want my Nobel prize!

I'm getting incredibly tired of people trying to force non-Lawful Good Paladins in. Just. It is wearing me down, personally, to the point where I've visited these forums less and less.

Where once I was actually excited about the game, now I'm a lot less.

Even after the devs came out, said they were LG-only, and explained why (feel/flavor) and stated if they did a CG champion it would be different in flavor and mechanics people just won't stop.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
I'm getting incredibly tired of people trying to force non-Lawful Good Paladins in. Just. It is wearing me down, personally, to the point where I've visited these forums less and less.

Yeah, I totally agree. While I don't think it unreasonable for there to be Paladin-like holy warriors for even Caden Calien, Asmodeus or Demogorgon, they are CERTAINLY not Paladins, and the angst around it is draining.

But, this is not a Paladin alignment thread, this is a debugging the code thread! And personally, I like TheFinish's change to the second point in the code:

"You must protect the innocent as best you can, and never knowingly cause them harm."

So, yeah, there's some more pennies for this discussion.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
Grey Star wrote:
I have made a groundbreaking discovery. Good bicarbonate and chaotic lemon juice react with each other. The paladin chemical reaction happens with CG character! I want my Nobel prize!

I'm getting incredibly tired of people trying to force non-Lawful Good Paladins in. Just. It is wearing me down, personally, to the point where I've visited these forums less and less.

Where once I was actually excited about the game, now I'm a lot less.

Even after the devs came out, said they were LG-only, and explained why (feel/flavor) and stated if they did a CG champion it would be different in flavor and mechanics people just won't stop.

And I'm getting really tired of people trying to force me to feel bad for not giving precedence to their obsessively restrictive playstyles and pretending that the mechanics of Paladins have ever had even a little bit to do with Law and Chaos, not just Good and Evil. Even when the devs came out with a new Paladin Code not just allowed but *required* prioritizing Good over honor, honesty, and obeying the law, it just won't stop.


Revan wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Grey Star wrote:
I have made a groundbreaking discovery. Good bicarbonate and chaotic lemon juice react with each other. The paladin chemical reaction happens with CG character! I want my Nobel prize!

I'm getting incredibly tired of people trying to force non-Lawful Good Paladins in. Just. It is wearing me down, personally, to the point where I've visited these forums less and less.

Where once I was actually excited about the game, now I'm a lot less.

Even after the devs came out, said they were LG-only, and explained why (feel/flavor) and stated if they did a CG champion it would be different in flavor and mechanics people just won't stop.

And I'm getting really tired of people trying to force me to feel bad for not giving precedence to their obsessively restrictive playstyles and pretending that the mechanics of Paladins have ever had even a little bit to do with Law and Chaos, not just Good and Evil. Even when the devs came out with a new Paladin Code not just allowed but *required* prioritizing Good over honor, honesty, and obeying the law, it just won't stop.

Just because good is prioritized over law doesnt mean law isn't important.

Following a code is, by it's very nature, inherently lawful.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Revan wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Grey Star wrote:
I have made a groundbreaking discovery. Good bicarbonate and chaotic lemon juice react with each other. The paladin chemical reaction happens with CG character! I want my Nobel prize!

I'm getting incredibly tired of people trying to force non-Lawful Good Paladins in. Just. It is wearing me down, personally, to the point where I've visited these forums less and less.

Where once I was actually excited about the game, now I'm a lot less.

Even after the devs came out, said they were LG-only, and explained why (feel/flavor) and stated if they did a CG champion it would be different in flavor and mechanics people just won't stop.

And I'm getting really tired of people trying to force me to feel bad for not giving precedence to their obsessively restrictive playstyles and pretending that the mechanics of Paladins have ever had even a little bit to do with Law and Chaos, not just Good and Evil. Even when the devs came out with a new Paladin Code not just allowed but *required* prioritizing Good over honor, honesty, and obeying the law, it just won't stop.

It can be tiring. I've been having the same discussion for 40 years or so with the same arguments offered. I especially enjoy the thought that people are trying to "force" something into the game.

Funny thing? If you take people that are not familiar with the history of D&D/Pathfinder and tell them that there is a holy warrior for each alignment or God they have no problem with it. The most blowback I've gotten at a table was someone familiar with the game system asking why the change. When told they said "huh" and checked out the material.

Much like any change to the system or the flavor if you talk with your players you can usually find a compromise -- if people are willing to compromise.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
knightnday wrote:
Funny thing? If you take people that are not familiar with the history of D&D/Pathfinder and tell them that there is a holy warrior for each alignment or God they have no problem with it.

Holy Warrior, probably not.

If you actually say Paladin though that tends to conjure up iconic imagery in people’s heads. For me it’s that of a hero, someone who does good (and for evil we have the Antipaladin).

Wayfinders

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Sorry for restarting an argument about paladin alignment. I just wanted to make a joke about a strange bicarbonate/vinegar claim made in the discussion.

Now, about the code, I think the player who plays a paladin, need to define what is the conviction that drives his character into being a paladin. If he acts accordingly whit his conviction, he follows his personal code. If not, he is a risk to falling. I think it's more simple than a universal code and that open the road to a more interesting character development.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

My image of the Paladin is someone who dedicates her life to upholding Good and honor by devoutly submitting to rules and strictures provided by an outside source

Which I see as antithetic to Chaotic

I am still all for having holy warriors for each alignment though, or at least the 4 extremes as well as True Neutral

Grey Star wrote:

Sorry for restarting an argument about paladin alignment. I just wanted to make a joke about a strange bicarbonate/vinegar claim made in the discussion.

Now, about the code, I think the player who plays a paladin, need to define what is the conviction that drives his character into being a paladin. If he acts accordingly whit his conviction, he follows his personal code. If not, he is a risk to falling. I think it's more simple than a universal code and that open the road to a more interesting character development.

This would perfectly fit a Chaotic "Paladin" IMO but not a Lawful one


Grey Star wrote:
Now, about the code, I think the player who plays a paladin, need to define what is the conviction that drives his character into being a paladin. If he acts accordingly whit his conviction, he follows his personal code. If not, he is a risk to falling. I think it's more simple than a universal code and that open the road to a more interesting character development.

The Paladin having a personal reason for following a particular code is definitely something a player needs to think on. Not only when playing a Paladin, but also when playing a Cleric (or other character that strongly follows a deity).

This is a player thing, and also kind of a real-world thing. If IRL you want to carry a gun and catch bad guys, become a police officer. If you can't follow all the rules, then don't. If you become a police officer and you break the rules, don't expect there to be no consequences. Knowing why you want to be a police officer can lead you a long way to not committing crimes yourself, or mishandling evidence, or what have you.

What you're asking for Grey Star is a player thing, not a rules thing, and I've always wanted my players to have reasons for what they did (whether or not they played a paladin) because it makes for more fun & in-depth characters.

Wayfinders

The Raven Black wrote:
This would perfectly fit a Chaotic "Paladin" IMO but not a Lawful one.

Why doesn't it fit for a lawful one? They have a strong conviction and it drives them into the specific path of a paladin. Differents paladins just don't have the same motivation and conviction but they have one.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Grey Star wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
This would perfectly fit a Chaotic "Paladin" IMO but not a Lawful one.
Why doesn't it fit for a lawful one? They have a strong conviction and it drives them into the specific path of a paladin. Differents paladins just don't have the same motivation and conviction but they have one.

It is because I read the "personal code" as something belonging exclusively to the Paladin and not as a code coming from outside

I might be wrong in this interpretation because as a non-native speaker I maybe mistranslated your post and missed a crucial nuance. My most heartfelt apologies for any offense I gave you here. It was not intended


Iron_Matt17 wrote:
Good, on you Dog. Your statement belies a mature attitude. One I hope to emulate when I find something I'm not happy about.

Thank you for saying so. It is a cunning illusion I hope to maintain. ;)

I hope to live up to it when I want to froth about shields again.

Wayfinders

The Raven Black wrote:
Grey Star wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
This would perfectly fit a Chaotic "Paladin" IMO but not a Lawful one.
Why doesn't it fit for a lawful one? They have a strong conviction and it drives them into the specific path of a paladin. Differents paladins just don't have the same motivation and conviction but they have one.

It is because I read the "personal code" as something belonging exclusively to the Paladin and not as a code coming from outside

I might be wrong in this interpretation because as a non-native speaker I maybe mistranslated your post and missed a crucial nuance. My most heartfelt apologies for any offense I gave you here. It was not intended

I am also a non-native speaker, and I could have made my point in a better way. By "personal code", I mean a code made by the player. It can be a code enforced by an order of knight. So we can have more interesting code for the side who like the personal side of a code of conduct and the side who want a code that has a meaning on a larger scale.


I disagree, following a code is more honor dealing than lawful.

and honor does not equal law or justice
law does not equal justice either.
even doing the right thing does not equal law or good either

and futhermore

they said that the paladin was LG for the playtest and not much has been said other than that as far as its aignment

and past that, people want it G only and some want it to remain LG. both have valid arguments for both. though legacy and if they remove the L from the paladin I will leave to me are more personal than much else.

moving on.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

There are also people who wish for a CG holy warrior to coexist with LG Paladin without being the exact same class

It is a varied landscape

Liberty's Edge

8 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:

There are also people who wish for a CG holy warrior to coexist with LG Paladin without being the exact same class

It is a varied landscape

Indeed. I'm actually probably in this camp in a lot of ways, but I'd require that the CG version be equally focused on the Good part of their Alignment and equally powerful.

Which some people who only want LG Paladins seem to have problems with.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

There are also people who wish for a CG holy warrior to coexist with LG Paladin without being the exact same class

It is a varied landscape

Indeed. I'm actually probably in this camp in a lot of ways, but I'd require that the CG version be equally focused on the Good part of their Alignment and equally powerful.

Which some people who only want LG Paladins seem to have problems with.

I also am very much in this camp. I totally agree with DMW, and thankfully haven't seen many people (if at all) who would fit into the "LG=Only Good Class". But I'm sure they're out there...


I can see all 3 good alignments being able to have paladins.

those lg ones that cant see a CG code being as strict stuff. the problem there is they are looking at it the wrong way.

think LG code look at LG archons
think NG code look at NG angels
think cg code look at cg azatas


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheFinish wrote:
Stone Dog wrote:

I think that being incarcerated (or executed) prevents the Paladin from doing actual good in the future, so the second tenets safety clauses feel like they give the paladin a decent buffer to choose inaction if necessary.

It sets up a paladin's player with interesting challenges, but one thing should be kept in mind (okay, at least one). A paladin doesn't have to win. A paladin can stay Lawful Good, not commit any Anethema, keep to the Code to the best of their ability and still not succeed in saving innocents from immediate harm.

It isn't a weakness .

If the threat of death or incarceration is enough for a paladin to decide not to act....what's the point of the second tenet, except for them to be able to break tenets 3 and 4 with the excuse of "I'm saving an innocent!It's fine!"?

Basically any situation where you'd need to save an innocent would involve going up against something that could "[...]sacrifice their life and future potential in an attempt to protect an innocent", be it a band of marauding orcs, a house being on fire, or a Katapeshi slave-driver mistreating slaves. Which means the Paladin is free to ignore the situation.

If so, then the entire second tenet after "You must not take actions that you know will harm an innocent" is essentially pointless.

The reasoning is probably: Paladins should be obligated to protect the innocent, but players will feel bad if their paladin is obligated to engage in a suicide mission. So they get an excuse not to.

The issue is world design. In the Dresden Files, the Knights of the Sword have some pretty lawful stupid seeming requirements, but they also have an omnipotent god on their side who ensures things turn out well if they have faith. Real life Christians have chosen to be martyred rather than break their faith for the same reason.

However, if you have a simulationist GM who will just let the paladin die for nothing, then the code needs more wiggle room.


johnlocke90 wrote:
The issue is world design. In the Dresden Files, the Knights of the Sword have some pretty lawful stupid seeming requirements, but they also have an omnipotent god on their side who ensures things turn out well if they have faith.

Or even if they don't since one of them is agnostic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
Revan wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Grey Star wrote:
I have made a groundbreaking discovery. Good bicarbonate and chaotic lemon juice react with each other. The paladin chemical reaction happens with CG character! I want my Nobel prize!

I'm getting incredibly tired of people trying to force non-Lawful Good Paladins in. Just. It is wearing me down, personally, to the point where I've visited these forums less and less.

Where once I was actually excited about the game, now I'm a lot less.

Even after the devs came out, said they were LG-only, and explained why (feel/flavor) and stated if they did a CG champion it would be different in flavor and mechanics people just won't stop.

And I'm getting really tired of people trying to force me to feel bad for not giving precedence to their obsessively restrictive playstyles and pretending that the mechanics of Paladins have ever had even a little bit to do with Law and Chaos, not just Good and Evil. Even when the devs came out with a new Paladin Code not just allowed but *required* prioritizing Good over honor, honesty, and obeying the law, it just won't stop.

Just because good is prioritized over law doesnt mean law isn't important.

Following a code is, by it's very nature, inherently lawful.

No. It isn't. Chaotic people follow codes. Not just in countless stories where you can argue whether they're 'really' Lawful, but *everywhere* in 3.5, P1E, and from what we've seen of P2E. Exalted Sacred Vows in 3.5 did not have a Lawful requirement. Ronin Samurai and Order of the Cockatrice Cavaliers have codes. (And for that matter, Order of the Warrior Samurai and Order of the Lion cavaliers, who specifically swear to serve a Lord, are perfectly free to be Chaotic.) Chaotic Clerics have codes, even more explicitly codified in P2E.

You can argue that the Paladin code is harder and more restrictive (even though the fundamental design philosophy of the P2E code has been to make it *less* restrictive and exceedingly difficult to break if you're making a good faith effort), but there is absolutely no leg to stand on to claim that codes are Lawful-exclusive.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

To start with, I like the idea that there can be a code all paladins follow, but another code can be added based on alignment. For example the Gray Paladin's code,

Gray Paladin code:
  • A gray paladin must be of lawful good, lawful neutral, or neutral good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act (for example, casting a spell with the evil descriptor).
  • She should strive to act with honor and uphold the tenets of her faith, but failing to do so is not a violation of her code.
  • And, other than evil actions, she can do whatever else she feels is necessary to uphold the causes of law and good.

A CG good paladin could easily have something to the effect of "as long as an action is done for the sake of good and freedom a paladin can do whatever is necessary." Ex: Breaking in to save a group of lawfully bought slaves, and murdering the owners so that the slaves cant be reclaimed. All was for the sake of good, the way to do it well not the best.

Second, I don't see how wanting a class to be more versatile such that a group can ban all but a single alignment of it or leave it alone can hurt. I mean in pf1 there are Gray paladin (LN, LG, or CG alignment), and they recently added the Vindictive Bastard. For those that don't know a Vindictive Bastard is a Paladin who can have any alignment and do what ever they want, while getting what could be the prototype for the new Retributive Strike.

In fact having a any alignment holy warrior in Core allows for Prestige classes to have the flavor of, "You are so for the 1 alignment I, [insert god here], decided you need to be my champion go forth with your new abilities mighty warrior may the path of X guide you to VICTORY!"


Well, I mean, to try to get the thread back on topic; do the current rules even encourage an LG paladin to be lawful, or good? If they weren't lawful, or good, would they encourage them to follow whatever tenets did guide them? If they worship Desna, Asmodeus, Gozreh, or whomever does it encourage them to follow their distinct god(ess)'s doctrines to feel unique from a paladin of any of the other faiths?

Currently if you're not metagaming to subvert tenet 1, yes it encourages good paladins by taking away their shiny paladin abilities when they do evil things. Tenet 4 encourages lawful behavior but can be easily subverted, so lawful is optional at this point (I mean, even the word 'respect' can be interpreted so you don't have to obey them, so long as you respect their power or such---the consequences of disobeying). And as for all that other stuff---it's not at all addressed. Maybe there'll be some unique feats and such that help here. As of right now I think you can get away with C-L G Paladin without much effort and certainly without falling.

As for discussions of what the paladin should or shouldn't be... maybe a dedicated thread would be more appropriate. What posts I've read here deal very little with code debugging.


The current rules do encourage paladins to be good (don't lie or cheat, protect innocents, follow the "laws"). However, it does not exactly encourage lawfulness. The reason being that it asks to follow the rules (Tenet 4), but then says you can break them to be honorable (Tenet 3), but still can't lie to save yourself.

So I would change Tenet 4 to read something like, "Follow legitimate authority unless to do so would put you at risk", similar to Tenet 2. Or better yet add a rule where it is okay to ignore Tenets 3 & 4 if doing so would put you at harm, again similar to Tenet 2.

From trying to think of the ways to write this, I can say that any fool proof code is doing to be way more complicated with lots of exceptions and cross-references between the Tenets. Ex: You can't lie unless you need to so to prevent yourself from getting killed when going through Cheliax on the way to find some "miracle cure" for a plague.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quote:
Because it alters the lore of the class. It alters the flavor of the world.

While opening it to any alignment would, having Paladins be any Good and Antipaladins be any Evil wouldn't change a thing, concept or lore wise.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

You all need some perspective if you think "person strenuously disagrees with me on a forum" is persecution.

When someone starts tracking down Hwalsh and harassing him outside of discussions he willingly enters, and generally acts rudely in, Ill consider the possibility that someones being persecuted.

As for what else do I want? Maybe if he stopped acting like a put upon victim just because game rules might change, literally comparing himself to a victim of persecution, that might help.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The lore and flavor of the world are constantly changing. Every single month new material is released that alters what we thought we know. New classes and archetypes spring forth. Races that one had never heard much from suddenly have a much larger presence in the world.

The world survives and carries on regardless of such changes. Lore adapts and expands.

The paladin has had a run that spans decades with all but minor changes. Recently we've been told that barbarians are having their alignment restriction removed -- in effect altering the lore of the class and the flavor of the world. It remains to be seen what will happen to the monk. But any changes will indeed alter that class and the world as well.

The paladin opening up would indeed change the class and the world. It is very true. In my opinion such inclusiveness, like all inclusiveness, makes the world better. There would still be LG paladins (or champions if you prefer) with new exciting allies and foes to work with and against. The world adapts and moves on.

To address the topic of the thread, I'd prefer to see codes per God rather than a generalized code that doesn't address what honor, murder, poison and so on means for each culture and ancestry. Add five dollars to the book price and increase the number of pages. Use the rest to flavor out other classes or ideas if needs be, but if the paladin/champion is so important it is worth doing right.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Calling out an individual poster like this is not cool.

If you have an ongoing problem with an individual’s posts, take it up with an email community@paizo.com. They’ll review it and take appropriate action - it’s up to Paizo to determine if someone has been persecuted or is persecuting anyone, not some kind of community consensus.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PF1; Core Rulebook wrote:
Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity's (if she has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaotic, evil, good, and lawful descriptors in their spell descriptions.

Ignoring scrolls and wands for a second. I always read the PF1 limitation on clerics casting evil spells as a good cleric as an impossibility instead of a code of conduct constraint: that Desna just does not have the right cosmic mojo to grant a casting of infernal healing.

Paladin Code wrote:
You must never willingly commit an evil act, such as murder, torture, or casting an evil spell.

Having the casting of evil spells as part of the code suggests that Sarenrae is willing to grace that paladin with a casting of infernal healing... once. If this is intentional it adds something interesting to the divine relationship.

If this is not intentional and that this clause is really there for scrolls and wands. Then what is the difference between using that slain drow's wand to heal, versus taking that slain drow's sword. Both are tools. (My answer to the difference is that the is something comically Evil about evil magic, and only mundanely evil about a sword tempered in the blood of slaves.)

I'd like to edit and proofread the above but I have a Pathfinder game to run to.


DM Livgin wrote:
PF1; Core Rulebook wrote:
Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity's (if she has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaotic, evil, good, and lawful descriptors in their spell descriptions.

Ignoring scrolls and wands for a second. I always read the PF1 limitation on clerics casting evil spells as a good cleric as an impossibility instead of a code of conduct constraint: that Desna just does not have the right cosmic mojo to grant a casting of infernal healing.

Paladin Code wrote:
You must never willingly commit an evil act, such as murder, torture, or casting an evil spell.

Having the casting of evil spells as part of the code suggests that Sarenrae is willing to grace that paladin with a casting of infernal healing... once. If this is intentional it adds something interesting to the divine relationship.

If this is not intentional and that this clause is really there for scrolls and wands. Then what is the difference between using that slain drow's wand to heal, versus taking that slain drow's sword. Both are tools. (My answer to the difference is that the is something comically Evil about evil magic, and only mundanely evil about a sword tempered in the blood of slaves.)

I'd like to edit and proofread the above but I have a Pathfinder game to run to.

I think this highlights something important. One of the oft cited distinctions between law and chaos is the deontological-consequential split, but since it is largely left to the GM as to what is law and chaos, this split isn't really that effective, because it is precisely dependent on the position of the GM on the deontological-consequential axis to often times determine what is good and evil. While there are fundamentals by which good and evil, and law and chaos differ, by which I doubt many people would argue, the fact that there are places that the fundamenentals of the two axes intersect make it subjective, based on the GM's viewpoint as to what is considered Good or Lawful or Chaotic or Evil, or even Neutral.

Without a universal agreement on what counts as any of these, when there is any sort of conflict, there is basically only the GM's decision as to what is valid. As such, I don't see why we can treat a Paladin's alignment, or even a Paladin's code, as something that is independent of table variance. There can be no universal paladin code, even if there is only one in the CRB, because there is no universal agreement on what constitutes an evil act or a legitimate authority. As such, I don't see why the Paladin Code, or Paladin alignment, can't be something that the CRB openly accepts is subject to table variance. Maybe for the sake of PFS, they give some guidelines for Paladins in scenarios, but I don't see the idea that there is a single ideal of a paladin that either the code, or any alignment restrictions, must follow.

Wayfinders

By my experience, nothing is more chaotic evil than a loyal good paladin. They kill without hesitation and arrogates themselves the right to be judge, jury and executioner. It's hard or impossible in some cases to be a paragon of anything if you have meta-objective, like gather gold to have the right equipment for your level, to play the game how it intended to be played. How can you build an orphanage when you see all others players in your group using their gold to buy awesome stuff?

201 to 250 of 251 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paladin Code Debugging All Messageboards