"Its Lawful Good so long as there's no witnesses"
Well. That ain't right.
The very powers of Good and Law empower the abilities of a Paladin. They don't care if you think their tactics or methods are "nice" or "fair". They are shaped and designed to cut to the heart of the matter, bypassing the faux justifications and gnashing of teeth that Evil cowers behind. The very universe marked you (the ogre) as evil, the Paladin witnessed the act of evil, and justice was carried out in accordance (and within) the terms of the code.
The act of executing the Evil Ogre in a back alley for his act of evil, one that went unpunished by the local government (who's role is to serve and protect its populace), was an act of Law and Good. The fact that there were no witnesses changes nothing, other than ensuring that Evil, and the perversion of Law that Evil enables, has no way to retaliate against the Paladin without breaking their own code.
It is called "beating them at their own game, without sinking to their level" and it is not "fair". Evil never truly is "fair".
I don't see your statement as factual. Legitimate authority is recognized and respected. If not for the person then for the office that person holds
There also comes a time in every Lawful society that those that continue to abuse their power are called to answer, usual at the point of a sword or enraged mob of the populace. Respect is owed to those in office who respect the role of that office and use it to help the population. When they betray that respect and trust, and turn towards evil, they lose any respect owed to them. If not, tyranny would rule to this day.
The Paladin oath and code of conduct is not a straight jacket, and they are given immense ability to resolve issues within its guidelines. They are, however, forbidden from evil actions. If chaotic action and disregard of the "authority structure" is required to ensure justice, the Paladin will act accordingly. They might not like or enjoy the methods, but they are permitted.
In the quarter of a century I've been gaming I cant think of a single paladin that would take an elected official to the sword because he refused to recognize the election of an evil person as legitimate.
I don't see your statement as factual. Legitimate authority is recognized and respected. If not for the person then for the office that person holds.
That's a nice image to have spread around about Paladins, and I see no reason to say anything to the contrary nor to leave any witnesses who could testify against it.
In the quarter of a century I've been gaming I cant think of a single paladin that would take an elected official to the sword because he refused to recognize the election of an evil person as legitimate.
I don't see your statement as factual. Legitimate authority is recognized and respected. If not for the person then for the office that person holds.
Paladins attempting to usurp the legitimate authority of House Thrune is the plot of Hell's Vengeance.
If the local authorities don't uphold Law and Good, (or at least Just Law) they are, by definition, illegitimate in the eyes of a Paladin, and any form of resistance and any way to weaken such regimes are ok, their laws that don't conform to the Paladin's code are not to be observed if flouting them serves a greater purpose.
well, Robin Hood could have been a Paladin, fighting the Evil Prince John Lackland's Regime while waiting for the return of Good King Richard.
So you're saying it's acceptable for a paladin to sneak around and kill a person entitled to the legal protection of the city? They are judge, jury, and executioner in a state that provides for them? Your decision to obey the law when it suits is a Neutral attitude, and a Neutral Good paladin is just as fallen as a Chaotic Evil one. The Alignment is Lawful Good, Law gets equal billing with Good.
If the "legal protections" of the city protect an evil doer from the consequences of their deeds of harming the innocent, then the laws of the land come into conflict with not only the Code of the Paladin, but his very purpose.
As I said before, alignment is not a straight jacket. You can perform actions that fall outside of it. No one is perfectly consistent in their behavior and actions, and neither are Paladins. Above all else, a Paladin is Good (as noted by their inability to perform evil actions) and the Lawful bit is secondary. They are not explicitly called out as being unable to perform chaotic acts. While it may be up to the GM to determine if an act (a single act) is enough to justify "grossly" violating the code, it is more likely that multiple actions over time without the Paladin displaying distaste towards the chaotic actions he was forced to take in service of Good, that would change his alignment, and thus bring about a fall.
A Paladin's decision to follow the laws of the land has nothing to do with his "whims". It has everything to do with his service to Good and the protection of innocents. He will follow the laws of the land up until it conflicts with his code. There is no higher law or power than his/her code. Whether or not you agree with it changes nothing. They do not need your approval.
If the paladin's code is the highest authority, how can paladins have different codes? If the Powers of Good are the highest authority, why do Paladins of Torag and Paladins of Sarenraw have different codes?
That is a fairly easy question to answer, given a moment to consider it. All Paladins share the same basic code of conduct. Some of them swear additional oath/code when they choose to devote themselves to an order that follows a deity. Whether those oaths supercede the basic code of the Paladin is up to that player and the GM involved (remember those oaths to deities are optional and not required). There only comes a problem when any additional oaths directly contradict their "no evil acts" clause, if any exist.
However, that is beside the point. The Code a Paladin swears by is the highest authority that guides his/her actions. It doesn't matter if they swore different oaths. It doesn't matter what situation they are in.
If you need to be elected to be legitimate, then does that mean that Andoran is the only legitimate governing body in all of Golarion?
If you need to be elected to be legitimate, then does that mean that Andoran is the only legitimate governing body in all of Golarion?
The long answer is probably No, with a dash of depends…
Then again the code has its share not very accurately defined terms that could make a Paladin actions very rather widely.-> See 'Honor', 'Innocents' and the above 'legitimate'
Actually giving players the power to fill out what their particular character felt, was the 'right answer' to what the things above meant is of cause far far too much faith to place in the individual player, so here we are trying to narrow down every definition, until every character basically follows the same behavioral constraints.
*Sigh*
But people are talking about the service to Good, and since the deity codes replace the standard one, it is clear that there is no "Light Powers" equivalent of the Dark Powers of Ravenloft.
Some people were talking about service to deities, some were not. And there is major table variation between the thought that 'swearing an oath' to a patron deity replaces your original paladin code. That does not fly at my table. You are a Paladin, first and foremost. Any additional oaths you swear to your patron are between you and them. At my table, you could fall from favor from your patron deity and still have not fallen as a Paladin. The gods do not fuel your power and your ultimate loyalty is to Good and Law, then your deity. Now, do not get me wrong. I said previously that the Paladin code has a great deal of room for actions within it, and you can play loose with quite a few of those codes, all save for one.
You may play differently, and that is fine. I merely try to play, and run, my games as consistently as possible, with few exceptions. If allowing the oaths to a deity to override the base code of a paladin allows for a 'grey area' to exist and misunderstandings and abuse rise out from it, I take the hardest line and strictest reading, effectively eliminating the problem.
This is all getting away from the point that paladins are not licensed to commit murder, and an evil alignment is not a crime in and of itself.
If by murder, you mean the unlawful killing of one person by another, then yes. In a government that allows some of its population to get away with torture, debasement, abuse, and other unseemly acts, a Paladin would have a license to commit murder. Not on a whim, but since the government will not call its citizens to justice, the Paladin will bring justice where he/she can. That government may not sanction it but the Paladin does not care. The Paladin would become a vigilante in the eyes of that kind of government. As far as I am concerned, THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. This is actually a VERY GOOD thing, as the Paladin is probably the only sort of person I would actually trust with that sort of power. Not if I was the government, of course, I would be threatened.
I agree with you that evil of, and by, itself is not a license to smite. I would make a Paladin fall for attempting such a thing, absent other corroborating evidence of wrong doing.
EDIT: I do realize that some of these concepts are absolutely terrifying to some people if they were taken out of these context and super imposed into the real world. The Pathfinder universe is vastly different that our own for numerous reasons. Tangible alignment is one of the greatest of those reasons, as are the presence of deities. Keep that in mind.
Robin hood was a vigilante, ranger, or some combination of the two.
If your diety tells you to take a level of vigilante, you do.
I think Batman is some combination of vigilante and Paladin.
Personally I am in favor of the Smiteadin. One does not become evil by simple deeds or acts of selfishness. By registering as Evil to divine magic, there can be no doubt that such an individual is foul indeed. The world will be brighter without them.
I doubt any paladins would consider Cheliax a legitimate authority.
Robin hood was a vigilante, ranger, or some combination of the two.
If your diety tells you to take a level of vigilante, you do.
I think Batman is some combination of vigilante and Paladin.
Robin Hood did not have an alternate identity, so I guess pure ranger would be it, I only mentioned Paladin because he acted as a paladin might.
As for batman, his paladin levels depends on your choosing a LG version of the character... and depending on which version of Batman you take, he's been described as any of the 9 possibilities.
well, he DID try to set himself up as full king while his brother was prisoner in Germany...
Personally I am in favor of the Smiteadin. One does not become evil by simple deeds or acts of selfishness. By registering as Evil to divine magic, there can be no doubt that such an individual is foul indeed. The world will be brighter without them.
I doubt any paladins would consider Cheliax a legitimate authority.
You register as evil if the paladin happens to ping you as you're daydreaming about braining your strangling your kid brother because he put dung in your boots. Maybe find a more civilized approach before running them through with your sword.
You register as evil if the paladin happens to ping you as you're daydreaming about braining your strangling your kid brother because he put dung in your boots. Maybe find a more civilized approach before running them through with your sword.Personally I am in favor of the Smiteadin. One does not become evil by simple deeds or acts of selfishness. By registering as Evil to divine magic, there can be no doubt that such an individual is foul indeed. The world will be brighter without them.
I doubt any paladins would consider Cheliax a legitimate authority.
Not so. According to the spell text, you register as evil if the paladin happens to ping you as you're in the process of braining or strangling your kid brother (if you're 5HD or greater).
Thinking about something isn't the same as intending to do something which isn't the same as "actively intending" (to prepare or be in the process) to do something (else, I'm sure we'd all be quite a bit more successful in Real Life).
Can we backtrack a bit? Let's backtrack a bit.
Literal smite-on-sight is hyperbole. It's very rare and generally only a new player thing. What I'm referring to in this thread is more akin to attempts to solve a murder mystery by scanning for evil. It's a brute force method, and rarely feels satisfying.
Forget evil for a second. Think about see invisible instead. You'll wind up missing quite a bit of hidden-in-plain-sight stuff (not to mention giant chameleons) if you rely on magic to solve all your spot-hidden problems.
What I'm really getting at is this: For some players, magical powers don't augment your abilities as an intelligent gamer. They *become* your abilities. I think that risks leading to an oddly computerized style of play where exploring a dungeon becomes nothing more than a series of if/then statements. What I'm looking for is ways to break that cycle.
Can we backtrack a bit? Let's backtrack a bit.
Literal smite-on-sight is hyperbole. It's very rare and generally only a new player thing. What I'm referring to in this thread is more akin to attempts to solve a murder mystery by scanning for evil. It's a brute force method, and rarely feels satisfying.
Forget evil for a second. Think about see invisible instead. You'll wind up missing quite a bit of hidden-in-plain-sight stuff (not to mention giant chameleons) if you rely on magic to solve all your spot-hidden problems.
What I'm really getting at is this: For some players, magical powers don't augment your abilities as an intelligent gamer. They *become* your abilities. I think that risks leading to an oddly computerized style of play where exploring a dungeon becomes nothing more than a series of if/then statements. What I'm looking for is ways to break that cycle.
Have non-evil villains. Or lots and lots of evil characters.
Dragonlance Campaign Setting, city of Istar in the Age of Might. Outlawed evil gods, then outlawed neutral gods, then in the final weeks of its existence, declared evil thought the same as evil deeds, to the point one cleric was about to arrest a young boy because he wished his mother would die.And then the gods dropped a freaking mountain on the continent, slaughtering countless innocents. Who's evil now? : Pummmm yeah.
thing is
in some instances, that even the most righteous can be caught up in the zeal of the moment. REgardless of age, and in this regard there is not one individual that could be all that innocent.
and those who were not caught up in it likely saw the writing on the wall and up and left the city.
seriously when you have a 9 year old rat out his mother for cheating on his father and then she gets executed because by the law she did an evil act...
hos does the 9 yr old stay innocent?
Wow. I hope you're joking.
ummmm yeah.
thing is
in some instances, that even the most righteous can be caught up in the zeal of the moment. REgardless of age, and in this regard there is not one individual that could be all that innocent.
and those who were not caught up in it likely saw the writing on the wall and up and left the city.
seriously when you have a 9 year old rat out his mother for cheating on his father and then she gets executed because by the law she did an evil act...
hos does the 9 yr old stay innocent?
Evil has consequences. Even the small slights that seem minor can have lasting impacts, especially on innocents. And I think it is ridiculous that adultry would impose a death sentence. That is what happens when you let emotion determine policy and law.
Everyone knows, Smite makes right!
This is a case of'"A must have item". A phylactery of faithfulness.
It tells you if a considered action could annoy your deity.Great idea, Detect Lead. First round, it tells you if there is lead in front of you. Second round, it tells you what or who has the lead. Third round, it tells you the location and shape of the lead, such as bullets or a lead lined box.
I read the rest of the topic and I stand by my first statement.
The spell may need some suggestions though.
I’m just going to say that if you buy that item, GMs have permission to have every NPC laugh at your character.
Because the phylactery of faithfulness is a box that has our tie to your head. So wearing one makes you look like a moron who can’t tell right from wrong.
It looks so dumb, you guys.
If you need to be elected to be legitimate, then does that mean that Andoran is the only legitimate governing body in all of Golarion?
Campaign idea: an Order of Paladins begins a crusade against Andoran because they view elected governments as inherently illegitimate, and proper authority can only be obtained from a ruler directly blessed by the Gods.
Spell casting and using powers on officials is tantamount to drawing a weapon, so any good GM should keep this problem as self-correcting.
Funny comic, BTW! Nice art.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In 40some years of roleplaying game practice. FInd me any paladin of Iomedae who recognizes the legitimacy of the current Chelaxian gummint... I'm not even sure Abadarites do.
Sorry to Necro your comment, Klorox, I just wanted to point out that there are, in fact, some Order of the Godclaw Hellknight Paladins.
Even more specifically, Queen Galfrey has a claim to the Chelaxian throne, is a paladin of Iomedae, and recognizes the legitimacy of Chelaxian rule.
Even *more* pressing, Iomedae is, well... Iomedae - and she voluntarily works with Asmodeus out of respect of his legitimacy.
well... if that's how it works in this game, maybe I ought to fully convert to D&D5 , agame where paladins have no alignment requirement anymore...