Paladins and Feinting

[HumbleGamer]

Hi there,

I was wondering if a Palading using feints during a fight would be doing something against its own code

Quote:

You must act with honor, never taking advantage of others, lying, or cheating.

Leaving apart that you feint with "deception", and that you will just be using that skill to, eventually, perform feints, would a paladin using feints be

- Acting with no honor
- taking advantage of others
- Cheating

It feels so borderline, but also it could be something worth a discussion.

As for me, I think that making a good use of combat maneuvers won't be necessarily cheating ( we are not talking about tossing dirt in the eyes or blind the opponent with a flash ), but I can't put out of my head the image of a honorable combatant who fights in a fair and square way.

On the other hands I doubt that on the battlefield, during a duel or anywhere else we will ever see an enemy complaining that the "strike was meant to come from left and not from the right" or that "the paladin was supposed to step from the sides instead of standing still, and since he didn't now I am flat footed".

What do you think?

Cheers!
Suggestions?

[Grankless]

If "I faked swinging from the right but am really attacking from the left" breaks the code, so should using a shield. Only a dishonorable coward would let a hunk of metal do the fighting!

[Stack]

I think banning a paladin from feinting would be a very extreme interpretation. Under this interpretation, a paladin would be a terrible general (can't mislead the enemy about the position and strength of your force, can't use diversionary attacks, etc.). If you start going to that extreme, there are all kinds of other ridiculous limits you can reach. Attacking from an ambush? Nope, taking advantage of the enemy's lack of awareness. Enemy didn't raise his shield? Wait to attack until he is properly prepared.

You can't try to impersonate the Grand Marquess, charge a dying person triple price for a healing potion, or mark cards, but I would be wary of a GM that didn't let a paladin feint.

[HammerJack]

No. Just no.

[jdripley]

I take those tenets to be more about how you relate to people.

"Give me those potions at half cost or I won't stay here and defend your town against the undead horde that's bearing down on you." That is taking advantage of others.

"I will stay here and defend your town while you go for help, come hell or high water." and then finds out there's a juicy dungeon half a day's walk to the east, and goes there while the undead horde wrecks the town. That is acting without honor.

"I do not have the funds now, but if you trust me, give me the potion now so that I may defeat our mutual enemy. When I return with the fiend's treasure, I will pay you half again as much in return for your faith in me." and then decides not to return to that merchant after the loot is won. That is cheating.

But in battle? Nah, man, in battle anything goes. What is the functional difference between rolling higher than AC and scoring a hit, and feinting to reduce AC and then scoring a hit? The straight-up roll is a quick and convenient shorthand for all of the fake-outs and sly moves that make up good swordsmanship in the first place.

[thenobledrake]

A Paladin, feinting: Watch out, I'm going to shield bash you! <attacks with sword> I didn't say when, pay attention to the sword too! <shield bashes next round>. There it is!

Humorous example aside, feinting is not lying, not dishonorable, and taking advantage of someone any more so than combat otherwise would be - because if it were any of those things and thus against a paladin's code to do, it would say so clearly like how the evil parts of necromancy are pointed out as being evil.

[Orithilaen]

Aside from the fact that feinting is not lying, a paladin can even lie to prevent immediate harm to an innocent, which probably applies in some combat situations.

[rainzax]

I would put "feinting" and "acting first in initiative" in the same, uh, tier.

Both exploiting a combat advantage.

[Siro]

A Feint is just another combat maneuver, no more tenet breaking then taking advantage of your superior sword techniques against a less skilled foe in battle.

Of course any strict DM can make anything seem like tenet breaking=

“ I am taking away your champion abilities because you did not give the red dragon the standard two weeks notice of intent to combat (not acting honourably) while rallying your other party members against it to improve YOUR chances of winning (taking advantage of others) and cheating on your wife (with said dragon) and lying to your party members about your smothering side dragon (sometimes in the middle of said cheating).”

[masda_gib]

Look at the Swashbucklers Fencer subclass. It gets Feint as its panache ability.

Feinting is just part of fencing, of elaborate swordfighting. It is the art of "Not fighting like someone you has a weapon in their hand for the first time".

So Feinting is okay for paladins.

[shroudb]

i'm assuming that every single weapon attack in the game somehow involves feinting. You can't expect to swing your weapon in a straight line up and down and somehow land a hit.

The whole point of the attack bonus is simulating your experience in wieldign said weapon competent enough to land hits, and that always includes trying to land blows in the less protected areas of the enemy.

Now, the Feint action takes those small constant feints into the extreme, making a more grandiose move in order to leave the enemy even more exposed.

That's not dishonorable, not cheating, that's simply swordmanship.

[Ched Greyfell]

Paladins and fainting could also be an interesting thread.

[PossibleCabbage]

Misleading your opponent as to your intentions is an expected part of hand to hand combat, so a Paladin can feint with impunity.

It's much like how a Paladin does not need to announce "I am picking rock" before playing rock, paper, scissors or how a Paladin can play Poker and bluff because that is an expected part of the game.

[pennywit]

HumbleGamer wrote:

Hi there,

I was wondering if a Palading using feints during a fight would be doing something against its own code

Quote:

You must act with honor, never taking advantage of others, lying, or cheating.

Leaving apart that you feint with "deception", and that you will just be using that skill to, eventually, perform feints, would a paladin using feints be

- Acting with no honor
- taking advantage of others
- Cheating

It feels so borderline, but also it could be something worth a discussion.

A couple thoughts:

1) Feinting seems perfectly in character for a paladin of Chaldira Zuzaristan. Her paladins are supposed to use things like stealing and mischief in her service.

2) Especially if the paladin serves a war-oriented deity, I think feinting in combat is a legitimate tactic alongside tripping an opponent and other combat maneuvers.

3) I think that if a paladin were leading an army, then deceptive tactics against the enemy army would be acceptable, as that's part of war.

That said, I think there might be a problem with a paladin using a sneak attack (as that's potentially taking unfair advantage of an opponent) or a paladin who uses tactics like false surrender.

[Unicore]

It could be fun to play a paladin who decides for themselves that feinting is against their code.

[Deadmanwalking]

Feinting almost certainly doesn't count as lying or taking advantage for Code purposes, but even if it does, a Paladin is allowed to lie or take advantage of people to protect innocents.

If a Paladin is in a fight to the death, it should generally be to protect innocents. In fact, I can think of few fights a Paladin could be in without breaking their Code by fighting that don't fall under that umbrella one way or another. So basically any real fight they should definitely be able to feint.

I suppose it's arguable they shouldn't do so while sparring, but that situation will almost never come up during play. And I think it would still be fine even then.

[Blammoh]

I can't help it, but I keep hearing a levelling sound in my head each time I read 'PalaDING'..

[The Raven Black]

I do not think any deity out there would look down on a feinting Paladin. Iomedae herself likely feinted in combat.

Now a Paladin that decided that they would never feint in combat because they feel it is beneath them is another thing completely. And quite interesting IMO.

As always, check with your GM.

[Nocte ex Mortis]

Ched Greyfell wrote:

Paladins and fainting could also be an interesting thread.

First, I am so sorry for what I am about to do.

If a Paladin faints in combat, do they fall?

[WatersLethe]

In actual, real world combat you'd be an absolute s$~! combatant if you couldn't feint.

It's a fundamental part of getting past someone's guard. In editions past it could easily have been abstracted into the normal flow of combat. The fact that we now have a way to bring it into the mechanical narrative shouldn't make a difference.

If a GM said a Paladin couldn't feint, I'd ask to switch out characters right away because they don't understand from a fundamental level what a paladin is.

[Stack]

WatersLethe wrote:

In actual, real world combat you'd be an absolute s#$% combatant if you couldn't feint.

It's a fundamental part of getting past someone's guard. In editions past it could easily have been abstracted into the normal flow of combat. The fact that we now have a way to bring it into the mechanical narrative shouldn't make a difference.

If a GM said a Paladin couldn't feint, I'd ask to switch out characters right away because they don't understand from a fundamental level what a paladin is.

And a GM that would pull that would likely give you other trouble later, even if you didn't want to feint anyway.