Good day.
I have a situation, in which the paladin uses bluff to pose as a legitimate person from the Chelish authority, to get a rebel/freedom fighter out of jail.
Shortly afterwards, there will be a part where the group will have to obtain a docked ship. Be it from an evil aligned captain, but it is the only vessel docked, they can get to their objective with. Naturally, said captain does not voluntarily hand over their ship.
I have not before run into this, so i don't know if this causes problems with their paladin powers.
Thanks in advance, and happy new year.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It may be elucidating to look at the 2e Paladin, which has a priority for "what rules take precedence over other rules". To be specific here "do not allow innocents to come to harm when you could reasonably prevent it" is more important than "do not lie."
1e is a different game, but I've always tried to draw the line so that a Paladin should not deliberately speak untruth, but a Paladin is also not obligated to be forthcoming with damaging information. You can omit information, phrase things in a misleading way, answer a question with a question, let someone else talk for you, etc.
Like it's the difference between "there are no fugitives hiding in the attic" (a lie) and "I certainly don't know of any fugitives currently hiding in the attic" (since they could have left since you last saw them, and there's no expectation that you would be aware of everybody in the attic at every point in history) or "Do you really think I would be so foolish as to try to hide fugitives from as thorough and diligent an agent of the law as yourself?" (a question, not a statement.)
The important thing about Paladins is that you always try to do the right thing in the right way. If you're making an effort in this direction, you are probably fine.
yeah, the deity in question matters a lot. Some deity's will be more ok with lying, but others might have a major issue with it.
The goddess is Sarenrae.
Why send the paladin and not someone else?
If it must be the paladin, why it has to be Bluff instead of another solution?
But ok, let's roll with it. A paladin could lie (no matter the codex) and afterwards ask for atonement. Because he sincerly blames himself for not being able to come up with a better solution, and he will strive to improve.
That tenet's interpretation is a good one.
Thank you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the second situation simply have the paladin pay to use the ship. The paladin can probably make it seem like he is bribing the captain on the ship, but in reality, he is renting it. Just make sure to return the ship and pay for any damages. Use Diplomacy instead of bluff to pull it off. It might seem like this is skirting the code, but in reality, the paladin is paying a fair price for the service. Strictly speaking the paladin has not committed any wrong. Keep in mind that paladins are lawful good, which means they are going to be fairly good and figuring loopholes.
Did the paladin actually state he was the authority figure, or was it just implied? That might be nitpicking a bit, but strictly speaking it is not a lie. Paladins and other lawful alignments are often good at skirting restrictions without actually breaking them. Saying I am a <insert title> and order you to release the prisoner is different than saying are you going to refuse the order of a <insert title>, especially when the paladin has never outright stated he is a <insert title>. He may have implied he held the title, but never outright stated it.
Part of Sarenrae's paladin code is that I will redeem the ignorant by my words and actions. If they will not turn to the light, I will redeem them by the sword. From the sounds of things, the paladin has been following this. He tries to use a non-violent method first. Sarenrae would not have problems with this.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a situation, in which the paladin uses bluff to pose as a legitimate person from the Chelish authority, to get a rebel/freedom fighter out of jail.
Shortly afterwards, there will be a part where the group will have to obtain a docked ship. Be it from an evil aligned captain, but it is the only vessel docked, they can get to their objective with. Naturally, said captain does not voluntarily hand over their ship.
I have not before run into this, so i don't know if this causes problems with their paladin powers.
As described, you’re talking about a Paladin of Sarenrae engaging others under false pretenses to free someone from an evil, unjust authority, and then commandeering a vessel from an evil-aligned captain. You’re asking whether someone of that alignment, and who follows that goddess code of conduct, might run into issues if they do the above things.
By default, per the Core Rulebook, a Lawful Good character “combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.
Lawful good combines honor with compassion.”
Digging deeper into Ultimate Campaign’s alignment rules, a Lawful Good character’s relevant core tenets include fairness, honor, property, right, and truth. She “believes in honor” and “would rather die than betray [her] faith.”
Finally, Sarenrae demands that her Paladins are fair to others, that they do not abide evil, but that they try to get people to do the right thing via words before resorting to violence.
With that all that in mind:
1. A Paladin of Sarenrae should not use dishonesty as a means to achieve her goals. Dissembling, omissions of truth, and white lies may work fine for people who aren’t Paladins who want to justify not acting as Paladins would. A Paladin of Sarenrae would either not act this way, or, if she absolutely had to, would seek atonement after the fact.
2. A Paladin of Sarenrae would not allow the whims of an evil ship-captain get in the way of freeing people from an unjust regime. She would pay that captain fare wages for his assistance, seek to convince him to do the right thing if coin did not suffice, but would not shirk from seizing his vessel by (preferably non-violent) force if it was the only way of saving the innocent/delivering justice to them.
Thanks in advance, and happy new year.
Happy New Year to you, as well!
Maybe overly simplifying the answer here but... A Paladin can do ANYTHING 'for the greater good' and still retain their powers, EXCEPT performing an Evil action. And if they do things that 'grossly violate' their oaths, they might find themselves cut off from their power anyway. Gross violations is a fluid and not-fully-defined level of action, as it should be. Paladins CAN lie, they CAN cheat, they CAN steal, etc, etc. Their oaths (and their own beliefs) make them opposed to doing so. At the very least, a Paladin should be morally conflicted after engaging in such behavior and seek to atone (if not mechanically, but narratively). If they are not conflicted with such behavior, this indicates a potential shift in their core alignment and might be a more serious issue to tackle.
One thing to remember is that D&D does not get into the complexities of real world morality to the extent some people like. Doing Evil in the name (or pursuit) of a 'greater' good is still Evil, and your Paladin will lose their powers. Their path is a narrow one and it is HARD to stay balanced on it.
Remember Paladins are also lawful, and it may not be as chaotic to lie as it is evil to blindly murder, but you do have to both maintain lawfulness and goodness at the same time.
This to me ultimately comes down to specific deity's paladin's code how lenient they will be, and for one major reason. Some paladin codes just wish to see evil destroyed and don't allow for the "opportunities of redemption" that say Sarenrae and Shelyn offer. At the same time, just saying "repent or I will kill you" is very unlikely to ever be successful, especially as opposed to the stereotypical paladin's fall to a clever evil guy twisting their point of view. A paladin presented with someone that has no reason to fight them who is evil and has evil aims need not be turned into a hostile over taking them on a journey to show the follies of their evil, even if that requires a bit of light deception or leading.
At the risk of sounding really obvious, “This isn’t evil” is not the criteria by which a Paladin defines his or her life. A Paladin’s code of conduct and oath are, invariably, a more specific version of Lawful Good.
Secondly, a Paladin may not be able to detect someone’s evil supernaturally, but “normal evil” is a misleading label. The entry level for ANY evil is a willingness to “take what he wants without regard for whom it hurts” and “to hurt others for their own ends,” or to “kill for profit, sport, or convenience” without concern for their victim, or to be “vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable” while doing “what his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do.” So really, what we’te talking about is what scope of evil an NPC of evil alignment is capable, given their ability and available resources.
Now we can debate all we want about how morality plays in the real world, but those are the actions that define evil in this fictional game. If someone pings as evil, they’ve either done seriously dark things or are well on their way to doing so—which is why a goddess like Sarenrae instructs her Paladins to not let evil go unopposed or unchallenged.
Hence why I would argue that Sarenrae would not be okay with deceit, and that if a player arguing he’ll be remorseful and will get an Atonement spell later might work for a real-world knight taking his cues from papal edicts against Albigensian heretics, but will get him no luck in Golarion. Conversely, I think a Paladin would—correctly—recognize that a person doesn’t simply register against his Detect Evil on account of having the wrong combination of adjective and noun on their NPC sheet. They SHOULD try to find a peaceful, redemptive resolution with the captain, but if he resists I don’t think they should feel bad about locking him in his own brig.