PDA

View Full Version : Playing a Paladin, and my DM...



Ceaon
2010-07-23, 04:47 AM
... did NOT make me fall.

We're playing a short campaign (Forgotten Realms, 3.5 D&D) and I made a paladin/aglarondan griffonrider.
An obsidian portal page can be found here (http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/puppeteer).

The campaign is fun and exciting, and I'm really enjoying it. However, the adventure is rather scripted. Now, I know that, since it's a short campaign with only a very few sessions, this is kind of unavoidable. I'm okay with it.

Here's my problem.
First, all combats are indoor (meaning I can't use my griffon), detect evil is banned, and I'm very often unable to charge because there's too little room or too many obstacles. Since charging is what I wanted this character to do, and not being able to use half my class features is not that great, I wasn't having much fun in combat. The DM kinda-warned me this would happen, but I didn't realize how bad it would be until we started playing. But I figured, my time to shine will come.

Second, since the adventure is scripted, I, as a player, have to make decisions I don't think a paladin would ever make. Sometimes, the rest of the party does something I won't do and I stand at the side (knowing full well what the party is doing, of course). Other times I just have to do something or else I can't come along.

Examples are: sneaking (breaking) into a general's office and looking around in his personal things, infilitrating a hideout by pretending to be a worker and signing a contract that I have no intentions of living up to (I can't), lying (mostly I try to say nothing when the party tells blatant lies, but even remaning silent feels very un-paladinlike) and ignoring orders from superiors and legitimate authority (the hathran, for those familar with the setting), and killing 'potential evil' (young women who were training to become illegal spellcasters). I did not kill any of them personally (dealing non-lethal damage as always with my merciful weapon), but the others did.

I didn't fall after any of these things.

Again, I want to stress that I like this campaign and I like my DM. I am enjoying myself and so are the other players. But, not making me fall after the killing of those girls made me go O.o. The other players are all playing CG or CN characters, and I could justify all these actions even for a LG non-paladin character - but not for a paladin.

The words "we can't do this, we have a paladin in our team" have been uttered many a times, which, combined with the fact I'm not very useful except for a high diplomacy modifier makes me kinda feel like a burden instead of an addition to the party.

So, last session, my paladin was hit by a forcecage and rising water trap (I haven't been very lucky neither during these sessions), but the party managed to teleport me out in the last minute.

However, I spoke to the DM and explained I wanted another character, meaning the paladin drowned.

Did I overreact or was this a wise decision?

blackseven
2010-07-23, 05:05 AM
If you weren't having fun (most important), and your DM was okay with it (almost as important), and the other players are okay with it (only marginally important), this seems like a reasonable course of action.

I think the DM being lax about falling was okay in this case. IF you wanted to keep your paladin, I think it would be very interesting to play (I've been in thsoe situations a lot where I have to walk a fine line), but if you weren't having fun, rerolling would be good too.

Psyx
2010-07-23, 05:05 AM
I don't think it was a bad choice. Having moral quandary in the part can be fun, especially if it causes good IC conversation. But if a scripted adventure DEMANDS that you act in a way that makes you less comfortable with the character, then go for a change.

Although you could have asked your GM to sub out Detect undead for detect evil (I forget the source for that) and the mount for Underdark knight (PHB2?) or something else.

Badgerish
2010-07-23, 05:10 AM
...

Again, I want to stress that I like this campaign and I like my DM. I am enjoying myself and so are the other players. But, not making me fall after the killing of those girls made me go O.o. The other players are all playing CG or CN characters, and I could justify all these actions even for a LG non-paladin character - but not for a paladin.

The words "we can't do this, we have a paladin in our team" have been uttered many a times, which, combined with the fact I'm not very useful except for a high diplomacy modifier makes me kinda feel like a burden instead of an addition to the party.

So, last session, my paladin was hit by a forcecage and rising water trap (I haven't been very lucky neither during these sessions), but the party managed to teleport me out in the last minute.

However, I spoke to the DM and explained I wanted another character, meaning the paladin drowned.

Did I overreact or was this a wise decision?

"We can't do this, we have a Paladin in our team" are a core part (and often failing) of playing a Paladin in 3.5

They are very strongly-themed characters and it certainly looks like these themes are being ignored.

Given what you say, I agree with your choice to retire the Paladin. However, if the party tried really hard to save you from the trap and/or treated saving you from the trap to be a great success, then I would lean towards escaping the trap as normal then leaving the party for adventures anew.

hamishspence
2010-07-23, 06:07 AM
The non-association rule does suggest a paladin "will not continue an association with those who consistantly offend against his moral code"

So- eventually, a paladin who's being played according to the code, would leave the group- allowing for a new character to replace them.

2xMachina
2010-07-23, 06:13 AM
No need to kill him. Just retire him off to another adventure as a NPC.

(I don't like killing characters.)

Vitruviansquid
2010-07-23, 06:27 AM
Falling is great in a narrative and gives an epic, heroic feel to the paladin as a fighter of good against evil.

... but it's a horrible mechanic for a tabletop RPG. It's such a bad idea, mechanically speaking, that I say you and your DM just sort of ignore it when it's inconvenient and use it when it's convenient.

potatocubed
2010-07-23, 06:33 AM
"We can't do this, we have a Paladin in our team" are a core part (and often failing) of playing a Paladin in 3.5.

This is truth, and the reason I ban paladins in my games. The presence of a paladin in the group forces all the other players to play paladin-friendly characters (or whoops, there go your powers, not theirs). More relevantly, it also forces the GM to run only paladin-friendly adventures (or be very lax with the falling thing) or again, there go your powers.

Getting away from my mini-rant, I would say that retiring the paladin one way or another is your best bet - the adventure as written is obviously not paladin-friendly, so you're either going to have a less-than-satisfactory paladin experience because you're not suffering the appropriate consequences for your actions, or you're going to have a less-than-satisfactory paladin experience because you are suffering the appropriate consequences for your actions.

Could you refluff perhaps as a LG fighter or cleric? You could keep that 'morally upstanding' feel while getting away with more when the shadiness starts.

Person_Man
2010-07-23, 09:04 AM
You can ride your Griffin everywhere a Medium creature can go. It just takes squeezing penalties (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Movement,_Position,_and_Distance#Squeezing), which aren't horrible considering how awesome your mounted bonuses are. There's also the Tunnel Riding feat in Races of Stone, which reduces these penalties.

I would also add that as your Special Mount, you have the Share Spells ability. Invest in UMD cross class, or take the Sword of the Arcane Order or Arcane Schooling feat. Cast Alter Self on yourself with a wand or a scroll, and both of you can turn into different creatures.

If that doesn't work, you can ask your DM if you can change your race to Stronheart Halfling or some similar Small Race, and give your Griffin the Dungeonbred template (CR +0, Dungeonscape) which decreases it's size by one step and increases it's maneuverability by one step.

On the roleplaying front, I would say that your definition of Lawful Good depends entirely upon the God you worship. If you want to be a Paladin who acts like a Klingon or a Crusader and not a Jedi or an honest cop, then just work with your DM to come up with a God that matches that philosophy. Laws, honor, and Good ideals vary widely from culture to culture. Alignment is a guide, not a straitjacket.

Devils_Advocate
2010-07-23, 07:33 PM
Second, since the adventure is scripted, I, as a player, have to make decisions I don't think a paladin would ever make.
Query: Does the above sentence become any less accurate if "have" is replaced with "choose"? If so, how?


But, not making me fall after the killing of those girls made me go O.o. The other players are all playing CG or CN characters, and I could justify all these actions even for a LG non-paladin character - but not for a paladin.
Well, if you wanted your paladin to fall, you could have discussed that with the DM. Player feedback should not be irrelevant for this decision, and not just because it's good for a DM and paladin player to come to a consensus about the standards at work. The character's thoughts and feelings, decided by the player, are not entirely irrelevant, and could easily be a deciding factor as to whether a given violation is a "gross" violation.

Of course, if you don't have in-character reasons for your character's choices, but are just metagaming so that (s)he can work with the rest of the group... well, that's sort of the problem, isn't it?

As hamishspence points out, even avoiding direct participation in code-violating activities doesn't make it kosher for a paladin to aid and abet such activities. But that doesn't require opposing the rest of the party, unless they harm or threaten innocents. "I have to leave this group" is a legitimate response and should pretty much be the default response to unacceptably unethical but Good group. All the more so if they expect the paladin to participate in their naughtiness.

So if a paladin is clearly inappropriate for a party, there is an entirely legitimate and largely non-confrontational way for the player to just scrap the character instead of trying to force things to fit. There's no need to invent an excuse to eliminate the character from the game; a ready-made reason is already provided.


I would say that your definition of Lawful Good depends entirely upon the God you worship. If you want to be a Paladin who acts like a Klingon or a Crusader and not a Jedi or an honest cop, then just work with your DM to come up with a God that matches that philosophy. Laws, honor, and Good ideals vary widely from culture to culture. Alignment is a guide, not a straitjacket.
A character's definition of the phrase "Lawful Good" will likely be influenced by factors other than choice of deity. In any event, opinions on semantics have no direct bearing on alignment. Nor does the Paladin code vary with patron deity; that's how Clerics work. Well, in 3.5. In 4E they do mostly just have different powers, but in 3.5 the Paladin has its own special code and alignment restriction.

Honesty, for example, is required: no lying and no cheating. So is respecting legitimate authority, so definitely more Federation than Klingon there.

Dr.Epic
2010-07-23, 07:41 PM
Examples are: sneaking (breaking) into a general's office and looking around in his personal things, infilitrating a hideout by pretending to be a worker and signing a contract that I have no intentions of living up to (I can't), lying (mostly I try to say nothing when the party tells blatant lies, but even remaning silent feels very un-paladinlike) and ignoring orders from superiors and legitimate authority (the hathran, for those familar with the setting), and killing 'potential evil' (young women who were training to become illegal spellcasters). I did not kill any of them personally (dealing non-lethal damage as always with my merciful weapon), but the others did.

I didn't fall after any of these things.

(Lawful) Good doesn't equal (Lawful) Nice.

Being Lawful means have vows you follow. Just because you break the law or are doing something a criminal would do doesn't mean you're evil or living without laws.

Starbuck_II
2010-07-23, 07:46 PM
Examples are: sneaking (breaking) into a general's office and looking around in his personal things, infilitrating a hideout by pretending to be a worker and signing a contract that I have no intentions of living up to (I can't), lying (mostly I try to say nothing when the party tells blatant lies, but even remaning silent feels very un-paladinlike) and ignoring orders from superiors and legitimate authority (the hathran, for those familar with the setting), and killing 'potential evil' (young women who were training to become illegal spellcasters). I did not kill any of them personally (dealing non-lethal damage as always with my merciful weapon), but the others did.

Sneaking isn't against code. And looking at things isn't as well.
Not lying isn't lying. Omission isn't lying (rather silly).

Ignoring legitamate authotity is against code. Killing evil isn't wrong (why not use nonlethal if you weren't sure?) and since you did you are clear.
You aren't judged by others actions (you can't fall for them).

I repeat it doesn't matter if your allies kill every good god: you don't fall for another's acts.
Now you should do your best to tell them that what they did wasn't right (if it wasn't, but I don't think killing evil was wrong). Even killing neutral is okay if they attack/threaten your lives.


However, I spoke to the DM and explained I wanted another character, meaning the paladin drowned.

Did I overreact or was this a wise decision?

Depends on you.

liquid150
2010-07-23, 07:59 PM
No, you didn't overreact at all, in fact I'd say you made the correct decision. Mostly like, from an IC perspective, your character would just become uncomfortable with either the missions or the tactics of your party-mates, and would take off.

Fouredged Sword
2010-07-23, 11:01 PM
Sounds to me like you are all set player wise and character wise to find a nice sunset and get to walking. Give a good "you are good people (for the most part)" speach and fade out of the game. Then respec as a halfling paladin of freedom on a mini mount. That will let you still be a holy warrior for good, but let you lie, cheat and steal so long as it if for good.

WalkingWall
2010-07-24, 05:13 PM
I think if you arent enjoying the game you should change. However tere are ways to make it less dificult to follow the paladin code one is low intel as a pally it can be a dump stat and if you stupid your charecter isent gana know when he is being lied to about what happend to all thouse girls your party killed they could tell you they teleported them to wounderland and you would belive it. Sense the paladin conduct specifictly says that they cant KNOWINGLY group with poeple that brake there moral code however if your to dump to know there braking your moral code the gods take pitty on your stupidity and let you keep your powers.

Ceaon
2010-07-25, 08:45 AM
Thanks, everyone, for both the advice and the affirmation I made a defensible decision by leaving this character.

I have switched characters and am now playing a LG monk, a close friend of the paladin, send by the paladin to help the party out. This is working out great since 'just' acting LG is much more lenient than the paladin's code, and the party dynamics aren't radically different now.

Killer Angel
2010-07-25, 08:54 AM
Thanks, everyone, for both the advice and the affirmation I made a defensible decision by leaving this character.


I agree you made the right choice. Also, your DM acted correctly. Have fun. :smallsmile:


I have switched characters and am now playing a LG monk, a close friend of the paladin, send by the paladin to help the party out.

A monk? The paladin hate the group, did he?
(sorry, can't resist) :smalltongue:

Tequila Sunrise
2010-07-25, 09:20 AM
Did I overreact or was this a wise decision?
If you're not having fun, better to play a new PC than slog along with the old one. So, yes, a wise decision. It appears that you have a pretty reactionary idea of how paladins should be played, but unless you threw dice or a fit, I don't see any overreaction.

On the topic of your paladin not falling: maybe by the rules he should have fallen because of what he did/didn't stop. But the Code is bad class design; hard-coding "this is how you must rp your character" can cause all kinds of problems, and it sounds like your DM realizes this. So kudos to him for ignoring the Code and the fallen paladin BS.

aivanther
2010-07-25, 09:25 AM
This is what Paladin of Freedom is for. All the fun of moral rightouesness, but you get to be a rebel instead of a cop.

Ceaon
2010-07-25, 12:21 PM
On the topic of your paladin not falling: maybe by the rules he should have fallen because of what he did/didn't stop. But the Code is bad class design; hard-coding "this is how you must rp your character" can cause all kinds of problems, and it sounds like your DM realizes this. So kudos to him for ignoring the Code and the fallen paladin BS.

Well, yes, I think so too. He tried to keep me playing this character. However, since this time the Code was not only crunch, but also very much this character's fluff (it had been established he was a very lawful AND a very good person), it was really hard to see this character as a real person.


A monk? The paladin hate the group, did he?
(sorry, can't resist) :smalltongue:

:smallamused: Muahahahaahh! :smallbiggrin:

In all seriousness, he is actually doing okay. The group consists of a barbarian/runescarred berserker that deals good amounts of damage, a spellthief that can disable opponent casters, and a ranger/rogue who is a capable damage dealer as well as a skill-monkey. My monk is a monk/shou disciple and works as a defensive powerhouse, using grapple, trip, a lot of AoOs and reach instead of damage to make sure enemies attack mostly him. He also has the highest diplomacy of the group, and can join the rogue when scouting.
I guess that, since none of the characters are higher than tier 4 (I think?), a monk can contribute fine.

If you followed the link I provided above: session 4 will be added soon, I guess.