PDA

View Full Version : What are the Silliest Ways You've Seen People Force Paladins to Fall?



Pages : [1] 2

Ridureyu
2008-11-29, 12:34 AM
As inspired by the "If a Villain wears babies for armor, would that force a paladin to fall" (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97978) thread, I must now ask this question:

What are the most ludicrous ways you know of that DMs will try to force a Paladin to fall?

This is not a thread to argue about how and why Paladins fall, or to Rules-lawyer around, or to attack the class, or whatever. Please try to keep to the topic.

A few basics that I've seen:

"One of the orcs/trolls/gibberlings/demons you killed was pregnant. Thus, you killed an innocent life and YOU FALL. Of course, if you hadn't done that, you would fall anyway for allowing the monster to attack townspeople."

"One of the townspeople you rescued is evil. YOU FALL!"

"The blacksmith you bought your armor from cheats on his taxes. You had dealings with him, and thus YOU FALL!"

jcsw
2008-11-29, 12:38 AM
As inspired by the "If a Villain wears babies for armor, would that force a paladin to fall" (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97978) thread, I must now ask this question:

What are the most ludicrous ways you know of that DMs will try to force a Paladin to fall?

This is not a thread to argue about how and why Paladins fall, or to Rules-lawyer around, or to attack the class, or whatever. Please try to keep to the topic.

A few basics that I've seen:

"One of the orcs/trolls/gibberlings/demons you killed was pregnant. Thus, you killed an innocent life and YOU FALL. Of course, if you hadn't done that, you would fall anyway for allowing the monster to attack townspeople."

"One of the townspeople you rescued is evil. YOU FALL!"

"The blacksmith you bought your armor from cheats on his taxes. You had dealings with him, and thus YOU FALL!"

Sounds like a game of paranoia to me.

Yukitsu
2008-11-29, 12:40 AM
I don't just threaten severe bodily harm to people who pull jerk moves, so it hasn't come up.

Khosan
2008-11-29, 12:41 AM
Silly idea: Create a trap that shoots Helms of Opposite Alignment. They're forced to 'wear it' because it's now lodged in their abdomen.

EDIT: Refinement of silly idea. Helm of Opposite Alignment only works when put on the head. So you'd have to drop them from above.

Dragonus45
2008-11-29, 12:42 AM
Lol, I love paranoia. The worst one I've seen was a Paladin attacked an orc who started a bar fight with a wonam, or so it seemed. He turned out to be effected by suggestion and the paladin fell.

Lert, A.
2008-11-29, 12:43 AM
While putting out the spreading campfire that was about the start the forest on fire and kill the neighboring town, you killed the spark of a newly conceived fire elemental... you fall.:smalleek:

xPANCAKEx
2008-11-29, 12:43 AM
sounds like a DM who is either:
A) a ****
B) hates you
C) hates paladins
D) a smattering of the above

Archpaladin Zousha
2008-11-29, 12:46 AM
I remember my brother telling me that when he joined a group with a paladin, everyone cheered "Woo! Fallen Paladin!", not because they were sadistic or anything, but because they thought Blackguards were awesome and wanted him to become one.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-11-29, 01:04 AM
sounds like a DM who is either:
A) a ****
B) hates you
C) hates paladins
D) a smattering of the abovethatsthejoke.jpg

Remember, Citizen, the Code is your friend, and Happiness Is Mandatory!

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 01:07 AM
considering knocking out the NG druid PC who stole part of his (metal) breast plate of invulnerability when it got pulled off in battle.

Yes, rather than help fight the horde of zombies, a NG character stole, mid combat, a piece of armor he couldnt use without loosing his powers for 24 from an ally, and the paladin would get in trouble for taking it back.

Ridureyu
2008-11-29, 01:10 AM
Not quite a paladin, but I also saw a Vow of Poverty Monk get screwed over in a similar way. When he returned to the inn, he was told that a random person and dropped money in his pocket undetected, so he lost the feat.

And do I have to restate the first post again? It's understood that these things come from idiot DMs who shouldn't be allowed to run a game. The humor comes from seeing how insanely obsessed some people are with their PALADIN-HATRED, and will go to any lengths they can to force a fall.

Archpaladin Zousha
2008-11-29, 01:12 AM
Or their misguided opinion that Good is Dumb and Evil is so much more badass.

FMArthur
2008-11-29, 01:16 AM
Breakaway floor tiles concealing a pit. In a peasant hut.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 01:27 AM
on the Vow of Poverty thing, by RAW, unless the gold was magical you'd be fine. Youre allowed ordinary (cant be magical or masterwork) wear ordinary clothing, and have a nonmagical sack with one days rations in it. if you cant touch money, how can you donate it, and shouldnt you have been allowed a spot check anyways?

Wih
2008-11-29, 01:37 AM
Was told that tying up unconcious prisoners securely enough that they couldn't cast spells was akin to torture, and that if I was a Paladin I would have fallen (was playing a Crusader).
Needless to say, that one didn't sit too well with me.

John Campbell
2008-11-29, 01:49 AM
Kidnapped by a 20th level Wizard (note: we were about 7th level at the time), forced to fight children until he killed one, tortured until he willingly submitted to being possessed by Asmodeus, and then sent to commit genocide on the wizard's political enemies and the family that'd hired us.

Best part: The paladin was the never-plays-anything-but-paladins DM's own annoying party-policing DMPC, and he somehow thought that the rest of us were supposed to care about the little fall-and-redemption arc he had plotted out for himself. He didn't really understand when the rest of the party's reaction to coming across the DM Police murdering babies with his eyes glowing red was, "We kill him."

Cheesegear
2008-11-29, 02:02 AM
A child was dying, and I had already used up all my Lay On Hands that day...The child died under my watch.

"You shouldn'tve used your Lay On Hands on your {Barbarian Friend}, he had plenty of hit points left. The child does not. Due to your actions and lack of foresight, the child is dead. YOU FALL!"

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 02:05 AM
A child was dying, and I had already used up all my Lay On Hands that day...The child died under my watch.

"You shouldn'tve used your Lay On Hands on your {Barbarian Friend}, he had plenty of hit points left. The child does not. Due to your actions and lack of foresight, the child is dead. YOU FALL!"

There was an easy way to prevent that
Heal check.

Cheesegear
2008-11-29, 02:09 AM
There was an easy way to prevent that
Heal check.

Tried that. And failed. Apparently a 28 didn't pass.

Ridureyu
2008-11-29, 02:11 AM
on the Vow of Poverty thing, by RAW, unless the gold was magical you'd be fine. Youre allowed ordinary (cant be magical or masterwork) wear ordinary clothing, and have a nonmagical sack with one days rations in it. if you cant touch money, how can you donate it, and shouldnt you have been allowed a spot check anyways?

Because he didn't notice the coins for several hours, the logic is that he "possessed" the gold.

It sucks, but you can't argue when something is Rule 0'ed.

Ionizer
2008-11-29, 02:13 AM
That's funny, because it's a DC 15 Heal check to stabilize a dying person.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 02:16 AM
sounds like both the paladin and the monk suffered from rule 0 abuse/misuse.

Zeta Kai
2008-11-29, 02:47 AM
Tried that. And failed. Apparently a 28 didn't pass.

That's called railroading. The DM wanted you to fall, so you did. It's as simple as that.

And if a DM pulled that on my character, I'd rip up my character sheet & go about my day doing something else. There's railroading, & then there's character derailment.

Weizegger
2008-11-29, 02:50 AM
I fell for consorting with LN worshipers of an LE deity. Without knowing that they worshiped anyone. After regaining my Paladin-hood, I fell again for consorting with Atheists.

I've fallen for taking the Power Attack feat because the DM ruled that the in game training for taking the feat infused my character with rage and agression that made me lose sight of my religion. SO when I was retraining feats with the PHB2 rules he forced a TOTAL CLASS CHANGE. And I became the LG Barbarian with no abilities. And because of that he forced me to pay for the Barbarian retraining. All for changing Shield Spec to Power Attack.

I fell for getting killed and allowing myself to be resurrected as I was a Paladin of Jergal in the FR campaign.

I've fallen for dealing lethal damage against a fallen Archon.

VerdugoExplode
2008-11-29, 02:57 AM
I have mixed feelings about this situation involving a friend:

We were sent off to investigate some strange goings on in a village, supernatural pranks and the like. After a bit of sleuthing we come to find that an 8 year old kid who had come into a book with demonic power and was fast on his way to becoming an evil wizard. The kid carried a mace with him to which my friend then vocalized that a child with a weapon was no threat to his mighty paladin-ness. I don't think the DM took too kindly to this and promptly had the kid hit him for 8 points of damage which at level one is a near fatal blow. Cue paladin killing the kid and promptly being forsaken by his god.

Now on the one hand the kid was evil, consorting with demonic forces and a recent murder attempt on a paladin, but on the other it was an 8 year old kid. Sigh.

Stupendous_Man
2008-11-29, 02:57 AM
:smallsigh: Choo Choo! Here comes the train!

turkishproverb
2008-11-29, 02:59 AM
"Your paladin made the man feel bad by yelling at him, YOU FALL"

aka BOED/BOVD.

That's right, no Paladin Drill Sergeants.

Lemur
2008-11-29, 03:01 AM
That's called railroading. The DM wanted you to fall, so you did. It's as simple as that.

And if a DM pulled that on my character, I'd rip up my character sheet & go about my day doing something else. There's railroading, & then there's character derailment.

I guess that would be the rational response. The vindictive one is to try to ruin the campaign in any way possible from that point on. If it were me, the paladin's spirit would be shattered, and he'd go mad.

"This is a sign! All I do is for naught, and my destiny is one of failure and death. It is clearly my fate to kill every infant in existence and nothing can be done to change this."

New character goal acquired: murder all children. If prevented from doing so, protest so much that nothing else can be done.

"Let me go! I have babies to kill yet, don't you understand? True, if this cruel world hadn't forced me down this path by destroying all hope I could live normally, but no more. My best efforts to save others will always fail, even when they should succeed, so my only recourse is destruction. Oh woe etc..."

Chaotic stupid isn't enough. You need filibuster class soliloquies. After that, yeah, you can leave the table.

Ridureyu
2008-11-29, 03:08 AM
People don't seem to realize that Paladin rules are meant to keep the character good-aligned and consistent, not a puzzle with which to screw over your players.

The Power Attack one is kind of funny, though. If the Paladin trains in order to fight, he FALLS. If he does not fight, he would obviously FALL as well.

Cheesegear
2008-11-29, 03:14 AM
That's called railroading. The DM wanted you to fall, so you did. It's as simple as that.

And if a DM pulled that on my character, I'd rip up my character sheet & go about my day doing something else. There's railroading, & then there's character derailment.

And that's pretty much exactly what I did. Re-rolled a LE Cleric. Now if there's a dying kid, I can Spontaneous Inflict Wounds on him and put him out of his misery.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 03:15 AM
I think cases like these are why grey guard was made. seriously, BoED has a chapter full of 'situation a has solutions x, y and z. X and y make you fall, z gets you killed and evil wins. DMs dont do this.'

how soon can a paladin go grey guard?

Behold_the_Void
2008-11-29, 03:16 AM
I fell for consorting with LN worshipers of an LE deity. Without knowing that they worshiped anyone. After regaining my Paladin-hood, I fell again for consorting with Atheists.

I've fallen for taking the Power Attack feat because the DM ruled that the in game training for taking the feat infused my character with rage and agression that made me lose sight of my religion. SO when I was retraining feats with the PHB2 rules he forced a TOTAL CLASS CHANGE. And I became the LG Barbarian with no abilities. And because of that he forced me to pay for the Barbarian retraining. All for changing Shield Spec to Power Attack.

I fell for getting killed and allowing myself to be resurrected as I was a Paladin of Jergal in the FR campaign.

I've fallen for dealing lethal damage against a fallen Archon.

Why do you still play with these guys?

Waspinator
2008-11-29, 03:17 AM
on the Vow of Poverty thing, by RAW, unless the gold was magical you'd be fine. Youre allowed ordinary (cant be magical or masterwork) wear ordinary clothing, and have a nonmagical sack with one days rations in it. if you cant touch money, how can you donate it, and shouldnt you have been allowed a spot check anyways?

A very good point. You're allowed to have money. You're just supposed to donate it as soon as possible rather than spend it on anything or hoard it.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 03:19 AM
A very good point. You're allowed to have money. You're just supposed to donate it as soon as possible rather than spend it on anything or hoard it.

except for food, if you still need it.

Cheesegear
2008-11-29, 03:20 AM
how soon can a paladin go grey guard?

Sixth Level. Although I prefer Shadowbane Inquisitor. Who are equally questionable - and have Sneak Attack to boot.

Shadowbanes also get a non-alignment Smite ability. If I can give an in-character reason as to why I think he is evil (true or not), he can be smote.

Waspinator
2008-11-29, 03:20 AM
Well, yeah. It's vow of poverty, not vow of starvation.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 03:25 AM
Sixth Level. Although I prefer Shadowbane Inquisitor. Who are equally questionable - and have Sneak Attack to boot.

Shadowbanes also get a non-alignment Smite ability. If I can give an in-character reason as to why I think he is evil (true or not), he can be smote.

Yeah, but Shadow Bane Inquisators fall a lot easier. I want to start out greyguard/paladin to mess with a fall happy DM.
Also, since it hasnt come up yet: cannabalism from eating a psionic sandwich.

Cheesegear
2008-11-29, 03:44 AM
Yeah, but Shadowbane Inquisitors fall a lot easier.

Depends who your DM is. In the SbI fluff, it says;
"It is better to sacrifice a village that hides a demon, than it is to risk letting the demon escape or the evil spread."

It also implies that if your target/opponent is evil...You can do whatever you want to it. It's evil. Go nuts.

But just don't make a habit of it.

BloodyAngel
2008-11-29, 06:03 AM
Eating veal, served to us at a counts manor. Our DM is a raging vegan.


.... Ok, I made that one up, but tell me it isn't a good one!

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:06 AM
Eating veal, served to us at a counts manor. Our DM is a raging vegan.


.... Ok, I made that one up, but tell me it isn't a good one!

Someone on this board said from eating a ham sandwhich in another thread.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-11-29, 06:15 AM
Someone on this board said from eating a ham sandwhich in another thread.This might make sense in some historical settings...

kamikasei
2008-11-29, 06:15 AM
After regaining my Paladin-hood, I fell again for consorting with Atheists.

I would love to hear his justification for that, and by "love" I mean "love to RAAAGE".

BobVosh
2008-11-29, 06:18 AM
Slept with a child. Of course said child was 77. Dirty elves. Also arrested. It got to the point where you had to cast zone of truth and ask em thier age to be safe to buy anyone a drink.

Before anyone asks, I didn't play that game it was my bro and his friends.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:20 AM
This might make sense in some historical settings...

Yeah, but the reason was that the pig was an innocent life.

On a related note is it cannibalism for a wereboar to eat pork?

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:34 AM
for an elf- 25 is equivalent of 15, in Races of the Wild- 100-odd is merely the age most elves go into the wild.

Drizzt is "little more than a child" as drow go- 70s- he's still plenty old enough to be a high-level adventurer and be thinking about issues of starting a family.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:37 AM
for an elf- 25 is equivalent of 15, in Races of the Wild- 100-odd is merely the age most elves go into the wild.

Drizzt is "little more than a child" as drow go- 70s- he's still plenty old enough to be a high-level adventurer and be thinking about issues of starting a family.

So elves basically live in their parents basements until theyre in their 30s?

kamikasei
2008-11-29, 06:40 AM
So elves basically live in their parents basements until theyre in their 30s?

And acquiring no useful skills. No wonder elven society is stagnant if they spend the equivalent of human decades learning the language, poetry and etiquette before they get the equivalent of a high school diploma.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:45 AM
if we take drizzt as an example- of a male elf- they live with family as "child" till 16- get four years training- get sent to "upper school" for another ten year, and at 30 years old they are comfortably physically mature and plenty old enough to be interested in the opposite sex.

Elaine Cunningham short story concerning Liriel Baenre's adulthood initiation ceremony suggests drow have ten years between early childhood and puberty- beginning at 15 and ending at 25.

Also, Races of the Wild pointed out while most elves are cautious about aging, there are 30 year olds with the grace and mental maturity of century-plus old elves.

Kami2awa
2008-11-29, 06:48 AM
I'm curious as to how many of the GMs who are mentioned on this thread are still permitted to GM by their fellow players, or indeed play in RPGs at all.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:49 AM
And acquiring no useful skills. No wonder elven society is stagnant if they spend the equivalent of human decades learning the language, poetry and etiquette before they get the equivalent of a high school diploma.

And RPGs havent been invented yet... Sucks to be an elf huh?

And I meant the elf equivilent to a 30 year old human.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:52 AM
the elf equivalent of a 35 year old human is 175- same aging penalities.

I think its more a matter of- the elves we see leave their village to adventure, have thought it over for a very long time- have built their skills within their society.

the 110 year minimum is for PCs- its entirely possible that the "stay at home" elves will have gotten levels in various classes rather earlier.

BobVosh
2008-11-29, 06:53 AM
2nd ed elves in 3ed I think. They played 2nd mostly, and it was about the time of...the change.

arguskos
2008-11-29, 06:53 AM
When I was just starting out as a DM, I once made a paladin fall since he deemed burning down a town that had an evil church in it to be a fine act. I disagreed, and caused him to fall. That's my worst story though, since I don't have players that play paladins frequently.

Anyways, I once fell because I defended a red dragon from the rest of my party. The poor thing was sick and was asking for our help to get better, and the party tried to kill it. I intervened, tried to save the dragon, and to do so, had to deal some non-lethal damage to the party wizard, so he wouldn't just cone of cold it into oblivion. The DM made me fall for defending an evil creature. I think it's debatable, he didn't. :smallannoyed:

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 07:06 AM
Wanting to reedem an evil doer makes you fall?

Hmm... If doing evil makes a paladin fall, does doing good make a blackguard rise?

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 07:15 AM
BoED makes it pretty clear, that Good guys are supposed to want to redeem evil doers.

Dragon mag Paladin Guide points out that redeeming evildoers is an exception to the standard Do Not Associate With Evil rule.

In any case, BoED also points out all Good characters can work alongside evildoers against a Greater Threat (the enemy of my enemy is my ally, if not my friend) but with the point raised that you can't let these evildoers commit evil acts while you are working with them.

Its really not as bad a book as some people paint it as- the redemption themes alone help to avoid the "All Evil Beings Must Be Killed" trope.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 07:25 AM
Oh, believe me, I like BoED and paladins. I was questioning his DM. I do have to say I dislike how much BoED limits good chars in combat strategies and social interactions while it gives DMs a step by step guide on forcing paladins into fall or die situations without a giving the player ideas to get out.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 07:28 AM
it said on earlier page- never make it choice between two evils- only an easy evil and a difficult good. Failure doesn't make you fall.

Neithan
2008-11-29, 07:29 AM
Alignment is not for every gm.
gm is not for every people. :smallwink:

A paladin might fall for things he does in anger or for selfish reasons. Everything else may be regretable, but is not a blemish on his soul.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 07:35 AM
granted, but it sucks to be railroaded into a failure is the only option position (what this thread is about). And how easy is it to make a 'do evil and save the day or do good and doom the world' situation?

Not to mention some DMs will make you fall for using Coup de gras on a disarmed blackguard.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 07:35 AM
apparently, according to description of Fiend Of Corruption- being mind-controlled by fiend to do evil act means you lose powers. But, atonement is cheaper for the caster.

It is one of the more controversial aspects of the Atonement spell- that even involuntary actions, or those carried out in ignorance, may cause Falls.

Accidents, according to BoVD, don't cause falls, but negligence can- doesn't have to be outright selfish decision to risk other's lives.

the Coup-de-grace bit was mentioned in Quintessenial paladin 2: DM: "he's helpless" Player "he's the enemy"

Since BoED explicitly calls out executions as Not Automatically Evil- if paladin has the authority to try and execute the blackguard who has been defeated, he may do so.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 07:44 AM
I was referencing QP2. and the players arguement was that he was pure evil and a violation of everything a paladin stands for. (which is the intended flavor).

And how often are adventurers the only ones opposing the vile dictator/aristocrat/necromancer/etc that controls all the lands in the vicinity and wouldnt be found guilty by the judges because he controls them?

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 07:48 AM
slightly more Chaotic- but still trial- is the sort of thing in The Three Musketeers book at the end. It may be something of a kangeroo court, but it gives the villain a hearing- they go out of the way to make it as much an execution, rather than a Killing Out Of Hand, as possible, even getting hold of a legal executioner.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 07:57 AM
I really see paladins filling in as a marshal in a western movie. coming in to a lawless, evil town, getting rid of those that prey on the weak and helpless. If he can do so by words, and know it will work, thats fine, but if need be, he's willing to dish out sixshooter (bastard sword) justice. He is the law. He is goodness.

Tengu_temp
2008-11-29, 08:04 AM
I've seen a paladin fall "for racism" for hating and mistrusting drow, in a setting where it's established that all drow are bastards and Drizzt clones do not exist.


Or their misguided opinion that Good is Dumb and Evil is so much more badass.

I think people who hate paladins are the same who think that evil is badass.

They couldn't be more wrong, of course. Being evil doesn't make you badass, it just makes you a d*ck.


Someone on this board said from eating a ham sandwhich in another thread.

Someone says hello!

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 08:10 AM
Hey Tengu. I couldnt remember your name and was too lazy to go look. :p

I improved on your ham sandwich with eating a psionic sandwich.

Tengu_temp
2008-11-29, 08:14 AM
Hey Tengu. I couldnt remember your name and was too lazy to go look. :p


I wouldn't be surprised if some DM out there made a paladin fall for being lazy.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 08:20 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if some DM out there made a paladin fall for being lazy.

Wait, whos being lazy? The paladin or the DM?

Morty
2008-11-29, 08:25 AM
I don't have any stories about paladins falling for silly reasons, but I do remember a discussion on another forum about whether a paladin should give his mount and armor to a beggar if asked for it. At least some posters claimed he should.

Samurai Jill
2008-11-29, 08:27 AM
Alright, im DMing a session and one of my players is a paladin and was wondering if someone (likely his blackgaurd nemisis) wore armor made entirely of living human babies, if he would be moraly allowed to attack him.

I know its a ridiculous notion but I was intriged and wanted to see what others thought.
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target50.html

Man. That never gets old.

Zeful
2008-11-29, 08:54 AM
That's called railroading. The DM wanted you to fall, so you did. It's as simple as that.

And if a DM pulled that on my character, I'd rip up my character sheet & go about my day doing something else. There's railroading, & then there's character derailment.

I'd just ignore the DM. Act as if you never lost your paladin abilities. Then when gets out from behind the screen to talk with you privately you smack him in the head for being a bloody idiot.

Or simply bring a taser to the next session and randomly stroke it throughout gameplay.

The best way to avoid falling is to also have a cleric in the party. Worship the same god. Then when the DM tries to nail you for excessive CoC violations, open up the PHb to the Cleric section and point out the Ex-Cleric section, then ask if the Cleric fell. Since you're the same religion, if you fall he falls.

Jorgo Mono
2008-11-29, 12:27 PM
Huh. I managed to get away with torture (worst part was poking a rogue who attacked me's eyes out to get information, Saren-style.) Guess my DM's too lenient.

Neithan
2008-11-29, 12:29 PM
I don't have any stories about paladins falling for silly reasons, but I do remember a discussion on another forum about whether a paladin should give his mount and armor to a beggar if asked for it. At least some posters claimed he should.
It was an alignment thread. There will always be someone who thinks it should be that way. :smallwink:

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 12:31 PM
depends on the setting- by PHB alone, there is nothing explicitly forbidding it, but with BoED and Fiendish Codex 2 in play, there is:

(BoVD has torture, but also execution, and does not explicitly state that either are evil, whereas BoED says- Torture is evil, execution, not necessarily)

and Fiendish Codex 2 lists level of evil from Intimidating (no lethal damage- unarmed strikes, holding head underwater, etc might count) all the way up to Sadistic (capable of killing a medium to high level character) All are Evil.

Mark Hall
2008-11-29, 12:50 PM
I think the worst I've run into was in the Temple of Elemental Evil computer game. If any party member took part in the drinking contest, the party paladin fell. It could be the LE dwarven fighter, and the paladin would fall (you couldn't have CE and LG in the same party; you picked an alignment for your party, and everyone had to be within 1 step of that).

For real fun, if you gained a level as a result of winning the drinking contest, and someone added Paladin, you can then freely rob all of the unconscious drinkers without losing your Paladin status.

Archpaladin Zousha
2008-11-29, 12:52 PM
I think people who hate paladins are the same who think that evil is badass.

They couldn't be more wrong, of course. Being evil doesn't make you badass, it just makes you a d*ck.

Well, the party he joined (he eventually made a sorcerer instead), was basically composed of d*cks. Epic level d*cks. He was made into an epic level sorcerer/red dragon disciple/vampire, and the rest of the party included a guy with a fireball for a head who was doing Shakespeare at the tavern they were at, and when the audience booed him he spat on the curtain, setting it on fire and burning the whole tavern down and a half-orc fighter named Sir B*tchsmacker, who had a half-orc pr0n magazine and fought by throwing cabers. Hollow cabers loaded with dynamite, so when he yelled "CABER!" everyone around him was like "Aah! Run like hell!" And another character (His name was either Vegeta or Gerbil), once was squatting out in the woods to take a dump, when a freak portal opened right were he was and sucked him into a feasthall in The Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, where he landed on the hostess's lap and defecated all over her dress. And another time they were fighting a Worm That Walks, and they needed to kill every single worm. One of them crawled up my brother's character's butt, so they burned him to kill the worm. And then one time they flipped his hood off in direct sunlight just for the hell of it.

To hear his description these guys weren't just d*cks, they were completely nuts!

ChaosDefender24
2008-11-29, 12:52 PM
http://www.llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target50.html

Man. That never gets old.

small world!

hewhosaysfish
2008-11-29, 12:54 PM
About the idea that a Paladin can't coup de grace: I'm a highly amused by the little mental movie of a Paladin who robotically follows the rules of such a flawed code. He gets stuck in this loop where he strikes down an evildoer (because they're evil) then stops attacking (because they're helpless) then heals them back to consciousness with Lay on Hands (because they helpless and injured) then strikes them down again (because they're not helpless anymore but still evil). This loop continues until he either rolls high enough on damage to kill them out right, without stopping on negatives, (which is, of course, much more morally acceptable than killing them while they're down and bleeding) or until he doesn't have enough Lay on Hands left to heal them all the way back to consciousness (in which case he stabilises them with a Heal check and tries again tomorrow).
But torture is wrong.

Mark Hall
2008-11-29, 12:58 PM
I don't have any stories about paladins falling for silly reasons, but I do remember a discussion on another forum about whether a paladin should give his mount and armor to a beggar if asked for it. At least some posters claimed he should.

Not all religions believe that you should give everything to anyone who asks for it. In a good cause? Sure. But simply handing out capital goods because someone asks? Idiocy.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 12:58 PM
i figure it can take a number of fashions-

Paladin grabs villain, shackles them, hauls them to a town (non-corrupt) finds living victims of villain to testify against him, and lets law jail or execute him.

If villain escapes jail before execution, he may be sworn in as a professional executioner, and granted the authority to carry out the already imposed sentence.

Or, in more proactive campaigns, the villain is tried and sentenced (again with witnesses, if necessary from the afterlife) in his absence, and paladin again granted the authority to impose sentence.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 01:02 PM
I figure, whatever player's view, DM must know gamist principles, as well as an element of simulationism. if DM knows paladin player wants moral dilemmas, should think about giving him them- good ones, not impossible ones.

If DM knows paladin hates moral dilemmas, again, should think carefully before throwing them at him. And should also consider opinions of other players in both cases.

Signmaker
2008-11-29, 03:09 PM
City where slavery was legal.
LG Pally whose god didn't enjoy slavery all that much.
CG God of Party's cleric asks to intercept slave ship and go Abe Lincoln on it.
Wholly subdual damage was dealt to pirates, who, by the way, were NE.

Pally fell.

Was it childish for me to quit that campaign?

Archpaladin Zousha
2008-11-29, 03:12 PM
No. No it wasn't.

Zeful
2008-11-29, 03:14 PM
City where slavery was legal.
LG Pally whose god didn't enjoy slavery all that much.
CG God of Party's cleric asks to intercept slave ship and go Abe Lincoln on it.
Wholly subdual damage was dealt to pirates, who, by the way, were NE.

Pally fell.

Was it childish for me to quit that campaign?

It wouldn't be childish to steal the DM's D&D books either.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 03:14 PM
City where slavery was legal.
LG Pally whose god didn't enjoy slavery all that much.
CG God of Party's cleric asks to intercept slave ship and go Abe Lincoln on it.
Wholly subdual damage was dealt to pirates, who, by the way, were NE.

Pally fell.

Was it childish for me to quit that campaign?

Nope. Did you smite idiot the DM on the way out?

Signmaker
2008-11-29, 03:20 PM
Nope. Did you smite idiot the DM on the way out?

The rest of the party helped me with it. =D
Unfortunately, it was an online campaign, and the rest of the players are quite attached to the DM. He warmed over eventually though, and I managed to get in to a future campaign without alignment issues happening again.

I get Evil act falling a Paladin. I get ridiculously chaotic act which defies paladin's morals as able to fall a Paladin. I do not get how helping a CG god whose aims coincide with your god's (even if defying local laws) falls a pally.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 03:30 PM
exactly. Paladins should be able to fight slavery and tyranny as part of being LG.
Even LG knows that when the BBEG is LE, sometimes, you still have to break his face. (or break him with yours. which ever)

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 03:31 PM
BoED: slavery is evil- when faced with choice between Law and good, an exalted paladin is required to choose Good.

Zeful
2008-11-29, 03:32 PM
(or break him with yours. which ever)

Which is why paladin/monk(kensei) should be cool (Smite Evil unarmed strike, with the FACE (from long range, and with fire)!) but suck anyway.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 03:35 PM
Domiel is LG Archon dedicated to opposing tyranny. Has an order of sneaky assassin types- paladin can multiclass as one of these.

You might, if you think Trials and Evidence are important, have the Order of Slayers of Domiel always do divinations and pass sentence- before they send the slayers out- so killings are executions rather than murder.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 03:41 PM
BoED: slavery is evil- when faced with choice between Law and good, an exalted paladin is required to choose Good.

and then falls for committing a unlawful act.
And yes, except for the monk part, a monk/paladin/kensai would be awesome.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 03:43 PM
can't fall for commiting unlawful act, only for changing alignment to Chaotic Good or NG, in this case. Maybe not respecting legitmate authority- but to an Exalted, Evil authority figures aren't legitimate.

in 2nd ed however, paladins fell for Chaotic acts.

Zeful
2008-11-29, 03:45 PM
and then falls for committing a unlawful act.
And yes, except for the monk part, a monk/paladin/kensai would be awesome.

You can't fall for committing a chaotic act. Or disobeying a law. Paladin's are expected to disobey evil laws.

Dacia Brabant
2008-11-29, 05:59 PM
Wow I didn't realize there were so many paladin-haters bad DMs out there.

(Actually I'm not surprised, but this is a depressing thread nonetheless.)


And I once had a paladin who fell for being a bit of a pottymouth. Granted it was 2ed and you could fall for really arbitrary stuff back then, but come on.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:03 PM
the Deva states Roy should "watch what he's saying" and Eugene's Deva in SoD says "the language isn't helping your case"

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:06 PM
You can't fall for committing a chaotic act. Or disobeying a law. Paladin's are expected to disobey evil laws.

I agree, but BoED says a lawful good person in an evil society must work within that society's law to change it.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:13 PM
it says they prefer to do so- I'd say generally if there is a quantity of evil in an otherwise not so bad system.

CGs are more relaxed about overthrow- but disobeying laws isn't the same as Organizing The Revolution.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:17 PM
it says they prefer to do so- I'd say generally if there is a quantity of evil in an otherwise not so bad system.

CGs are more relaxed about overthrow- but disobeying laws isn't the same as Organizing The Revolution.

Unfortunately, many DMs would disagree

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:19 PM
true, and when your only source that says "paladins are allowed to disobey evil orders from Evil leaders, or Neutral ones that are becoming Extremist" is BoED, can be difficult. But at least some sources exist for the Heroically Disobediant paladin.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:24 PM
ah yes. always fun to be an atypical paladin if your DM lets you.

hamishspence
2008-11-29, 06:30 PM
Or a typical BoED paladin- if you read it carefully and pick out the bits you like most: "Execution is not evil" "Can work with evil creatures toward a common goal" "can disobey evil orders" "sex, in the context of a healthy relationship, is natural and good"

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 06:34 PM
"sex, in the context of a healthy relationship, is natural and good"

Making a class with high Cha and immunity to disease and you think it wont come up?

Mephit
2008-11-29, 06:52 PM
Making a class with high Cha and immunity to disease and you think it wont come up?

Not to mention the cool ride that comes with it...

Whoo, flying unicorn of Justice!

Nero24200
2008-11-29, 06:59 PM
I once had a paladin fall for being attacked by a corrupt watchmen...I beleive the exact conversation went somthing like this..

Watchmen: Hey you! Lets fight!
Me: Sorry, I'm not going to break the law and fight a watchmen on the street. This city has an arena, head there if you want a scrap
Watchmen: No! I'm fighting you now!

Appearntly, using your bare fists to knock out an armed, crazed, watchmen who was using lethal damage is "chaotic".

Zeta Kai
2008-11-29, 07:30 PM
I once had a paladin fall for being attacked by a corrupt watchmen...I believe the exact conversation went somthing like this...

In situations like this, I'd point out to the DM that the players almost in variably outnumber the DM by about a 4:1 ratio. :smallamused:

This is another reason that I became a DM: to counteract idiotic player-hating such as this. It's a slippery slope from this sort of shenanigans to outright TPK-style sadism. Some people don't wanna be the DM because they have a story to tell or a group to lead; they do it because they have a love of power or a grudge to settle.

Tengu_temp
2008-11-29, 07:42 PM
Not to mention the cool ride that comes with it...

Whoo, flying unicorn of Justice!

Sex and riding a unicorn are mutually exclusive. Sorry.

SurlySeraph
2008-11-29, 07:49 PM
BoED: slavery is evil- when faced with choice between Law and good, an exalted paladin is required to choose Good.

An exalted paladin, yes. But exalted characters are more than good. A normal paladin can be more lawful than good.


Sex and riding a unicorn are mutually exclusive. Sorry.

Come on, chicks love unicorns! They're like the fantasy equivalent of a Ferrari that's good for the environment and has a massive phallic object attached to the hood. :smalltongue:

Trizap
2008-11-29, 08:38 PM
this is why I don't really like paladins restrictions, they become so troublesome
at times, if I ever DM a game, I'll be sure to come with a bit more flexible rules for paladins first :smallannoyed:

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 08:45 PM
this is why I don't really like paladins restrictions, they become so troublesome
at times, if I ever DM a game, I'll be sure to come with a bit more flexible rules for paladins first :smallannoyed:

Do what is right and just, dont be too much of an ***hole about it?

Trizap
2008-11-29, 08:47 PM
Do what is right and just, dont be too much of an ***hole about it?

perfect. why not?

KeresM
2008-11-29, 08:55 PM
I do like to have clearly defined 'codes' for my paladins. It is worth pointing out that two paladins can have opposing codes and still both be paladins.

Roderick_BR
2008-11-29, 09:10 PM
on the Vow of Poverty thing, by RAW, unless the gold was magical you'd be fine. Youre allowed ordinary (cant be magical or masterwork) wear ordinary clothing, and have a nonmagical sack with one days rations in it. if you cant touch money, how can you donate it, and shouldnt you have been allowed a spot check anyways?
Yeah, people doesn't lose their poverty vow by having someone pushing stuff on his pocket. The best it should happen is he putting a hand in his pocket, and go "hey, I found a coin here. Uh, don't remember this, but I guess it can pay a warm meal for some homeless people."

One I heard from this forum was the "a random guy gives you a coin. When you pick it up you fall because he was evil, and you was accepting things from him, thus allying with him".

My group never really had problems with paladins. I think I'm the only one that plays them anyway, and my party never bothered with it, especially because I always play NG or LG in any character I try :smallbiggrin: (with the memorable exception of my CN evoker wizard/blood magus)

John Campbell
2008-11-29, 09:21 PM
I think people who hate paladins are the same who think that evil is badass.
Nah. I hate paladins and I hate evil characters, and both for the same reason. Both are almost invariably terrible for party harmony.

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 09:27 PM
Nah. I hate paladins and I hate evil characters, and both for the same reason. Both are almost invariably terrible for party harmony.

Not every paladin is Miko and not every evil character is Belkar. I hate to say this, but if thats how you play, somethings not right.

Thurbane
2008-11-29, 09:33 PM
In the ToEE computer game, one of the side quests involves trying to lure a barmaid outside and assassinate her. The quest was obviously keyed to the action of agreeing to get her to go outside with you.

My group (that included a a Paladin) managed to chat her up and agree to go for a stroll outside. My Paladin immediately fell. This was before I knew anything about the quest - I thought I was just asking her outside for a bit of nooky. I remember thinking "Wow, that pally must really have a strict code!". :smallbiggrin:

arguskos
2008-11-29, 09:34 PM
Not every paladin is Miko and not every evil character is Belkar. I hate to say this, but if thats how you play, somethings not right.
They don't have to in order to cause massive inter-party conflict, on the scale that the party self-destructs.

For example, I DM'd for a group that had 2 evil characters, 2 neutrals, and a Paladin of Law and Goodness (by his own choice). The evils and the pally came to blows over philosophy, and the paladin (who had been looking for an excuse to kill or drive off the evil characters, for being evil bastards) opened up a smite on the evil warmage. End result of this brawl? The evils killed the pally, and the neutrals, waking up to find the pally dead and the evils gloating, opened up a can of whupass (reasoning that the pally just was murdered for no reason, though they didn't know he started it), and killed the evils. As the DM, I have a strict "hands-off" policy when it comes to in-character disputes, since the characters need to handle it themselves (I get involved when it leaves the game, and translates to the players and the table, cause that's not cool), so I just rolled with it, and had everyone draw up new characters, and rebooted the campaign. We all laughed about it and had fun, so it was all good. :smallwink:

Kris Strife
2008-11-29, 09:40 PM
Who thought it would be a good idea to have evil chars and a paladin in the same party?

And it sounds like you had a Miko style paladin to me.

Demented
2008-11-29, 10:08 PM
A Miko-style paladin does not wait for an 'excuse' to kill or drive off evil characters. She smites them immediately for the sin of being born.

Aside that, a paladin doesn't have a whole lot of options when it comes to partying with evil characters, unless you wave away the 'may not associate with evil characters' clause. Even then, Lawful Good meets Evil... You'd probably get something like Celia. "I can't believe you just did that!"

Deme
2008-11-29, 10:40 PM
They don't have to in order to cause massive inter-party conflict, on the scale that the party self-destructs.

For example, I DM'd for a group that had 2 evil characters, 2 neutrals, and a Paladin of Law and Goodness (by his own choice). The evils and the pally came to blows over philosophy, and the paladin (who had been looking for an excuse to kill or drive off the evil characters, for being evil bastards) opened up a smite on the evil warmage. End result of this brawl? The evils killed the pally, and the neutrals, waking up to find the pally dead and the evils gloating, opened up a can of whupass (reasoning that the pally just was murdered for no reason, though they didn't know he started it), and killed the evils. As the DM, I have a strict "hands-off" policy when it comes to in-character disputes, since the characters need to handle it themselves (I get involved when it leaves the game, and translates to the players and the table, cause that's not cool), so I just rolled with it, and had everyone draw up new characters, and rebooted the campaign. We all laughed about it and had fun, so it was all good. :smallwink:


The party conflict happened when you mixed the two: inherently, each on its own does not have to cause conflict. I've had several paladins in various parties, and an evil person once (my old group tended to play heroic-y stuff. we only had one person who really wanted to do evil. We had a lot of potential jerks, but they were pretty willing to do good if the cause was right.), and rarely was there much inter-party conflict. The closest that ever came was when the party was full of some very unmanagable CNs. When the stereotypical-for-their-classes (except probably for the wizard/sorcerer {can't recall which} , favored soul, and bard...but they weren't really at the crux of the problem) party contained a rogue and a barbarian, who were exactly the way you picture, really....yeah. That was a party held together by the fact that the bard was actually the scariest one of them all.

The other parties this group did, the ones with paladins? nearly no conflict. Almost none, except for that time with the elf-hating fighter and the elf-wizard, and that still wasn't so bad, and was mostly played for humor. The paladin was actually the only thing that would be able to stop the fighter from beating the snot out of the wizard, insulting him, taking his stuff, etc...admittably, this was because she was always trying to be allowed to handle his longsword, if-ya-know-whadda-mean-wink-wink-nudge-nudge.

good times, good times....



wait, what was my point again? Oh, right. Neither Paladins or evils are inherently disruptive unless mixed (and even then, there's some wiggle room). It's those dang stereotypes you have to watch out for...

kopout
2008-11-29, 10:58 PM
wait, what was my point again? Oh, right. Neither Paladins or evils are inherently disruptive unless mixed (and even then, there's some wiggle room). It's those dang stereotypes you have to watch out for...

True, it is the Belkars and Mikos that perpetuate this.

Thurbane
2008-11-29, 11:36 PM
Extremists rarely function well in groups, unless the whole group is like minded. I have always found Paladins to be disruptive to a group - sometimes only in very minor ways, but sometimes to the point of bringing an adventure to a grinding halt.

Most characters will reach a compromise when faced with a decision that the whole party can't initially agree on. Paladins hands can be pretty tied by their code of conduct.

I wouldn't say any of the D&D groups I've played for over 20 years in have had a Miko Paladin, but nearly all that did include a Paladin were continually getting bogged down in moral debates, and the Paladin saying "Sorry, I just can't allow that!"

Enlong
2008-11-30, 12:41 AM
A Miko-style paladin does not wait for an 'excuse' to kill or drive off evil characters. She smites them immediately for the sin of being born.

Well, it's better than a Kore-style paladin, who kills creatures for the sin of being the captive of an evil creature, on the off-chance that they will sympathize and one day become evil.

vicente408
2008-11-30, 03:28 AM
Well, it's better than a Kore-style paladin, who kills creatures for the sin of being the captive of an evil creature, on the off-chance that they will sympathize and one day become evil.

Kore is an exception, as it is explicitly stated that there is something that keeps him from falling though he commits horrible atrocities. In normal circumstances, he should have fallen so hard the Underdark shook.

PsyBlade
2008-11-30, 12:29 PM
I though Kore did fall. He uses items to replicate magic, and he has a complicated weapon/shield system to compensate for loss of benefits. He probably is taking levels in fighter now too. The only reason he's immune to fear is that he is insane.

The Glyphstone
2008-11-30, 12:34 PM
I though Kore did fall. He uses items to replicate magic, and he has a complicated weapon/shield system to compensate for loss of benefits. He probably is taking levels in fighter now too. The only reason he's immune to fear is that he is insane.

Isn't it the Word of God that he has somehow managed to escape falling, though?

vicente408
2008-11-30, 01:32 PM
Isn't it the Word of God that he has somehow managed to escape falling, though?

I believe so.

Nerd-o-rama
2008-11-30, 02:12 PM
We'll find out for sure in a decade or so, when the author gets back to that plotline.

Prak
2008-11-30, 07:06 PM
"The blacksmith you bought your armor from cheats on his taxes. You had dealings with him, and thus YOU FALL!"
"Ah yes, I had dealings with him, but as this is a psuedo-mideval world, where taxes were a tyranical process of unfairly separating the subjects from the meager earnings and making it very difficult for them to survive, I actually opposed a tyranical despot, thus I don't fall." :smallbiggrin:


I have mixed feelings about this situation involving a friend:

We were sent off to investigate some strange goings on in a village, supernatural pranks and the like. After a bit of sleuthing we come to find that an 8 year old kid who had come into a book with demonic power and was fast on his way to becoming an evil wizard. The kid carried a mace with him to which my friend then vocalized that a child with a weapon was no threat to his mighty paladin-ness. I don't think the DM took too kindly to this and promptly had the kid hit him for 8 points of damage which at level one is a near fatal blow. Cue paladin killing the kid and promptly being forsaken by his god.

Now on the one hand the kid was evil, consorting with demonic forces and a recent murder attempt on a paladin, but on the other it was an 8 year old kid. Sigh.

No, that one's probably perfectly reasonable, the paladin willfully killed a kid, yes the kid was "evil", but, that's because he was being misguided by an evil book, and possibly enhanced by it, the paladin should have disarmed the kid, and taken the book, burned it, and then turned the kid into the nearest good aligned temple.


Sex and riding a unicorn are mutually exclusive. Sorry.
No they aren't, why do you think unicorns prefer virgins?:smallwink:

The New Bruceski
2008-11-30, 09:35 PM
We'll find out for sure in a decade or so, when the author gets back to that plotline.

Too true. I love the comic, but a spotty update schedule and slow story progress when it DOES update really hurt it.

holywhippet
2008-11-30, 09:39 PM
No, that one's probably perfectly reasonable, the paladin willfully killed a kid, yes the kid was "evil", but, that's because he was being misguided by an evil book, and possibly enhanced by it, the paladin should have disarmed the kid, and taken the book, burned it, and then turned the kid into the nearest good aligned temple.


Misguided? Unless the book was sentient ala the diary in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets or had some corrupting enchantment it's possible that the kid picked up the book, began reading it and decided he liked what he was reading. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Should you suddenly go from "disarm and redeem" to "kill on sight" just because you hit your Xth birthday?

Waspinator
2008-11-30, 11:01 PM
Too true. I love the comic, but a spotty update schedule and slow story progress when it DOES update really hurt it.

It's the curse of many good comics, both web and print. If you have a lot of different plot threads running and you take your time to try to really develop all of them, it takes forever for any of them to progress. It's basically the comic version of why DMs hate parties splitting up.

Aquillion
2008-12-01, 12:23 AM
Misguided? Unless the book was sentient ala the diary in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets or had some corrupting enchantment it's possible that the kid picked up the book, began reading it and decided he liked what he was reading. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Should you suddenly go from "disarm and redeem" to "kill on sight" just because you hit your Xth birthday?
I think the point is that a Paladin should not be looking for excuses to kill people.

I don't think a Paladin falls if they kill someone in a rough situation, but the general mindset of a Paladin ought to be geared towards saving and redeeming people if it's reasonably possible.

It's a bit like being a cop. In the description of the situation given, I don't believe the Paladin was really at any risk, despite having taken eight damage (they had their whole team with them, right?) They could've chosen to try for a non-lethal attack, or asked the Wizard to cast Sleep. The impression I got was that they killed the kid more out of rage than out of self-defense; I don't see the level of force they used as being justified against an 8-year-old kid.

That doesn't necessarily mean that they should've fallen instantly (it's a kind of gray area), but I can see the logic behind it.

(Of course, part of the problem is that D&D doesn't really represent kids appropriately, so that kid was able to do much more damage to the Paladin than he likely would have in the real world... where he probably wouldn't even have been able to easily lift that mace, let along swing it effectively.)

BobVosh
2008-12-01, 01:07 AM
"Ah yes, I had dealings with him, but as this is a psuedo-mideval world, where taxes were a tyranical process of unfairly separating the subjects from the meager earnings and making it very difficult for them to survive, I actually opposed a tyranical despot, thus I don't fall." :smallbiggrin:

You break the lawful part of your alignment and fall.


It's a bit like being a cop.

I agree. It is like being a cop in a time era where cutting off people's hands for stealing without trial is common.

Prak
2008-12-01, 02:09 AM
Misguided? Unless the book was sentient ala the diary in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets or had some corrupting enchantment it's possible that the kid picked up the book, began reading it and decided he liked what he was reading. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Should you suddenly go from "disarm and redeem" to "kill on sight" just because you hit your Xth birthday?

Well, real life laws do make that kind of distinction, a child under the age of, IIRC, 9 that commits a crime such as murder isn't jailed, but rather, an attempt at psychological rehabilitation is made, and that's what, I believe, should be done in a case such as that.


You break the lawful part of your alignment and fall.
Ah but it's an unjust law, and thus I am not required to pass judgement on the man's civil disobedience one way or the other.


I agree. It is like being a cop in a time era where cutting off people's hands for stealing without trial is common.
a paladin is, however, commonly, called to be above that era's laws.

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 02:14 AM
You break the lawful part of your alignment and fall.

You don't fall for commiting unlawful acts.

Winged One
2008-12-01, 02:42 AM
You don't fall for commiting unlawful acts.

You do if your DM is the sort to generate material for this thread.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-01, 02:47 AM
You don't fall for commiting unlawful acts.The Code requires "respecting legitimate authority" which is often(reasonably, IMHO) interpreted to mean that ignoring the lawful ruler is a no-no.

Zeful
2008-12-01, 02:52 AM
The Code requires "respecting legitimate authority" which is often(reasonably, IMHO) interpreted to mean that ignoring the lawful ruler is a no-no.

If the ruler is legitimate (his parents had him in wedlock?) but the laws are obviously evil (stealing is punished by death by cannibalism). What should the paladin do then?

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 02:56 AM
If the ruler is legitimate (his parents had him in wedlock?) but the laws are obviously evil (stealing is punished by death by cannibalism). What should the paladin do then?

Take his PH, smack the DM with it while shouting 'SMITE IDIOT' and leave.

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 02:57 AM
The Code requires "respecting legitimate authority" which is often(reasonably, IMHO) interpreted to mean that ignoring the lawful ruler is a no-no.

Key there is the definitition of legitimate. For example, one could easily be LG and oppose palpatine. Or, for that matter one could adopt social contract views and say that the king lost his legitimacy when he started having abusive laws in place.

AgentPaper
2008-12-01, 02:58 AM
You don't obey laws made by an evil person, is where the line is drawn I believe.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-01, 02:59 AM
If the ruler is legitimate (his parents had him in wedlock?) but the laws are obviously evil (stealing is punished by death by cannibalism). What should the paladin do then?Not to either invoke Goodwin or bring real-world politics into this, but Hitler was perfectly legally placed in power. It's perfectly reasonable for a populace to have an Evil leader and for the laws to make obedience incompatible with good. Making all Paladins within the borders fall. It's dumb and reasonable DMs shouldn't do it, but the Code makes it supposed to happen. In that situation, however, I think the Paladin needs to quit worrying about falling and do the right thing. Doing anything else, IMHO, should be what makes him fall.

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 03:02 AM
See my post. Social contract says when a ruler abuses his power he is no longer legitimate ruler.

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:05 AM
Not to either invoke Goodwin or bring real-world politics into this, but Hitler was perfectly legally placed in power. It's perfectly reasonable for a populace to have an Evil leader and for the laws to make obedience incompatible with good. Making all Paladins within the borders fall. It's dumb and reasonable DMs shouldn't do it, but the Code makes it supposed to happen. In that situation, however, I think the Paladin needs to quit worrying about falling and do the right thing. Doing anything else, IMHO, should be what makes him fall.


Then the Paladin falls no matter what he chooses, right?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-01, 03:06 AM
See my post. Social contract says when a ruler abuses his power he is no longer legitimate ruler.Link to your definition? Because I can think of doxzens of ways to not break a basic social contract and still be an evil ****** that needs to be overthrown.

IE: You get a ruler abusing his power in a way that benefits those he's sworn responsibility towards but harms others.

Edit:@Ridureyu:IMHO, as long as the Paladin is doing the right thing as best he can tell, he shouldn't fall. By the most reasonable RAW, though, the Paladin can fall for living in Germany when Hitler came to power. :smallmad:

trehek
2008-12-01, 03:08 AM
I was playing in a campaign, where the party paladin was enticed by a pretty woman, who convinced the paladin to marry her. After they had lived a while together happily, the wife disappeared. A year later the woman returns in her true succubus form along with the paladins demon child, gloating at the paladin about his evil offspring.

The paladin FELL for slaying his own child.

btw, it later turned out the whole thing was planned by the (secretly) evil party wizard, who had summoned the succubus in the explicit intent of corrupting the paladin. :smalleek:

Lert, A.
2008-12-01, 03:09 AM
If the ruler is legitimate (his parents had him in wedlock?) but the laws are obviously evil (stealing is punished by death by cannibalism). What should the paladin do then?

Take his PH, smack the DM with it while shouting 'SMITE IDIOT' and leave.

I want to see how a fictional character can do this.

Mostly to avoid such a scenario since I'm the DM.

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:17 AM
Edit:@Ridureyu:IMHO, as long as the Paladin is doing the right thing as best he can tell, he shouldn't fall. By the most reasonable RAW, though, the Paladin can fall for living in Germany when Hitler came to power. :smallmad:


By saying the word "reasonable," you are missing the point of this thread:smallbiggrin:

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 03:17 AM
I want to see how a fictional character can do this.

Mostly to avoid such a scenario since I'm the DM.

As the DM, my advice is dont make him fall for choosing good over law or law over good in that situation. That or wear a helmet. Also, expect your players to be upset by the whole scenario.
And once again, cannabalism comes up in an paladin/falling/alignment thread.

Zeful
2008-12-01, 03:19 AM
As the DM, my advice is dont make him fall for choosing good over law or law over good in that situation. That or wear a helmet. Also, expect your players to be upset by the whole scenario.
And once again, cannabalism comes up in an paladin/falling/alignment thread.

I'd like you to come up with an obviously evil law in less than a minute.

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:22 AM
"To cull the excess population, 50% of girls born shall be killed."

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 03:23 AM
I'd like you to come up with an obviously evil law in less than a minute.

can it be one that my male players would like, but I should probably wear a cup if I have a female in the group?

BobVosh
2008-12-01, 03:25 AM
I'd like you to come up with an obviously evil law in less than a minute.

Deal. Looking at women without veils is punished by forcing you to throw your first born son from a wall (high enough to ensure crippling for life, preferrable just high enough to ensure death but not immediatly) and your wife is now the rulers concubine.

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 03:27 AM
I'd like you to come up with an obviously evil law in less than a minute.

Thinking starting now

All men must Execute their wives if they fail to "give" to the local Lord.

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:28 AM
"Everyone with skin color darker than X shall be killed."

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 03:29 AM
Thinking starting now

All men must Execute their wives if they fail to "give" to the local Lord.

NOte the 1 minute edit time.

KKL
2008-12-01, 03:36 AM
Gave 1 GP to a Hobo on a whim and told him to use it responsibly.

He was apparently Chaotic Evil and I fell for not ridding the world of his Most Irredeemable Taint.

I threatened my DM bodily harm.

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:40 AM
Gave 1 GP to a Hobo on a whim and told him to use it responsibly.

He was apparently Chaotic Evil and I fell for not ridding the world of his Most Irredeemable Taint.

I threatened my DM bodily harm.

Do you lose your PCing powers when you do that?

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 03:43 AM
Do you lose your PCing powers when you do that?

Yes. You dont threaten, you just smack.

KKL
2008-12-01, 03:44 AM
Do you lose your PCing powers when you do that?

I dunno. I'd attempt to use Smite Idiot, but I'm nowhere near a credible Idiot, and my Detect Idiot SLA is permanently wonky.

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:50 AM
You know, the idea that once a paladin enters a Lawful Evil society, he instantly falls (because if he obeys the law he is evil, and if he disobeys the law he is chaotic) would technically mean that a Paladin can never storm the gates of hell.

Or, to be really picky, he can never enter the DM's fortress. "my house, my rules!"

Elm11
2008-12-01, 03:52 AM
Captured, tortured to unconsiousness/near death, and having a helm of alternate alignment forced upon head :smallannoyed:.

On the other hand, he created an excellant black guard :smallamused:

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 03:59 AM
Might as well add one that I saw:

Multiple succubi hitting the Paladin with constant Beguiling attempts until he failed the save. No way to attack them, and no way to get out of range, and specifically stated as, "this is going to continue until you roll low." The Paladin was mind-controlled, but fell because of it.

It's funny how a DM will do this, but never consider killing off the entire party in the same way. it's pretty much the same thing.

golentan
2008-12-01, 04:17 AM
I knew a paladin who fell for the crime of Jaywalking. On the grounds that he not only broke the law, but he irresponsibly endangered traffic, himself, and anyone who he might have saved had he not been run over (hypothetical run over). We immediately fired the DM.

Also: Cannibalism =/= evil. Killing someone cruelly, or for the sole purpose of eating them when it's not a matter of survival, or eating them while alive are definitely evil. But once someone is dead, either naturally or as a result of a just execution, it's just plain wasteful to bury them. It also cuts down on potential undead in a fantasy setting. Plus: bone tools are cheap, useful, and awesome. Depending on the method of death, it may be unsafe or unhygenic, but evil is not a given.

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 04:41 AM
I dunno. I'd attempt to use Smite Idiot, but I'm nowhere near a credible Idiot, and my Detect Idiot SLA is permanently wonky.

Did I actually make this a meme? o.o

Cheesegear
2008-12-01, 05:06 AM
Did I actually make this a meme? o.o

You made a term. Not a meme.

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 05:16 AM
You made a term. Not a meme.

Whats the crossing point to memehood?

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 05:18 AM
Whats the crossing point to memehood?

being used heavily on 4chan.

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 05:25 AM
being used heavily on 4chan.

Anyone here a 4channer? Do I also need it put over the image of a cat doing something vaugely similar?

Khanderas
2008-12-01, 05:39 AM
I thought Kore did fall. He uses items to replicate magic, and he has a complicated weapon/shield system to compensate for loss of benefits. He probably is taking levels in fighter now too. The only reason he's immune to fear is that he is insane.

Isn't it the Word of God that he has somehow managed to escape falling, though?
I agree with PsyBlade, had that theory myself. He is seen using no powers except speak with dead and then he used a glowing bead.
I have not read any Word of God on that (qualifier, the author or someone like that says so outside the comic/story), but IN story when the goblins are talking to themselves on the road, they are just repeating rumors.
Under the assumption that a fallen paladin either becomes a blackguard or alcoholic I guess, Kore keeps fighting and therefore ppl assume he did not fall, somehow.

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 05:40 AM
Or he may have already relied so heavily upon equipment he didn't notice falling.

Saint Nil
2008-12-01, 09:47 AM
I was playing in a campaign, where the party paladin was enticed by a pretty woman, who convinced the paladin to marry her. After they had lived a while together happily, the wife disappeared. A year later the woman returns in her true succubus form along with the paladins demon child, gloating at the paladin about his evil offspring.

The paladin FELL for slaying his own child.

btw, it later turned out the whole thing was planned by the (secretly) evil party wizard, who had summoned the succubus in the explicit intent of corrupting the paladin. :smalleek:

Why would that cause a fall? If the child was half-demon, its prefectably resonable ti keep it from recking havoc towards others.

hamishspence
2008-12-01, 09:51 AM
Half-fiends don't have Evil subtype.

that said, killing a year-old infant, that isn't even a true fiend? Moral issues.

Blackfang108
2008-12-01, 10:35 AM
{Scrubbed}

Roderick_BR
2008-12-01, 10:53 AM
Why would that cause a fall? If the child was half-demon, its prefectably resonable ti keep it from recking havoc towards others.
Would be funny if he had, instead kept the child to raise it, and teach him to be good, while protecting him from others. Hellboy anyone?

Saint Nil
2008-12-01, 10:53 AM
Half-fiends don't have Evil subtype.

that said, killing a year-old infant, that isn't even a true fiend? Moral issues.

Ah, thought they were always evil, like their parents. THen yeah, he should have slain the mother and raised the child himself. Would have made for good role-play actually.
V-Ninjed:smallamused:

hamishspence
2008-12-01, 11:02 AM
they have Always Evil, but not evil subtype- and there are a few non-evil half-fiends out there. The half-fiend gargoyle shopkeeper, for example.

Oddly, since then, Expedition to the Demonweb Pits came out, Evil subtype fiend, only Usually CE, and explicitly states in description that some 10% are Not Evil- Cambions.

It's basically what you get if fiend hybridises with tiefling- no wings, unusually.

Waspinator
2008-12-01, 03:16 PM
I agree with PsyBlade, had that theory myself. He is seen using no powers except speak with dead and then he used a glowing bead.
I have not read any Word of God on that (qualifier, the author or someone like that says so outside the comic/story), but IN story when the goblins are talking to themselves on the road, they are just repeating rumors.
Under the assumption that a fallen paladin either becomes a blackguard or alcoholic I guess, Kore keeps fighting and therefore ppl assume he did not fall, somehow.

Also, he might actually be a paladin of slaughter or something.

Prak
2008-12-01, 03:24 PM
Ah, thought they were always evil, like their parents. THen yeah, he should have slain the mother and raised the child himself. Would have made for good role-play actually.
V-Ninjed:smallamused:

No no, he should have redeemed the mother, hit it like the fist of an angry god every day of the week (http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k48/tenimeart/Funny/would_hit_angry_god.jpg), and raised the child to be good. Much more badass that way.

kopout
2008-12-01, 04:02 PM
I was playing in a campaign, where the party paladin was enticed by a pretty woman, who convinced the paladin to marry her. After they had lived a while together happily, the wife disappeared. A year later the woman returns in her true succubus form along with the paladins demon child, gloating at the paladin about his evil offspring.

The paladin FELL for slaying his own child.


as he "EXPLETIVE" well should! Half-finds aren't always evil and he killed his own kids for the crime of being born


Ah, thought they were always evil, like their parents. THen yeah, he should have slain the mother and raised the child himself. Would have made for good role-play actually.
V-Ninjed:smallamused:


Would be funny if he had, instead kept the child to raise it, and teach him to be good, while protecting him from others. Hellboy anyone?

only1doug
2008-12-01, 04:32 PM
as he "EXPLETIVE" well should! Half-finds aren't always evil and he killed his own kids for the crime of being born





I see i have been ninjed

Ninja'd is when someone replies to a post while you are typing an answer. it's not a ninja when you just didn't bother reading their posts before posting yourself.

Timestamp: your post 4:02pm, post you quoted in edit 10:53am. if you take 5 hours writing your post then snails will ninja you.

Hzurr
2008-12-01, 04:47 PM
Ninja'd is when someone replies to a post while you are typing an answer. it's not a ninja when you just didn't bother reading their posts before posting yourself.

Timestamp: your post 4:02pm, post you quoted in edit 10:53am. if you take 5 hours writing your post then snails will ninja you.

Ah yes, the snail ninjas. A truely terrifying adversary.

Mark Hall
2008-12-01, 05:01 PM
Ah yes, the snail ninjas. A truely terrifying adversary.

Now I know my next PC! A flail snail ninja!

Aquillion
2008-12-01, 05:21 PM
I'd like you to come up with an obviously evil law in less than a minute."Anyone who enters this town must use this magic item to cast (random spell with an [Evil] descriptor.)" :smallwink:

But more seriously, any law that gives a sentence of death to something that obviously shouldn't have it (e.g. wearing red = death) is 'evil', at least to the extent that obeying it would generally force you to commit evil.

However, this is [i]not a no-win situation for a Paladin. They are absolutely forbidden to commit evil, so they can't just go around executing random people for wearing the wrong color; but they're not required to obey every single law. They're required to maintain a generally lawful alignment, and to respect the law, but that can extend to respectfully refusing to follow laws that go against your personal philosophy. Martin Luther King and Mahatmas Gandhi both very deliberately and publicly broke the law, but that doesn't make them chaotic.

Narmoth
2008-12-01, 05:34 PM
They're required to maintain a generally lawful alignment, and to respect the law, but that can extend to respectfully refusing to follow laws that go against your personal philosophy. .

No, they have to respect every lawful good law, and obey the lawful laws of their country, church, philosophy or whatever they have sworn allegiance to.

This is something most players overlook, but which is portrayed quite good in Dominic Deegan, where the king makes a construct to enforce his draconian, unjust laws, and the construct hinders him.

So a paladin is not only not forced to accept institutionalized slavery where it is legal, but is bound by his alignment and code to oppose it actively to not fall.

To repeat:
The paladin are only forced to obey laws he himself (the player) finds just, making him able to disregard or even oppose laws that he finds unjust (the player can argument for based on the alignment and the norms accepted as good in the group/demographic or whatever).

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 05:45 PM
It's amazing how people still try to use logic and common sense to stop "YOUR PALADIN FALLS" fiat.

Narmoth
2008-12-01, 05:57 PM
I've fallen for taking the Power Attack feat because the DM ruled that the in game training for taking the feat infused my character with rage and agression that made me lose sight of my religion.

Not that I agree with your dm, but Power Attack is actually required to become a Blackquard


Now on the one hand the kid was evil, consorting with demonic forces and a recent murder attempt on a paladin, but on the other it was an 8 year old kid. Sigh.

My pally carries 2 saps (which he dual-vields) for such occasions.


I guess that would be the rational response. The vindictive one is to try to ruin the campaign in any way possible from that point on. If it were me, the paladin's spirit would be shattered, and he'd go mad.

"This is a sign! All I do is for naught, and my destiny is one of failure and death. It is clearly my fate to kill every infant in existence and nothing can be done to change this."

New character goal acquired: murder all children. If prevented from doing so, protest so much that nothing else can be done.

"Let me go! I have babies to kill yet, don't you understand? True, if this cruel world hadn't forced me down this path by destroying all hope I could live normally, but no more. My best efforts to save others will always fail, even when they should succeed, so my only recourse is destruction. Oh woe etc..."

Blackguard
Actually a quite interesting concept with some modifying


If the ruler is legitimate (his parents had him in wedlock?) but the laws are obviously evil (stealing is punished by death by cannibalism). What should the paladin do then?

Actually, legitimate should not be a question of birth. It's legitimate as in "representing the peoples will and doing the best for the people":

"Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. "
The joke is fun because the peasant has a point. And the paladin has to see it. Which is where the real problem with paladins begin. Even the more benevolent kings and the temples of the realm are in fact oppressors of the people in a generic medieval setting. The paladin should actually be opposing them.


As the DM, my advice is dont make him fall for choosing good over law or law over good in that situation. That or wear a helmet. Also, expect your players to be upset by the whole scenario.
And once again, cannabalism comes up in an paladin/falling/alignment thread.

Actually, good weights more than law, and choosing law over good is the most reasonable reason to fall reasonably fast I've seen in this thread








Come on, chicks love unicorns! They're like the fantasy equivalent of a Ferrari that's good for the environment and has a massive phallic object attached to the hood. :smalltongue:

I'd like to quote that. Please :elan:

KeresM
2008-12-01, 06:17 PM
I did once do the 'that free drink you accepted from the barmaid made you fall because she was evil and the drink she served to the guy at the table next to you was poisoned' thing.

In my defense though, the characters were essentially trapped in a dream-like sequence and it was just one of the 'completely off' things that kept happening.

Still took them EIGHT sessions for one of them to say, 'okay, weird things have been happening since we went through that portal, maybe we should go back and check it out'. The paladin thing happened in session 6, which was when I was running out of ideas.

Agrippa
2008-12-01, 06:32 PM
Actually, legitimate should not be a question of birth. It's legitimate as in "representing the peoples will and doing the best for the people":

Actually all legitimate means is that the ruler achieved power through constitutional means, is hereditary or has been offically proclaimed the legal ruler by some powerful and influential second party. The opposite of a legitimate ruler is a usurper or tyrant. Havelock Vetinary and Baron Klaus Wulfenbach are both tyrants.

kopout
2008-12-01, 06:48 PM
Ninja'd is when someone replies to a post while you are typing an answer. it's not a ninja when you just didn't bother reading their posts before posting yourself.

Timestamp: your post 4:02pm, post you quoted in edit 10:53am. if you take 5 hours writing your post then snails will ninja you.

yes, I do take a longtime to type what of it?

alright so not ninjad but the do express it just as well as I do If not better and I agree with them whole heartedly

SmartAlec
2008-12-01, 07:15 PM
Actually all legitimate means is that the ruler achieved power through constitutional means, is hereditary or has been offically proclaimed the legal ruler by some powerful and influential second party. The opposite of a legitimate ruler is a usurper or tyrant. Havelock Vetinary and Baron Klaus Wulfenbach are both tyrants.

By this definition, Wulfenbach is a tyrant, as he conquered Europe and holds it through virtue of Might is Right, but Vetinari was voted in by the Guilds of Ankh-Morpork to serve as Patrician, and is as legitimate as Ankh-Morpork gets.

Of course, you could argue that EVERY ruler has a tyrant or usurper somewhere in his or her family line/predecessors, as it's pretty unusual even in fiction to come across a dynasty or constitution that 1) is the original dynasty/consitiution of the land and 2) always has been. Hence the above emphasis on social contract - a King may be an 'oppressor' of the people by design, but as long as he more or less holds up his end of the bargain in the feudal pyramid -protects his people, governs fairly in the capacity of being the Final Court of Appeal, represents the land on the world stage, doesn't send the economy plummeting through excess or mismanagement etc etc - then usually, it's all good, and there's no need for Smiting to occur.

Edit: I can only imagine what would have occurred had Carrot Ironfoundersson, who is probably the closest thing to a Paladin that the Discworld will ever see, had come to Ankh-Morpork in the days before Vetinari - during the events of Night Watch, or even earlier, during the days of real tyranny.

kopout
2008-12-01, 07:18 PM
By this definition, Wulfenbach is a tyrant, as he conquered Europe and holds it through virtue of Might is Right, but Vetinari was voted in by the Guilds of Ankh-Morpork to serve as Patrician, and is as legitimate as Ankh-Morpork gets.

Yes, Wulfenbach is a tyrant, albeit a benevolent-ish one , and Vetinari is a legitimate ruler.

turkishproverb
2008-12-01, 07:28 PM
Actually all legitimate means is that the ruler achieved power through constitutional means, is hereditary or has been offically proclaimed the legal ruler by some powerful and influential second party. The opposite of a legitimate ruler is a usurper or tyrant. Havelock Vetinary and Baron Klaus Wulfenbach are both tyrants.

That is only one of many potential definitions of legitimate, actually.

Severus
2008-12-01, 07:43 PM
I have mixed feelings about this situation involving a friend:

We were sent off to investigate some strange goings on in a village, supernatural pranks and the like. After a bit of sleuthing we come to find that an 8 year old kid who had come into a book with demonic power and was fast on his way to becoming an evil wizard. The kid carried a mace with him to which my friend then vocalized that a child with a weapon was no threat to his mighty paladin-ness. I don't think the DM took too kindly to this and promptly had the kid hit him for 8 points of damage which at level one is a near fatal blow. Cue paladin killing the kid and promptly being forsaken by his god.

Now on the one hand the kid was evil, consorting with demonic forces and a recent murder attempt on a paladin, but on the other it was an 8 year old kid. Sigh.


Thank god I don't have any stories like any of these, because I don't play with idiot GMs.

/rant on

I think the big problem is that GMs are too tied up in our current world. They think "what should mother theresa do if she were in my fantasy world?"

They never bother to think that a fantasy world bristling with evil monsters and demons where people are getting killed all the time is way different. Sure some people can be redeemed, but what ever happened to the old fire and brimstone good? Give 'em what's coming to 'em.

Thank the fates I don't have to deal with GMs like this. I'd be tempted to club them to death while screaming, "I'm mentally deranged, so it would be evil to stop me from beating you to death!"

/rant off

kopout
2008-12-01, 07:51 PM
Thank god I don't have any stories like any of these, because I don't play with idiot GMs.

/rant on

I think the big problem is that GMs are too tied up in our current world. They think "what should mother theresa do if she were in my fantasy world?"

They never bother to think that a fantasy world bristling with evil monsters and demons where people are getting killed all the time is way different. Sure some people can be redeemed, but what ever happened to the old fire and brimstone good? Give 'em what's coming to 'em.

Thank the fates I don't have to deal with GMs like this. I'd be tempted to club them to death while screaming, "I'm mentally deranged, so it would be evil to stop me from beating you to death!"

/rant off

I think that the point is that the kid could be saved with a knock on the head and the the Half-fiend baby could be raised as a good person. A Paladin needs to take every opportunity to be good, Just killing people who might be evil will turn you into Kore, to insane to know you have fallen.

BRC
2008-12-01, 07:53 PM
Concerning Tyrants. If I remember correctly, as per the origional definition, a Tyrant was just somebody who came to power by unusual means. In the filing cabinet of government, Tyranny is the folder marked "Other".

Concerning Paladins and breaking laws, I believe that if the Paladin recognizes the ruling government as illegitimate, they could break some laws.
Example, in Azure City, let's say Redcloak said "All Humans line up in the courtyard". Now, Than wouldn't do that, but that dosn't make him fall because, as he sees it, Redcloak is not the legitimate ruler of Azure City. Of course, alot of this depends on the opinion of the omnipresent force of Law and Good that watches all a paladin's actions with their finger on a button labled "Fall". At what point does the rebellion becoem a legitimate government? When The People support them? Well how do you figure out who the people support.

"Bob the Paladin!, you MUST aid our cause against the evil king Nastius IV!"
"Sure, one second, let me finish this poll, I still need the opinions of another 200,000 people before I can determine who is the legitimate government"

Mewtarthio
2008-12-01, 08:13 PM
Concerning Tyrants. If I remember correctly, as per the origional definition, a Tyrant was just somebody who came to power by unusual means. In the filing cabinet of government, Tyranny is the folder marked "Other".

As I recall, a tyrant is simply a ruler who weilds absolute power.


No, they have to respect every lawful good law, and obey the lawful laws of their country, church, philosophy or whatever they have sworn allegiance to.

This is something most players overlook, but which is portrayed quite good in Dominic Deegan, where the king makes a construct to enforce his draconian, unjust laws, and the construct hinders him.

You're misremembering. What actually happened was that the construct created was a being of pure Law and Order. He opposed the evil king because the unjust laws were promoting instability in the land.

Note that Paladins are Good first and Lawful second (you fall for one Evil act, but you need an entire alignment shift to fall for being Chaotic). This implies that they believe Law is the best means to a Good end. In other words, a Paladin considers authority legitimate if and only if it promotes the causes of Good, or at least has the potential to do so. If a system is Evil, they have an obligation to change that system, but they will do so in a manner that causes as little damage to the system as possible.

Draco Dracul
2008-12-01, 08:31 PM
I think the silliest possible reason to fall is that you are so good that you make all the other LG people feel bad about themselves and making people feel bad is evil.

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 08:37 PM
I think the silliest possible reason to fall is that you are so good that you make all the other LG people feel bad about themselves and making people feel bad is evil.

Pfft. Don't you know guilt is one of the primary weapons in Good's arsenal?

Doomsy
2008-12-01, 09:20 PM
It's amazing how people still try to use logic and common sense to stop "YOUR PALADIN FALLS" fiat.

I've seen what happens when someone looked the DM in the face and said, "No he does not."

It is not pretty. He choked on his soda. :)

Zeful
2008-12-01, 09:22 PM
Which is why you keep playing as if you had never lost the abilities, lay on hands small children, smite evil, detect evil. Never be content with "You don't see anything", always assume they have something to hide.

Mark Hall
2008-12-01, 09:36 PM
Actually, legitimate should not be a question of birth. It's legitimate as in "representing the peoples will and doing the best for the people":

"Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. "
The joke is fun because the peasant has a point. And the paladin has to see it. Which is where the real problem with paladins begin. Even the more benevolent kings and the temples of the realm are in fact oppressors of the people in a generic medieval setting. The paladin should actually be opposing them.


You assume that divine right to rule does not exist. In D&D, this is not guaranteed. In the Forgotten Realms, Siamorphe would disagree. In 4e's world, Bahamut would disagree. In core 3e, Heironeous would have some good arguments; Altua would disagree most strenuously.

kopout
2008-12-01, 09:39 PM
Which is why you keep playing as if you had never lost the abilities, lay on hands small children, smite evil, detect evil. Never be content with "You don't see anything", always assume they have something to hide.

that would be ...interesting a paliden that went insane when he fell , but stayed good!
unlike most fallen palidens who go nuts and kill every one he would be a good version of Kore . God"You fall" paladen"no, i don't"

Ridureyu
2008-12-01, 09:45 PM
I've seen what happens when someone looked the DM in the face and said, "No he does not."

It is not pretty. He choked on his soda. :)

To which the response is, "Yes he does, and you lose a level. Want to lose another one?"

Remember, we're n ot exactly talking about reasonable people here:smallsmile:

kopout
2008-12-01, 09:50 PM
To which the response is, "Yes he does, and you lose a level. Want to lose another one?"

Remember, we're n ot exactly talking about reasonable people here:smallsmile:

but an in character "you fall" "no , i do not" is another story

Draco Dracul
2008-12-01, 10:12 PM
Pfft. Don't you know guilt is one of the primary weapons in Good's arsenal?

That is part of what makes it the silliest reason for falling ever.

The_Blue_Sorceress
2008-12-01, 10:28 PM
I played a paladin who stopped being a paladin because his god died. We joked that he spent a couple ofdays convinced that he'd somehow done something terribly wrong and that is was all his fault.

I had another (epic)(half-celestial) paladin (ftr/cleric/paladin, actually) fall as the price for saving the world. He renounced his vows and became NG as payment to a sin spirit for transporting him to the macguffin location where he ritually sacrificed himself to bring the sun back. It was sort of a no win situation, because if I didn't do it, I'd fall because I'd have let the world be destroyed in utter cold and darkness, but we couldn't get there in time without the sin spirit's help.

Come to think of it, the end of that poor guy's life was full of falling, because he had his half-celestial template stripped from him after dying on a demiplane. He lost his wings, his spells, his paladinhood, and then died.

Fun times.

Blue

Kris Strife
2008-12-01, 10:33 PM
That is part of what makes it the silliest reason for falling ever.

I know. If I start DMing again, you'd have to do something actually fall worthy, based on your code which would be set up at Character Creation, to fall.

Vexxation
2008-12-01, 10:38 PM
Come to think of it, the end of that poor guy's life was full of falling, because he had his half-celestial template stripped from him after dying on a demiplane. He lost his wings, his spells, his paladinhood, and then died.

Fun times.

Blue

See, that's how a Paladin is supposed to fall.
Heck, I'd rule that by renouncing his vows to save the entire world, and by selflessly offering his life for the good of all, he'd have his paladinhood re-instated as he died. Just so he could get all the perks of what would essentially be an Exalted death.

Heck, as a DM, that's reason to grant him a following and at least Divine Rank Zero.

Flame of Anor
2008-12-01, 10:51 PM
See, that's how a Paladin is supposed to fall.
Heck, I'd rule that by renouncing his vows to save the entire world, and by selflessly offering his life for the good of all, he'd have his paladinhood re-instated as he died. Just so he could get all the perks of what would essentially be an Exalted death.

Heck, as a DM, that's reason to grant him a following and at least Divine Rank Zero.

Heck yeah! That character is exactly what a really Good paladin should be! I salute him!

The_Blue_Sorceress
2008-12-01, 11:18 PM
See, that's how a Paladin is supposed to fall.
Heck, I'd rule that by renouncing his vows to save the entire world, and by selflessly offering his life for the good of all, he'd have his paladinhood re-instated as he died. Just so he could get all the perks of what would essentially be an Exalted death.

Heck, as a DM, that's reason to grant him a following and at least Divine Rank Zero.


He did get reincarnated, sort of. His new self had no memory of his old self at first, and had some... demonic possession problems. The game dissolved before anything was resolved, but the idea was to get the demon out of the new character, get the (ex) paladin his own body and go from there. There were hints that he might had gotten his paladinhood back, eventually, but there would be some serious questing involved.

Blue

Agrippa
2008-12-02, 12:10 AM
Concerning Tyrants. If I remember correctly, as per the origional definition, a Tyrant was just somebody who came to power by unusual means. In the filing cabinet of government, Tyranny is the folder marked "Other".

Concerning Paladins and breaking laws, I believe that if the Paladin recognizes the ruling government as illegitimate, they could break some laws.
Example, in Azure City, let's say Redcloak said "All Humans line up in the courtyard". Now, Than wouldn't do that, but that dosn't make him fall because, as he sees it, Redcloak is not the legitimate ruler of Azure City. Of course, alot of this depends on the opinion of the omnipresent force of Law and Good that watches all a paladin's actions with their finger on a button labled "Fall". At what point does the rebellion becoem a legitimate government? When The People support them? Well how do you figure out who the people support.

"Bob the Paladin!, you MUST aid our cause against the evil king Nastius IV!"
"Sure, one second, let me finish this poll, I still need the opinions of another 200,000 people before I can determine who is the legitimate government"

Exactly my point. When I use the word "legitimate" I mean a legally sanctioned government not a just one. Paladins are honor bound to respect all legitimate authority as long as that authority is not absued to their knowledge. However paladins need not respect or even acknowledge the authority of a tyrant, i.e. one who comes to power by unusual means.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-02, 12:15 AM
Exactly my point. When I use the word "legitimate" I mean a legally sanctioned government not a just one. Paladins are honor bound to respect all legitimate authority as long as that authority is not abused to their knowledge. Where do you get that? They have to respect all legitimate authority according to the Code. Nowhere does it say that they can get out of it if the ruler is a tyrannical little despot. It's incredibly dumb, but that's the class by RAW.

Zeful
2008-12-02, 12:19 AM
Exactly my point. When I use the word "legitimate" I mean a legally sanctioned government not a just one. Paladins are honor bound to respect all legitimate authority as long as that authority is not absued to their knowledge. However paladins need not respect or even acknowledge the authority of a tyrant, i.e. one who comes to power by unusual means.

So if an evil govener/king/whatever came to power legally and then created laws that were obviously evil, the Paladin has to follow them or fall? That seems stupid from my point of view.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-02, 12:25 AM
So if an evil govener/king/whatever came to power legally and then created laws that were obviously evil, the Paladin has to follow them or fall? That seems stupid from my point of view.And if the Paladin does obey the Evil laws, he falls. It is dumb. Incredibly. It should not work that way. But it does. Thanks, WotC. :smallfurious:

Kris Strife
2008-12-02, 12:32 AM
And if the Paladin does obey the Evil laws, he falls. It is dumb. Incredibly. It should not work that way. But it does. Thanks, WotC. :smallfurious:

Wasn't the Gygaxian version worse?

turkishproverb
2008-12-02, 12:33 AM
And if the Paladin does obey the Evil laws, he falls. It is dumb. Incredibly. It should not work that way. But it does. Thanks, WotC. :smallfurious:

Again, that depends upon the definition of "Legitimate"

maybe The paladin's culture doesn't consider any ruler of an evil nation legitimate.

Zeful
2008-12-02, 12:38 AM
Again, that depends upon the definition of "Legitimate"

maybe The paladin's culture doesn't consider any ruler of an evil nation legitimate.

Maybe the paladin, doesn't consider any evil ruler of a nation legitimate and smite worthy.

Aquillion
2008-12-02, 12:55 AM
Where do you get that? They have to respect all legitimate authority according to the Code. Nowhere does it say that they can get out of it if the ruler is a tyrannical little despot. It's incredibly dumb, but that's the class by RAW.Respecting authority is not the same thing as blindly obeying it. Like I said elsewhere: Martin Luther King respected authority. That doesn't mean that he always blindly obeyed it.

A Paladin can join in a peaceful protest march against an evil despot. They can argue against unjust laws, and even take a forceful stand against them if that is truly necessary. They just can't egg the despot's statue and spraypaint Anarchy symbols all over the walls; they should look for ways to resolve things in a good fashion within the law first.

If a chaotic good character hears of someone scheduled to be unjustly executed, they'll go right over and break them out of prison.

If a lawful good character hears about it, they'll go to the magistrate, hire an advocate, argue the case in court, and pursue every legal option to get them out; if that fails, they can then step in front of the executioner and prevent the execution.

The alignments describe a general outlook and a way of thinking, not rigid straightjackets for how you have to behave.

trehek
2008-12-02, 03:57 AM
I would say that a paladin doesn't have to follow a nations laws if they become evil, as long as the paladin follows his code in disobeying them. Now, considering that the paladins code comes from his church, what would happen if a evil cleric would infiltrate the paladins church and rewrite their code as a new directive from their god? The changes might seem slight and innocent enough to pass. Personally, i sense major campaign plot hooks here.

Narmoth
2008-12-02, 04:33 AM
You're misremembering. What actually happened was that the construct created was a being of pure Law and Order. He opposed the evil king because the unjust laws were promoting instability in the land.

Actually, he was the champion of neutrality (or balance or something like that) My point was that he recognized the laws as unjust and therefore opposed them. He wasn't bound to support them just because they were law


You assume that divine right to rule does not exist. In D&D, this is not guaranteed. In the Forgotten Realms, Siamorphe would disagree. In 4e's world, Bahamut would disagree. In core 3e, Heironeous would have some good arguments; Altua would disagree most strenuously.

Yes, I know, but then you also have gods that guarantee that the ruler governs accordingly to the gods will (which you lacked in human medieval times), and a ruler given divine right to rule will still need to be lawful good for the paladin to need to respect the authority of.

Then again, you could argue that the God in question didn't have the right to govern the people either... (but let's not go that way)


I would say that a paladin doesn't have to follow a nations laws if they become evil, as long as the paladin follows his code in disobeying them. Now, considering that the paladins code comes from his church, what would happen if a evil cleric would infiltrate the paladins church and rewrite their code as a new directive from their god? The changes might seem slight and innocent enough to pass. Personally, i sense major campaign plot hooks here.

In 2nd ed you had renegade paladins that recognized the laws of their own church as corrupt and didn't follow them, following in stead the teachings of the priest or paladin who trained them or the old church laws


So if an evil govener/king/whatever came to power legally and then created laws that were obviously evil, the Paladin has to follow them or fall? That seems stupid from my point of view.

Basically, according to this, a paladin wouldn't be able to oppose Darken Rahl (spelling?) from the Sword of Truth books.


Maybe the paladin, doesn't consider any evil ruler of a nation legitimate and thereforesmite worthy.

If you put in therefore, that's exactly what I've been trying (and obviously failing) to say all along. The legitimacy of the ruler should be a direct effect of how he rules. Which was by the way one of the arguments for the french revolution: the king was unable to govern the country he was set to govern, so hes rule wasn't legitimate anymore

Starbuck_II
2008-12-02, 07:10 AM
I would say that a paladin doesn't have to follow a nations laws if they become evil, as long as the paladin follows his code in disobeying them. Now, considering that the paladins code comes from his church, what would happen if a evil cleric would infiltrate the paladins church and rewrite their code as a new directive from their god? The changes might seem slight and innocent enough to pass. Personally, i sense major campaign plot hooks here.

Which edition, in 3rd Paladins don't need no stinking churches: they get Code from the One (Goodness).

Gardakan
2008-12-02, 07:13 AM
My DM interpretate the sentence : I don't believe in you, that my friend say as a paladin to a women that was lying to us.

Avilan the Grey
2008-12-02, 08:58 AM
Thank god I don't have any stories like any of these, because I don't play with idiot GMs.

/rant on

I think the big problem is that GMs are too tied up in our current world. They think "what should mother theresa do if she were in my fantasy world?"

/rant off

Hehe...

I still like the concept of the Paladins of the Goddess of love which temples doubles as bordellos. All legal and lawful of course...

Avilan the Grey
2008-12-02, 09:04 AM
You assume that divine right to rule does not exist. In D&D, this is not guaranteed. In the Forgotten Realms, Siamorphe would disagree. In 4e's world, Bahamut would disagree. In core 3e, Heironeous would have some good arguments; Altua would disagree most strenuously.

Exactly. We are mixing up Real World with D&D again. Divine Rule most likely exists in the game world, I am sure a god can favor a family as rulers in a kingdom.

serok42
2008-12-02, 09:11 AM
I was playing a Knight of Solomania in a 2nd ed Dragon Lance game which followed the same rules as a paladin.

I fell in battle and the DM told the Kender that he found a healing potion on one of the draconians we were fighting. He poured it down my throat and it healed me and changed my alignment to Lawful Evil (It wasn't a normal healing potion the DM said) therefore making me fall.

I thought it was a pretty stupid way to make me fall. :smallfurious:

The group kind of fell apart after that.

SilverSheriff
2008-12-02, 09:36 AM
Tried that. And failed. Apparently a 28 didn't pass.

if my DM did that I'd tear up my character sheet and spit in his eye.

Severus
2008-12-02, 01:11 PM
I think that the point is that the kid could be saved with a knock on the head and the the Half-fiend baby could be raised as a good person. A Paladin needs to take every opportunity to be good, Just killing people who might be evil will turn you into Kore, to insane to know you have fallen.

Yeah, and who is going to do that? The average adventurer runs into bunches of these every adventure. There's no place to put all the people who could be saved if only they got a lot of love. In this world, we could lock them up in prisons and hope they get help. If the GM is building a world on a traditional fantasy model, prisons aren't a realistic option.

So the paladin is left with the choice, kill them and give them to the gods to care for, or let them live, and then bear responsibility when a large percentage of them go off and kill again.

You don't kill rabid dogs because you hate them. You kill them because they're dangerous and to protect others. You may even feel sorry for them. But the fact that they're 'innocent' doesn't change the fact that they're infected with a deadly disease and need to be put down. The fact that a murderous half-fiend kid could theoretically be saved doesn't mean that's the paladin's priority.

My point is that many GMs don't follow their world logic through to its rational conclusion. They make a world teeming with evil where good is struggling every day to just keep up... but then expect a paladin to act like he's got infinite resources to cure every evil booboo. He doesn't. While he worries about this kid, a dozen other villages are going to get sacked by Orcs (or whatever).

The concept of triage applies to these situations as well. The Paladin can't save everyone. He needs to try to save as many as possible. That means he leaves some to die/be executed.

Iuris
2008-12-02, 01:45 PM
Why are the paladins not allowed to do reasonable things?

-subdual damage. Solves half the problems. Kids, party members going rampant, you name it. It would also be a good idea to point out that a critical hit with subdual damage should be a particularly GOOD hit, ie. if hitting a friend, one that wouldn't leave any scars and would stop hurting earlier. Or, maybe, a particularly embarassing one. Very reasonable, too. Except for gamers, people don't think of drawing their weapons first :)

-take a third way. Human shields? Retreat, return at night and do a commando style rescue. Or maybe hire some stealthy help to do the rescue. Not all the money has to go into the Holy Avenger 2000(tm) v6.04 with chromium plated handle. Tyrannic government whose destruction would harm thousands, so challenging the ruler is out of the question? Start an underground slave railroad for the victims of the troublesome law or similar.


There are reasonable solutions. Just not extreme ones.


As for paladins falling, I'm sorry, no ridiculous stories to share. Never played a live RPG session, I like them in computer form. Oh, or webcomic form :)

Zeful
2008-12-02, 01:54 PM
Why are the paladins not allowed to do reasonable things?

-subdual damage. Solves half the problems. Kids, party members going rampant, you name it. It would also be a good idea to point out that a critical hit with subdual damage should be a particularly GOOD hit, ie. if hitting a friend, one that wouldn't leave any scars and would stop hurting earlier. Or, maybe, a particularly embarassing one. Very reasonable, too. Except for gamers, people don't think of drawing their weapons first :)
Then when the evil guy you subdued wakes up and escapes it's your fault.


-take a third way. Human shields? Retreat, return at night and do a commando style rescue. Or maybe hire some stealthy help to do the rescue. Not all the money has to go into the Holy Avenger 2000(tm) v6.04 with chromium plated handle. Tyrannic government whose destruction would harm thousands, so challenging the ruler is out of the question? Start an underground slave railroad for the victims of the troublesome law or similar.
"Your just going to leave those people under that monster's tyrannical rule?"


There are reasonable solutions. Just not extreme ones.


As for paladins falling, I'm sorry, no ridiculous stories to share. Never played a live RPG session, I like them in computer form. Oh, or webcomic form :)

The reasonable solution isn't always the "fun" one. Most gamers won't see an option if it isn't fun.

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 01:57 PM
the evil guy always claims its your fault- but he is responsible for his own deeds, same as in The Hostage Dilemma, when he says "Give in, or I Kill them, and it will be Your Fault."

Zeful
2008-12-02, 01:59 PM
Except you subdued him, and prevented his death. Therefore his escape is your fault.

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 02:05 PM
his escape, but not his actions. Had Roy been a paladin, would he have Fallen the moment Nale escaped prison and started killing people? Or the moment he made decision to hand him over to the authorities? There is such a thing as overdoing culpability for acts that occur thanks to the fact that you showed mercy.

Would Bilbo be considered "Responsible" for every child and baby bird Gollum killed in Mirkwood, because he had chance to kill him and chose not to?

Paramour Pink
2008-12-02, 02:17 PM
Then when the evil guy you subdued wakes up and escapes it's your fault.


"Your just going to leave those people under that monster's tyrannical rule?"


Wtf? A paladin fully capable of subduing a possibly deadly threat is just going to let that threat not be put under stringent lock and key? And the paladin that is actively organising an entire underground relieve-resistance is "leaving people under tyrannical rule"? Please explain; I'm definitely not seeing your point of view right now. That, or we disagree a lot on these hypothetical situations.

Zeful
2008-12-02, 02:18 PM
I'm not saying fall worthy fault. Just normal, "you should have been paying more attention." fault. Why would his actions be your fault, I was only talking about the escape specifically.


Wtf? A paladin fully capable of subduing a possibly deadly threat is just going to let that threat not be put under stringent lock and key? And the paladin that is actively organising an entire underground relieve-resistance is "leaving people under tyrannical rule"? Please explain; I'm definitely not seeing your point of view right now. That, or we disagree a lot on these hypothetical situations.
Escape Artist, spellcasting followers. The first can be dealt with by giving the party rouge a sap, and have him knock the guy in the head every morning. But then you have to worry about him starving to death between "capture" and "imprisonment" which can be a problem if the nearest settlement is a week-plus away. Which means you have to feed him, which necessitates him being awake.
The second can only be dealt with by AMF. Preventing any followers he might have from simply teleporting him away.

The resistance is all fine and dandy, but what about the non-slaves? The low-caste people suffer almost as badly as the slaves. Why not help them. If the tyrant is so bad, why not just kill him now, and pull a "Man in the iron mask"? A rogue or a bard could easily pretend to be the bad guy and have changed? Abdicate the throne and name a benevolent successor. You have the chance to redeem hundreds if not thousands from the path of darkness. Surely that is preferable to only helping simply the worst-off?

Note: I don't support the "It's the paladin's fault" school of DMing, I'm simply playing devil's advocate.

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 02:22 PM
like I said- if paladin chooses to subdue someone- should imprison them in some way.

Hard part is- when you are On Mission.

There are often circumstance where paladin Should subdue rather than kill, even if enemies are evil. a criminal organization within a city, for example- so that subdued targets can be questioned. If he hurries through guildhouse, smacking head right and left, stuns and ties up leader, then when he goes back some of the goons have woken and escaped- fact is- he might not have had time to tie everyone up.

Kris Strife
2008-12-02, 02:31 PM
On a similar note, any one ever seen a monk fall for being non lawful, a druid for being decidedly non neutral or a bard/barbarian for being non chaotic?

Zeful
2008-12-02, 02:31 PM
On a similar note, any one ever seen a monk fall for being non lawful, a druid for being decidedly non neutral or a bard/barbarian for being non chaotic?

Ever seen a cleric fall?

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 02:34 PM
well, I've seen a water fall :smallbiggrin:

that said, it seems that paladins are like the Jedi of D&D. Or maybe vice versa. they can fall very easily- "step over the line"

Kris Strife
2008-12-02, 02:45 PM
Ever seen a cleric fall?

Not even when he multiclassed paladin and fell as a paladin.

Agrippa
2008-12-02, 02:46 PM
So if an evil govener/king/whatever came to power legally and then created laws that were obviously evil, the Paladin has to follow them or fall? That seems stupid from my point of view.

Respect doesn't mean automatic obedience, just that you acknowledge the legititmate claim to power that ruler has and respect his or her authority. You can even do this when killing the evil little creep!

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 02:50 PM
"our loyalty is to The Throne, not the person sitting on it": Deathstalker.

Kris Strife
2008-12-02, 02:59 PM
"our loyalty is to The Throne, not the person sitting on it": Deathstalker.

"So you take orders from a chair? Does it at least talk?" my initial response.

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 03:04 PM
true- was cheesy fantasy. Was the words of the heroes who chose to rebel, but didn't want to overthrow the system- just one bad leader.

chiasaur11
2008-12-02, 03:05 PM
"So you take orders from a chair? Does it at least talk?" my initial response.

Yes, but it can't here you at all.

Aquillion
2008-12-02, 03:13 PM
On a similar note, any one ever seen a monk fall for being non lawful, a druid for being decidedly non neutral or a bard/barbarian for being non chaotic?Those aren't really the same. Monks and Bards just stop advancing; Barbarians only lose rage; and everyone but Druids only suffers if they change their alignment or take a prohibited class. Even druids have a much harder time of falling than Paladins, unless you regularly go around teaching language or actively go out of your way to hate nature. (There aren't that many cases where the party is even confronted with a decision that relates to revering nature; good/evil, associating with evil creatures, and respect-authority type decisions come up all the time.) Likewise, 'ceases to revere nature' generally doesn't come down to one event -- a Druid can burn down a forest if he feels that it's in the long-term best interests of nature, because he is still overall 'revering nature' (and, indeed, occasional forest fires are perfectly natural and necessary for renewal.)

Basically, all those classes come down to your character's overall attitude -- your alignment, your reverence towards nature, and so forth. Players are allowed to take occasional actions that are out-of-character without that meaning that their druid no longer reveres nature or that their Barbarian has become Lawful. It is very rare for that kind of overall character-definition to change just because you've done one thing; for the most part, players get to decide what sort of person their character is, and the DM only steps in if they're acting obscenely far from what they claim to be.

A Paladin, though, can explicitly fall as the result of a single act; even if I say my Paladin is basically a good guy, if he commits even one evil act, he's fallen and that's that.

The Glyphstone
2008-12-02, 03:14 PM
Can you imagine if Druids were held to the same standard as paladins?

*goes off to make parody thread*

Zeful
2008-12-02, 03:15 PM
Those aren't really the same. Monks and Bards just stop advancing; Barbarians only lose rage; and everyone but Druids only suffers if they change their alignment or take a prohibited class. Even druids have a much harder time of falling than Paladins, unless you regularly go around teaching language or actively go out of your way to hate nature. (There aren't that many cases where the party is even confronted with a decision that relates to revering nature; good/evil, associating with evil creatures, and respect-authority type decisions come up all the time.)

For the others, changing class is generally treated as a much, much harder thing to do through actions than simply violating the Paladin code. The Paladin's code can be broken by a single act; your alignment will almost never change that easily.

Helm of opposite alignment?

Aquillion
2008-12-02, 03:19 PM
Helm of opposite alignment?
Yeah, there's a few things that can force it. But it really has to be forced, for the most part. If you're playing by the RAW, a Paladin can fall entirely by accident on everyone's part, without even the DM intending it to be a risk -- to the point where it's sometimes a headache for the DM who doesn't want to just houserule out the whole thing to come up with reasons why they don't fall.

No other class restrictions are anywhere near that bad.

Paramour Pink
2008-12-02, 03:31 PM
I'm not saying fall worthy fault. Just normal, "you should have been paying more attention." fault.

On a sort of side note, did you ever notice that in this topic, none of the DMs warned their paladin players they were moving towards a fall? For some reason, this comment made me assume you would be the you of DM to at least give your players a warning. No idea why, but I prefer that way over the "you inched just vaguely over the line, time to lose your powers". Anyway...



Escape Artist, spellcasting followers. The first can be dealt with by giving the party rouge a sap, and have him knock the guy in the head every morning. But then you have to worry about him starving to death between "capture" and "imprisonment" which can be a problem if the nearest settlement is a week-plus away. Which means you have to feed him, which necessitates him being awake.

The second can only be dealt with by AMF. Preventing any followers he might have from simply teleporting him away.


For the Escape Artist spellcaster, I wouldn't suggest the constantly knocking someone unconscious dealie, honestly. Not if I was a paladin. Eventually, that does amount to torture. I guess a non-exalted, chaotic good paladin, or a Grey Guard (I think that's the name of the paladins with a relaxed code) could get away with that just fine, without it pushing them towards falling.

Anyway, I don't know a great deal about the game. I know even less about what a wizard can do, but I'm getting the impression from this board that it's save to assume they can do everything. So if I was one of the people that had to help keep this wizard under close watch, when it comes to feeding him, I suppose I would use a Charm Person deal. Magic to fight magic. Just something mind-effecting that would keep him compliant while he ate and thus kept him from escaping or attacking.

Once that's over, secure him in all reasonable ways possible (blinds over his eyes, cover his mouth, bind his hands as best as possible). Hopefully someone has enough nifty items to keep him in place. It wouldn't be great, and it would need someone constantly watching him, but a paladin will likely be vigilent anyway.

Also, what does AMF stand for? Sorry, new to this. I'm assuming "anti-magic-forcefield".

Anyway, with all this said, if the group is well aware that it's nigh impossible to keep a hold of this spellcaster, because of all the resources you just mentioned, I honestly wouldn't take him as prisoner. The risk and chance of him escaping would be too high. He wouldn't have made it out of the fair (or probably unfair for the party) fight that lead him to be captured in this hypothetical, uness there was a specific reason otherwise (like a story reason, or the spellcaster could have begged for mercy, but even if someone is Lawful Good, you're certainly not obliged to give it, not the least of which to an overtly evil person).



The resistance is all fine and dandy, but what about the non-slaves? The low-caste people suffer almost as badly as the slaves. Why not help them. If the tyrant is so bad, why not just kill him now, and pull a "Man in the iron mask"? A rogue or a bard could easily pretend to be the bad guy and have changed? Abdicate the throne and name a benevolent successor. You have the chance to redeem hundreds if not thousands from the path of darkness. Surely that is preferable to only helping simply the worst-off?


Why would a paladin not work on helping the others after he/she has set up the groundwork for the other resistance dealie? I know it's not intentional, but you're almost making it sound as though the paladin will just shrug their shoulder and say "Well, I've set up a minor relieve effort. Now I can finally return home" when we both know that's silly. The relieve effort would be the first step in what might very well be an up-hill battle to do exactly what you said: save hundreds if not thousands from a harsh situation.

A paladin (not even Heironeous), of course, isn't omnipotent and can't be everywhere at once. Also, a chaotic good paladin could easily pull the iron mask idea you're suggesting.

I can't help but feel I'm missing your point though. Maybe because you're not explaining, but probably because I haven't done more than skim the topic.


Note: I don't support the "It's the paladin's fault" school of DMing, I'm simply playing devil's advocate.

Ok.

hamishspence
2008-12-02, 03:34 PM
well, there are systems that, when paladin breaks code or commits evil act, penalize paladin- they lose one of their powers temporarily. Only if act is more severe do they lose several powers, or Fall completely, or even Fall and be Irredeemable (would have to be very severe)

Quintessenial Paladin 2 does this.