Paladin and rogue in the same group - what's allowed and what's not?

[Leshy]

At the moment things are okay as everyone is working toward the greater good... but what happens when they go to city and rogue just starts stealing around?

[Ashdate]

As a DM, the players playing the rogue and the paladin need to know each others boundaries. The Paladin Code is not an excuse to prevent another player from having fun; this isn't to say there can't be conflict, but unless the Rogue player allows it, The Paladin should not act like a babysitter, ensuring that the Rogue can't breathe without first passing a Detect Evil-flavored breathalyzer test.

Whatever it takes for the Paladin to look the other way -- conviction that setting a good example is better than scolding, the belief that all beings have a spark of goodness in them, ignorance, or a good bluff check from the Rogue -- should be made clear. This is not to say that the Rogue should commit unlawful acts without fear of repercussions, but said repercussions should primarily come from the DM.

[JellyPooga]

It entirely depends on how obvious the Rogue is being about stealing stuff, I suppose.

If the Paladin never knows about the Rogue stealing, or only suspects, then he has no reason to get preachy.

On the other hand, if the Rogue goes off and steals something then comes back to the group saying "hey guys, look what I just stole from that old lady across the street", then the Paladin is well within his rights to give a lecture. Quite whether the Rogue pays any attention to the lecture or even sticks around to listen to it, is up to him. The Paladin is really only under compulsion to try and prevent his compatriots from being a- or immoral, not to be the party inquisitor. As long as the amorality stays the right side of outright evil, then the Paladin doesn't really have to do anything.

If the Rogue is blatantly going around mugging or even killing people, then you may have a problem with inter-party conflict, but until then, let the players sort it out as characters. In theory, if the Rogue is good enough at what he's doing, then the Paladin should be none the wiser.

[NerfTW]

At the moment things are okay as everyone is working toward the greater good... but what happens when they go to city and rogue just starts stealing around?

So the rogue has a kleptomaniac trait? Because I don't see why being in the city means the rogue should just start going nuts and grabbing things.

I agree with Ashdate, but also, for the rogue, why can't he/she make a few compromises? Stealing things is risky. It puts the whole party and their mission at risk. Is the rogue really that much of a jerk/kleptomaniac that they can't go five minutes without stealing shiny things? Why is the defining trait "Steals stuff"? I know a lot of people who are law abiding who know how to do sleight of hand and lock picking. Just having those skills doesn't mean you have an unavoidable compulsion to use them to break the law.

The rogue knows this will tick off the paladin. Why wouldn't they just say "Hey, I'm only going to steal something if it's absolutely necessary, and not let the paladin know. There's no point in dividing the group over it and possibly getting us all thrown in jail. And certainly not because I like shiny things" instead of "I'm going to steal everything I want, regardless of who's looking, and flaunt it in front of my teammate who doesn't approve of it because I enjoy derailing our mission."

BOTH team members should compromise. They can very certainly find an in character reason why they'd work together. People do it all the time in the real world. There's no point in intentionally doing something you know your buddy doesn't like.

[Grail]

Paladins are NOT police, they are not bound to uphold the law anymore than another LG character is. And that is the issue, thief with a LG companion. A true LG character will find wanton thet abhorrent on both an ethical and moralistic level. They should see the bigger picture (whether it is there or not) stealing from the merchant might mean that merchant can't make payments on his shop, can't feed his children. Perhaps the item stolen was for a local lord after having been commissioned by the let's wife. Wanton and indiscriminate acts of theft don't consider that there can be consequences for their actions. A LG character should try and set things right. They should also try to show the thief that it's not ok to steal at will.

But the big question to be addressed is:

How does the thief expect to be successful at his crimes if the paladin can spot him? Because surely if the paladin spots him, then so does half the city.

[Zerter]

The Rogue is responsible for not letting the Paladin find out, the Paladin is responsible for not finding out.

If the Paladin does find out there's a problem that has to be resolved, but that's what either role-playing or killing other PCs is for.

[TheOOB]

Before the campaign even starts, the DM should tell the players that they are required to make characters who can work together as a group. In this case, that means a rogue who is not evil, and/or a paladin who doesn't get ballistic over small crimes and tries to redeem before punishing.

[Vitruviansquid]

Allowed: The buddy cop dynamic...

He's a mighty paladin who does things by the book. "On my honor, I swear to uphold the laws of your fair city and protect her citizens from those who would wrong them."

He's a cunning rogue with a rough exterior and a heart of gold. "You told me not to take everything that's not nailed down and I only took some of the stuff that's not nailed down!"

Together they slay monsters, rescue damsels, and have their swords and badges taken away by seneschals who are too old to deal with their crap! "Damnit, Rogue and Paladin, you blew up an entire orphanage to apprehend that necromancer! You're a pair of loose cannons that I won't have destroying MY city! I'm taking your swords and badges!

"Come on, milord! That orphanage was a front for an Orcus cult!"

Comedy ensues


Not allowed: The rogue and paladin trying to kill or physically coerce each other over every little thing, like their characters don't know how to solve any their problems without resorting to violence, and like their characters were mortal enemies rather than travelling companions before coming to the city.

[huttj509]

Also required: A discussion with the DM about what exactly is fall-worthy, especially when it comes to the infamous 'associate with evil' clause. My impression was the question was less "how do they interact" than "how do you keep the paladin from falling because of the thief's actions?"

I may have misunderstood.

[Grail]

The Paladin cannot fall because of the Thiefs actions, unless the Paladin actively encourages and supports him, and even then it's dubious.

A Paladin does not fall from associating with evil by RAW. Associating with evil is not in violation of his code, it is written in a different section under a different heading.

[Madfellow]

If it were me, I'd just say the paladin's Code of Conduct doesn't apply. At all. It's a stupid mechanic that causes nothing but grief.

[Dr.Epic]

At the moment things are okay as everyone is working toward the greater good... but what happens when they go to city and rogue just starts stealing around?

Because all rogues are pickpockets!

Rogues can be good. Heck, they can be LG. Being a rogue is also about being a stealthy fighter, a trap finder, a scout, and a charisma man. They aren't just thieves.

[Xuc Xac]

Stealing because the character is a rogue is like murdering because the character is a fighter. At least in 2nd Edition and earlier when the class was called "Thief", there was a more understandable reason to steal (although it's still dumb). In 3rd edition and later with prescribed wealth by level, what possible justification would a rogue have for picking pockets in town? You've got a king's ransom in magic items, gems, and gold on you. What's the point in picking pockets in town? That's like driving your Ferrari to a five star restaurant for a meal of lobster stuffed with caviar tacos and then swiping a handful of singles from the bartender's tip jar.

[Dr.Epic]

Stealing because the character is a rogue is like murdering because the character is a fighter.

Yeah, next thing you people will be saying all wizards do is cast spells.




Seriously though, I do agree with what you're saying.

[Gavinfoxx]

First:

The DM and the group need to throw out the paladin code of conduct, and rewrite it to be reasonable for the game and the setting and the group.

[CET]

Basically agree with what's been said (++agree on writing your own code for the paladin).

I think the GM and the players should look at this as a source of fun and dramatic tension. The only reason it would be anything otherwise is if one or more players (or the GM) are using it as an excuse to cause problems.

Some thoughts on how I'd handle it. YMMV.

- The Rogue cannot be the kind of person who would steal things from the paladin or other party members. The Paladin cannot be lawful-genocidal ('Thief? Kill!!').

- In character, if/when the Paladin discovers that the rogue sometimes 'acquires' things, the PCs might start an ongoing IC discussion about a code of conduct (the rogue won't steal from the needy/poor, etc).

- Personally, I think an awesome way to broach this is for the Rogue to produce a stolen McGuffin that the party really needed but couldn't get earlier (the gem that gets them into the evil dukes castle, or whatever). This provides some complexity for the Paladin to work with (yea, stealing is wrong, but we were able to save a bunch of lives because of it . . . )

[Nero24200]

First thing I would say is discuss the paladin's code with the pal player. Hash out some specifics so that he has a good idea what could make him fall/what wouldn't. Don't be afraid to tweek the code if both of you feel it need's tweeked.

A minor note is that the paladin only falls from associated with evil creatures or creatures he/she objects to morally, so providing good justifcation for steeling can help (for example, looting from fallen enemies is still stealing, but it might be harder for the paladin to object when the "victim" was trying to rip his throat out in the previous round).

Second thing would be to inform the rogue that playing a rogue doesn't automatically mean thief. If he plays a thief it's a character trait he has chosen and not a "bonus" or something from choosing that particular class. Also remind him that his is a choice - the paladin's code is not. The player playing the paladin is stuck with the code purely for playing a paladin, nothing ties this player to theft, so if it starts to cause issues I would look here first personally.

Lastly, remind both players that the party needs to reasonably work together. If something causes problems then it needs to go. If you feel the thief player is stealing a little too much and making it too easy to get spotted by the paladin, I would cause that as the problem and tell the player to drop the stealing. If you feel the paladin is overreacting to certain acts (for example, looting enemy bodies again) then you be inclined to do the same to the paladin.

The important thing is making sure that both players are willing to work together OOC to keep the party in one piece.

[Kish]

A Paladin does not fall from associating with evil by RAW. Associating with evil is not in violation of his code, it is written in a different section under a different heading.

This is a strange new concept of "RAW" with which I was not previously familiar.

As NerfTW and Xuc Xac have noted, why is "rogue" being treated as "someone who compulsively breaks the law"?

[Jay R]

We have a great dynamic right now between the paladin and my 2E mage/thief. She has made her position clear, and expects my thief to live up to it. On the other hand, she's not very vigilant. I occasionally slip out while she's occupied to spy on the enemy.

The only fly in the ointment is that I've had to explain to the DM (twice) that my thief has not become Lawful; he just finds it more lucrative to adventure with a paladin than to steal.

[DigoDragon]

I was involved in a short campaign where I played a roguish cleric and we had a paladin in the group. We worked fine together as long as any law-breaking I did was kept out of sight/out of mind.
A good example was when we captured a pominant henchman to the BBEG. The paladin had nearly killed the foe (he was at -8 HP) and left it to me for healing and interrogation (What we both call "Surgery"). The Paladin knows I'm a little rough with interrogations and so left the room.

After a short interrogation I slit the foe's throat and burned the body (can't be too careful!). Upon returning with the Paladin she only asked if the villain survived surgery or if he died on the operating table. No, this one didn't pull through (I sometimes let the foe live if they're not a major threat).
Paladin knows not to ask further questions and we moved on.

[obryn]

You know, I ran a multiclassed Rogue/Paladin for a short time in a 3.5 game. It worked great, if you could get past him picking locks to get at the villain instead of bashing in the door. :) And if you can have both in one character, there's probably no problem with having them both in the same party. :)

-O

[Janus]

Allowed: The buddy cop dynamic...

He's a mighty paladin who does things by the book. "On my honor, I swear to uphold the laws of your fair city and protect her citizens from those who would wrong them."

He's a cunning rogue with a rough exterior and a heart of gold. "You told me not to take everything that's not nailed down and I only took some of the stuff that's not nailed down!"

SENESCHAL: You can't touch the Elven Ambassador! He has diplomatic immunity!
ROGUE: I don't plan on diplomacy, lord.
PALADIN: By the gods, rogue, I'm only two weeks away from retirement! I can't take much more of this!

[Mando Knight]

Allowed: The buddy cop dynamic...

He's a mighty paladin who does things by the book. "On my honor, I swear to uphold the laws of your fair city and protect her citizens from those who would wrong them."

He's a cunning rogue with a rough exterior and a heart of gold. "You told me not to take everything that's not nailed down and I only took some of the stuff that's not nailed down!"

Together they slay monsters, rescue damsels, and have their swords and badges taken away by seneschals who are too old to deal with their crap! "Damnit, Rogue and Paladin, you blew up an entire orphanage to apprehend that necromancer! You're a pair of loose cannons that I won't have destroying MY city! I'm taking your swords and badges!

You're a loose cannon, Rogue, but a damn good cop!

As NerfTW and Xuc Xac have noted, why is "rogue" being treated as "someone who compulsively breaks the law"?

Fact: one can play a Lawful Rogue. Such a character is generally either the leader of a thieves' guild (if you're gonna steal things, it's gonna be under MY rules!) or the kind of character that's a Rogue because he's a martial-type character that uses his cunning and skills to back his ideals, rather than the omnicidal kleptomaniac.

[Synovia]

Second thing would be to inform the rogue that playing a rogue doesn't automatically mean thief. If he plays a thief it's a character trait he has chosen and not a "bonus" or something from choosing that particular class. Also remind him that his is a choice - the paladin's code is not. The player playing the paladin is stuck with the code purely for playing a paladin, nothing ties this player to theft, so if it starts to cause issues I would look here first personally. .

This is absolutely not the way to go. You don't tell one character "His concept is more important than yours". The paladin code most certainly is a choice, and there's nothing wrong with having a paladin fall because he can't keep to code.

A good chunk of the rogue's class skills are related to stealing. There's no reason that another character's class choice should prevent the rogue from doing what he does.

[The Glyphstone]

Allowed: The buddy cop dynamic...

He's a mighty paladin who does things by the book. "On my honor, I swear to uphold the laws of your fair city and protect her citizens from those who would wrong them."

He's a cunning rogue with a rough exterior and a heart of gold. "You told me not to take everything that's not nailed down and I only took some of the stuff that's not nailed down!"

Together they slay monsters, rescue damsels, and have their swords and badges taken away by seneschals who are too old to deal with their crap! "Damnit, Rogue and Paladin, you blew up an entire orphanage to apprehend that necromancer! You're a pair of loose cannons that I won't have destroying MY city! I'm taking your swords and badges!

"Come on, milord! That orphanage was a front for an Orcus cult!"

Comedy ensues


Not allowed: The rogue and paladin trying to kill or physically coerce each other over every little thing, like their characters don't know how to solve any their problems without resorting to violence, and like their characters were mortal enemies rather than travelling companions before coming to the city.

They Fight Crime.

[KnightDisciple]

A couple thoughts...

1.)Why does the rogue feel the need to wantonly steal while in the city? Unless he nails someone who's really rich, you get way more money by going out adventuring and beating monsters, and occasionally collecting quest rewards. I mean, what gets you a better end result: Pick-pocketing a half-dozen people for 5 gold each, or going out and slaying the Young Red Dragon and getting its hoard of treasure?
HINT: Not the first one.
2.)Why is it so terrible the paladin object to the thief taking people's money? In a medieval society, you don't have banks and debit cards. Most likely, what money you have on your person is all the money you have. Like someone pointed up above, stealing without a care could well bring great harm to many people's lives. So, yeah, the paladin should rightfully object to that. If the rogue is only doing a careful "steal from the corrupt rich" schtick, I could see the paladin being willing to "not notice his antics" or some such. But randomly stealing from innocent people walking down the street? What's wrong with the Paladin, who should be a Stand Up Guy, a Good Guy, objecting to that?
3.)Heck, why is the Paladin the only one who would object? Is anyone else in the party Good-aligned? They should probably not be okay with random pick-pocketing either. Even Chaotic Good shouldn't consistently approve of stealing from anyone the Rogue can see, because the return on the harm caused is too small (especially in light of typical adventurer treasure hauls).
4.)Why would it be bad, if this is a reoccurring thing, for the paladin to say that the rogue needs to stop, the rogue needs to leave, or (if no one else cares the Rogue is clearly heading down the path to Evil what with stealing from everyone in sight for no good reason) the paladin leaves (thus the player can make a Chaotic Neutral Fighter who doesn't care what the rogue does)? That seems like a pretty realistic response if someone's doing something you find strongly objectionable.
5.)Nothing about Rogues says they have to be thieves. Heck, even Sleight of Hand can be used for things like "hiding weapons up your sleeves" and "palming a knife when no one can see you". And even with Rogue skill points, there's no way you can get every skill on their list; thus, you can easily make a sort of scout, pathfinder, trap-disarmer LG Rogue. It's completely feasible. Heck, just go for the angle he's like a Medieval Navy SEAL or something.

[Kish]

5.)Nothing about Rogues says they have to be thieves. Heck, even Sleight of Hand can be used for things like "hiding weapons up your sleeves" and "palming a knife when no one can see you". And even with Rogue skill points, there's no way you can get every skill on their list; thus, you can easily make a sort of scout, pathfinder, trap-disarmer LG Rogue. It's completely feasible. Heck, just go for the angle he's like a Medieval Navy SEAL or something.

Or a police officer?

(Seriously, no class's skill set is better suited to a cop.)

[KnightDisciple]

Or a police officer?

(Seriously, no class's skill set is better suited to a cop.)

Oh, true!

[Janus]

My coworker recommends that the paladin and rogue be related.

[Mando Knight]

This is absolutely not the way to go. You don't tell one character "His concept is more important than yours". The paladin code most certainly is a choice, and there's nothing wrong with having a paladin fall because he can't keep to code.

A good chunk of the rogue's class skills are related to stealing. There's no reason that another character's class choice should prevent the rogue from doing what he does.

Another character's class choice shouldn't prevent the Paladin from doing what he does, either. It's a two-way street.