Mechanics of the Atonement Spell for restoring Paladins

[Recherché]

So it turns out in addition to his threes strikes rule, the GM sees me spilling the blood of an ally as an evil action. Apparently, allies come first, no matter what. Even if they are rampaging while under the possession of a Black Blade aiming to kill a good-aligned creature.

What the hell? Just because someone is an ally doesn't mean you should let them do something stupid. Sometimes being Good with a capital G means opposing your own allies because its the right thing to do. In this particular case the ally in question was not in his right mind, you stopped him from doing something horrible that he did not want to do with a minimum of harm. I'd ask your GM what solution to this situation would have resulted in you not falling. Cause every other alternative I see is far worse than knocking a friend out to help him. And if there wasn't a way to avoid the fall then the entire set up was a jerkass move at best.

[Madokar]

What the hell? Just because someone is an ally doesn't mean you should let them do something stupid. Sometimes being Good with a capital G means opposing your own allies because its the right thing to do. In this particular case the ally in question was not in his right mind, you stopped him from doing something horrible that he did not want to do with a minimum of harm. I'd ask your GM what solution to this situation would have resulted in you not falling. Cause every other alternative I see is far worse than knocking a friend out to help him. And if there wasn't a way to avoid the fall then the entire set up was a jerkass move at best.

Everything I've been getting from him and my group is that it's "bros before foes". So I was apparently supposed to attack the dragon. Or let the magus kill him. I keep saying that part of the paladin's duties to ensure that his companions don't commit evil deeds, but that doesn't fly, apparently.

Another part of it is that I had no proof that the dragon was good-aligned. Thing is, I pinged him with detect evil as soon as I saw him and there was no evil to be detected. Now granted, this sliver dragon had a more mercenary approach to his life, and was apparently working for a vampire. A vampire that apparently was putting up symbols of Sarenrae in a desecrated temple of Pharasma in attempt to ward the area.

On top of which, the dragon is from three years in the future. So the timey-wimey ball is going all wibbley-wobbley. We also met up with said vampire. He's one of our party members from the future. And while he's still preaching Sarenrae, he's allied to Driders and a Succubus. On top of which, he's aggressive. My Holy Bastard Sword still does it's extra 2d6 of damage to the Succubus and most likely the Drider too. So the whole thing is a great big hullabaloo.

[Tuvarkz]

Everything I've been getting from him and my group is that it's "bros before foes". So I was apparently supposed to attack the dragon. Or let the magus kill him. I keep saying that part of the paladin's duties to ensure that his companions don't commit evil deeds, but that doesn't fly, apparently.

Another part of it is that I had no proof that the dragon was good-aligned. Thing is, I pinged him with detect evil as soon as I saw him and there was no evil to be detected. Now granted, this sliver dragon had a more mercenary approach to his life, and was apparently working for a vampire. A vampire that apparently was putting up symbols of Sarenrae in a desecrated temple of Pharasma in attempt to ward the area.

On top of which, the dragon is from three years in the future. So the timey-wimey ball is going all wibbley-wobbley. We also met up with said vampire. He's one of our party members from the future. And while he's still preaching Sarenrae, he's allied to Driders and a Succubus. On top of which, he's aggressive. My Holy Bastard Sword still does it's extra 2d6 of damage to the Succubus and most likely the Drider too. So the whole thing is a great big hullabaloo.

Anyone keeping track of how many red flags this DM is setting off?

[Madokar]

Anyone keeping track of how many red flags this DM is setting off?

He's been a solid GM with a good campaign that's lasted a year. This fall is the first major disagreement I've had with him.

[Mordaedil]

Usually that is the case with a lot of DM's and why so many of us learn the hard way. All along he might seem like a real swell dude to play with, but then one day you wait for him to get to the table, so you call him and he's in his car, but he had to turn around because he forgot to put his pants on.

I'm not saying you ought to sever, but I think we've learned about what to not play at this DM's table (don't play paladins).

Not a problem though, just as soon as you finish this character, roll a new class.

[Dr.Zero]

I see only three solutions to this:

1. Get along: like I said, for me it's pretty clear that he wanted your paladin to fall; your paladin did one of the most paladin-ish thing he could do in that situation, so if that was a fall, everything else would have been a fall; in that case I at least hope that your GM has a really wonderful plot ready regarding that fall
2. Explain your point: that is, open your book at the page where it is explained what makes a Paladin fall, make him read it, and then, with a really calm and cool attitude, start smashing the aforementioned book on his face till he doesn't agree that, if the code was different, your Paladin should have known it before, to adhere to it.
3. Rage-quit: self-explanatory

I like a lot solutions #2 and #3 (in sequence, possibly), but #1 can work as well, if this is the first time something so annoying happens and if you think you can still have fun.