>Be paladin, see this >Wat do Are (STANDARD LG!) paladins

>>48652523
are cops completely countered by hostages?

>(STANDARD LG!

That still leaves a wide range of interpretations and options.

But, overall, most paladins have a decent enough charisma score to talk to the guy, either enough to convince him to let the hostage go in exchange for some sort of leniency, or long enough for the rogue to kill the guy.

>>48652523
Use your protective skills to increase her armor class.

>>48652523
>STANDARD LG!
Lawful Good does not mean Retarded Pacifist

File: hammer-of-wrath.png (146KB, 720x432px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 720x432px

>>48652523
>Lawful Good
>Not smiting his face from across the room

The righteous to not negotiate with terrorists.

>>48652523
Comply with kidnappers demands, as long as that doesn't mean threatening additional people, until hostage is released. Then shoot him.

OP here.

Charisma check are an option. What I have in mind is a Crime lord having a few kids on the side to use them as hostages if some good and smitey group comes along. What could a good party do if they are told to surrender or kids' throats get cut?

>>48652671
>What could a good party do if they are told to surrender or kids' throats get cut?
invent flashbangs

>A LG Paladin sees a hostage situation.
>Paladin decides a man with a knife isn't so dangerous
>Try to talk him down. Obviously this doesn't work.
>Don't really care if innocent people die, there's an afterlife and if they're not total shitbags they get to go to a good one.
>Shrug and charge in, killing the dude as quick as possible. He had his chance.
>Afterwards, pray to the gods that will listen, begging for leniency for the fallen souls. They gave their lives to help me punish evil, after all.

>>48652737
Fallen right there

>>48652523
Use Command spell tell him to "surrender"

>>48652743
Depends on the setting.

>>48652743
Is failing to stop a murderer an evil act? Please explain how you think this is a paladin falls situation.

Just BoP the hostage and HoJ the dude with a knife jeez what a shit paladin you are.

>>48652671

> "I swear to you: If you harm them, no force on earth can stop me from killing you."

>>48652743

Not really. Paladins can't fall from failing, in fact. They fall from deliberately going against their code.

Here, the fault is entirely the murderer's. A Paladin isn't in violation of his code because of the killer's actions, any more than the police are at fault when a criminal starts shooting hostages.

>>48652523
Smite, duh.

>>48652746
That's taking away the thief's free will. You fall.

>Man killing a woman

LG paladin here, this man is clearly doing God's work.

>>48652766
>LAWFUL good
>Giving a shit about free will

ok kiddo.

>>48652766
Oath of Ancients Pally so I don't give a fuck.

>>48652774
The woman is holding the man hostage. You need to intervene.

>>48652759
Wrong. He is at fault for CAUSING the death of innocents through his actions. Fallen, right there as said above by another anon. The righteous paladin waits. Patience is a virtue, remember. I know you modern kids don't remember it, but it is. Eventually the criminal has to either kill them, which the paladin can't stop and therefore doesn't fall. Or the criminal has to let them go to try to run. The smart paladin maneuvers so that it appears that the criminal can let them go, perhaps into danger of them dying, and escape. Then the paladin saves the innocents, makes sure they are alright, and then hunts down the criminal.

Rinse and repeat as needed. Eventually the criminal will make a mistake and the paladin unleashes holy justice when that happens.

Better to wait and get it right, then rush in and fuck it up. Patience.

>>48652684
Flashbangs are dangerous in enclosed spaces, and can be lethal at close range. Plus, shit would catch fire inside. Unless the floors are bare and there's nothing flammable on the walls.

>>48652826
>Plus, shit would catch fire
good? A hostage taker will drop a hostage if the hostage is on fire. Or if he is on fire. Or if everything is on fire.

You just have to heal the victim and subdue the assailant at your leisure.

>>48652816
>Patience is a virtue
And sloth is a sin. The line between the two is very thin sometimes. Prolonged inactivity justified as "patience" may prevent one from moving on and getting more work done elsewhere.

To extend upon your example. In the vacuum of no other threats, waiting until the kidnapper loses patience is a reasonable choice.
But in a complex world full of events, taking days to solve one situation while there might be, say. band of bandits rampaging in the countryside or some vile beast terrorizing the next town, taking extra time and effort to save one life can mean dozens of other lives will be extinguished.

>>48652816
Evil does not rest or wait.
Not smiting the criminal where he stands means willingly granting victory to Evil. That would be unacceptable and deserving of a Fall.

>>48652523
Even if he gets his artery cut, it should take more than a few seconds for him to bleed out enough to die. Just smite the hostage taker, then lay on hands the hostage.

>>48652523
Coup de grace is an auto crit and 10+damage fort save.

Daggers do 1d4 x2 on a crit.

The damage isn't enough to kill her and she has a good chance of saving. Just shoot the guy in the head and heal the woman.

Besides, by raw you cannot hold a full round action, only standard actions, so if you attack and bull rush he can only do 1d4 damage, maybe 2d4 on 19-20 attack roll.

File: 1409971967918.jpg (92KB, 600x750px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 600x750px

>>48652869
And here we have the wisdom of millennial. Look and laugh.

>>48652523
Remind him that there are two endings to this story: One where both he and the girl live, and one where both he and the girl die. Either way, he's coming with me.

>>48652916
Can he even Coup de Grace in this situation? IIRC it's only vs Helpless opponents.
Hostage in the picture appears to be Grappled, while that imposes a whole range of restrictions on her, it doesn't make her Helpless.

>>48652916
Even if you're playing the godawful bastard that is 3.P, doing "the peasant hostage has their throat cut" by RAW and not a fluff kill is retarded as all fuck.

RAWfags go back to /v/ where you belong.

>>48652816
>Wrong. He is at fault for CAUSING the death of innocents through his actions
Paladins won't fall if someone else tries to motivate the paladin via the threat of innocents.

A paladin wouldn't fall if an evil wizard messaged him from 500 miles away with the message "disembowl yourself now or I kill this kid" for kicks and then kills a random kid when the paladin wonders who's talking to him.

A paladin doesn't fall if an evil nation issues an edict that any paladin orders should disband or they will kill an innocent person.

A paladin doesn't fall if a hostage taker threatens to kill a hostage and then does so.

They are accountable for their actions, not others.

>>48652860
Waiting for an enemy to give you an opportunity is not sloth. Never will be. War, and all battles, are won by making the least number of mistakes and capitalizing on as many of the enemy's mistakes as possible.

As far as other problems, prioritize. If there are bandits killing many others, then the petty criminal with a hostage doesn't matter right now. Don't beat up your foe in a burning house. Fix the immediate problem and then return to other problems. A paladin is not a god and doesn't pretend to be. He does what he can, when he can.

>>48652942
Patience is a virtue.
Evil has no virtues.
In the fight against Evil, virtues are a luxury.
It's logic.

And ad hominem is a weak argument.

File: 1343204646594.jpg (69KB, 450x373px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 450x373px

>>48652960
They are accountable for their actions, including the action that leads to others killing people, if he can stop it.

You forgot one piece of the puzzle and it makes you look stupid.

File: 1342060536581.png (134KB, 400x259px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 400x259px

>>48652986
Not for a paladin.

Blatant lack of intelligence is a weaker argument.

File: Hyzy4Zw.jpg (33KB, 360x460px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 360x460px

>>48652523

Two can play at this game!

though what's funny is that in settings with ressurection hostages become fairly useless unless you have a weapon that cause people to die of old age

>>48652523
Depends on the paladin. Their oaths will determine what actions they can take and what actions, if any, would make them fall in this situation.

>>48653012
Especially for a paladin.

Projection is a weaker argument.

>>48653046
Except that resurrection costs a lot. Until that resurrection is gained and used, the paladin has no class abilities.

So there is that...

File: 1342047985667s.jpg (15KB, 250x187px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 250x187px

>>48653094
Ok, you are just too stupid for words. Therefore I will stop using them on you after this one last bit.

Virtues are what make a paladin better then others. To toss them aside, just makes him another thug with a weapon, nothing more.

I only have limited knowledge of D&D, but what about casting Hold Person DISCREETLY?

>>48652523
If I make a move, and the Bad Guy kills the hostage, I will kill the Bad Guy in retribution. But if I don't stop the Bad Guy, they could kill the hostage anyway.

Ergo, the hostage is already dead, and I should act accordingly.

I kill the Bad Guy.

>>48652561
Underrated answer.

>>48653148
It's has Range: Touch.
Also Paladin doesn't have that spell normally.

>>48653148
Ah, you're suggesting that a wizard solves the problem. Good thinking!

>>48653129
A thug with a weapon and divine backing.

>>48653164
Was it by any chance a ranged paladin spell in 2nd edition?

>>48653150
If you are a fighter, then sure. A neutral or evil fighter. A good, especially a lawful good, paladin does not think that way. That person is breathing until breath stops, is alive until life stops. No shortcuts, no self-serving lies to make it easier for you. You maneuver to try to get the bad guy to leave the hostage so that he can run. Since it is far easier to run without dragging someone along. As he is a self-serving bad guy, like yourself, he will abandon that which is an inconvience, the hostage, when he feels like he has a good chance to escape.

Give him that chance, to save a life. Then hunt his ass down and punish him when civilians are safe.

Honestly, how can so many morons actually inhabit one board. Migrate back to /b/ or something.

>>48652816
Bullshit. There's no real guarantee that the idiot trying to take hostages won't kill them regardless of what the paladin does. There's no guarantee that whatever he's demanding won't cause more harm than just killing the hostages. And the deaths of the hostages lie solely on HIS soul, not the paladins.

Should diplomacy fail, what are the chances of a paladin being able to quickly heal the hostage?

Failure to stop an evil act doesn't make a Paladin fall. WILLFULL INACTION probably can, but that's still debatable. Trying and failing DOESN'T. The Paladin falls when he performs an evil act of his own will and is fully accountable for it.

So no, standard LG paladins are not completely countered by hostages. Read less /tg/ memes and play more tabletop games.

>>48653247
There is a guarantee, the paladin is standing right there. One big fucking guarantee. You rush the bad guy, he kills hostage. You are at fault. Simple. You stay nearby, talking and maneuvering until the bad guy thinks he can get away by abandoning the hostage. The paladin stays nearby to secure the hostage if/when he abandons it. Then you hunt him down and punish him when he is away from civilians. How simple do I have to paint it to make you understand? Do I need to get out some 8-bit graphics?

Being a paladin is taking the tough road. It is not compromising your principles when faced with tough decisions. Play a rogue or a fighter if you want to not worry about morality. Or better yet a wizard. We all know they have no sense of right a wrong and obviously neither do you. Perfect match.

>>48652986
>Evil has no virtues
>In the fight against Evil, virtues are a luxury

Then what the fuck are we fighting? So we needa be evil to stop evil, and then later on someone else need to be evil to stop us? Naw, man. Be good. Be the most good. Have the most virtues. Don't let some hostage-taking fucker bring you down to his level. Do not let him take also your own morality hostage. Fuck. What are they teaching kids these days?

>ad hominem is a weak argument

... Isn't it just not an argument at all? Technically. Because it does nothing to address the points of discussion, only attack one of the members of the discussion.

What I'm saying is you're wrong. All the time.

>>48653242
No, I'm calling the Bad Guy's bluff. He's banking on me wanting to save the hostage. The moment he realises that's not going to work, he will release the hostage so he can defend himself properly.

Good is not Nice.

>>48652523
The hostage situation is intrinsically flawed. Yes, you should do everything you can do to preserve the life of the hostage, but at a certain point the hostage taker becomes beholden to you. After all, if they kill the hostage, their leverage is gone. If they harm the hostage, then their attention is not currently on you, giving you a range of options of dealing with them. Why hasn't the wizard already used some save-or-die spell to resolve the situation instead of wasting my time with this bullshit?

So, appeal to him. Talk him down. He can escape if he lets the hostages go. Preserving life is more important than capturing him. He doesn't have to do this and there are ways of him getting out of this situation without anyone getting hurt. Bu if it becomes obvious that he was never intending on letting the hostage go in the first place, I charge the fucker. Maybe I make it, maybe I don't. But I sure as hell don't give him the opportunity to take a second hostage. Also, why do anything just because someone took a hostage? How is the hostage my responsibility? It's not on me if Fucko the Clown kills someone. It's on him. He is a free-willed being with the ability to make his own choices. He has the power to not kill the hostage whenever he wants and I entirely refuse to be held responsible for someone else's decisions.

>>48653002
Attempting to save an individual and the villain kill the individual in the process does not a fall make.

If it were, then every paladin would be trapped by inaction at the merest hint of there being a fatality in any situation.

ITT: Paladins fall, no matter what they do.

>>48653340
>Then you hunt him down and punish him when he is away from civilians.
If you catch him. If he doesn't take another hostage. If he doesn't go out and slaughter a village full of innocents. Yes, maybe he can be talked out of it. Maybe no-one will get hurt. But letting him just walk away is the worst thing you could do.

>>48653293
Yes, and rushing the bad guy, when you know he will kill the hostage, as he has said so, and to the best of your knowledge appears able to do so, is an evil act. You are getting the hostage killed because of your inability to have patience.

Play less tabletop games and read more historical fiction. You might learn something.

>>48653387
>Yes, and rushing the bad guy, when you know he will kill the hostage, as he has said so, and to the best of your knowledge appears able to do so, is an evil act.

No it isn't, you're just retarded.

>>48653349
And if he is not bluffing, you fall. Simple as that.

>>48653399
No you don't, simple as that. What the bad guy does is not your responsibility. Stopping him is.

>>48652523
turn around 360° and walk away

>>48652766
not a thing in standard paladin codes, notably

File: 52a.jpg (26KB, 604x499px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 604x499px

>>48653408
>360°

>>48653353
Agree.

Talk them down if you can, but if they won't listen then kill them and hope the hostage survives.

What else are you going to do? Walk away and let the hostage taker go free?

>>48653359
It will if you choose to risk an innocent life for no reason other then your lack of patience and intelligence. And trying to equate to any other situation is a logical fallacy. Try again anon. Hostage situations are unique. They specifically are there to try to force one party to let the other have it's way. In most situations, it's to let the bad guy escape. Though sometimes it can be used just to buy time.

If it, as the OP suggests above, is used to escape, then let the bastard escape is the only real option for a paladin. He can just exercise patience and save the hostage, or he can be a thug and try to force the situation. A thug with no divine sanction, as he is going to fall if that hostage dies do to his choice.

>>48653399
Not if my paladin's ethical code states that he did not commit an Evil act, which is entirely plausible.

File: image.jpg (128KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 640x480px

Jesus whoever made the original paladin stuff was either the stupidest man to write for RPGs or the most devious bastard on the planet to do so, because these conversations are the most hilarious things this place produces, seeing people trying so hard to justify these retarded views while ignoring most kinds of logic.

>>48653460
ITT: Edgelord neckbeards argue that paladins can never succeed.

>>48653460
>Hostage situations are unique. They specifically are there to try to force one party to let the other have it's way. In most situations, it's to let the bad guy escape. Though sometimes it can be used just to buy time.

So you call the bad guy's bluff and remove their leverage.

>>48653380
Not to a paladin. Saving that one life is just as important as anything else. And if you fail to catch him before he takes another hostage, then you repeat it again. And if you fail to catch him before he slaughters a village of innocents, that is your failure to stop him in time. You were not good enough to stop him, assuming you tried. You are not a god, just a man trying to do the right thing. The first hostage does not need to die just so you can pat yourself on the back and lie to yourself that you did the right thing.

The paladin's road is not easy. There is a reason people look up to them.

>>48653460
If the bad guy killing the hostage is enough of a reason for the paladin to fall, then so is letting him get away and possibly kill another innocent when the paladin isn't there to stop it. So either it's a catch-22 "You fall because I say so" situation and you're a That GM, you're being inconsistent with your own rules, or the paladin doesn't fall.

I move up towards him. If he tried to hurt the hostage I use Guardian's Counter. It interposes me as the target instead of the hostage, moves the hostage to where I was and gives me a free attack after it happens.

Now he has no hostage and I'm in melee range of him. Time for smiting.

I'm a Defender. I'd be pretty bad at my job if I couldn't defend people.

>>48653478
Who said anything about them never succeeding? You let the hostage taker go then and there, then track them down afterwards. Maybe the party Rogue is already sneaking around to cover the exits and shadow the perpetrator back to their lair. No-one can succeed at everything, all the time, on their own. If you blunder into a situation with no-one to help, of course you're going to wind up failing more often than not.

>>48653511
And then he kiils someone and you fall because it's your fault.

>>48653521
Nope. Paladins fall if they willfully abandon their code. Failing to save a life because your hands were tied by your code doesn't make you fall.

>>48653535
In which case you don't fall for the hostage dying, either.

>>48653521
You must be a horrible GM.

>>48653551
I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, mocking the people calling for falls in this thread.

>>48653498
>Not to a paladin. Saving that one life is just as important as anything else.

Not to all paladins.

My paladin worships Thelkmor, who holds the punishment of the guilty as being more important than rescuing the innocent. So in this scenario, bumrushing the hostage-taker is entirely in-keeping with my god's worldview, and if the hostage dies, I get to keep all my god-given powers.

>>48653551
Well that's what this threads about anyway.

It boggles my mind how people misinterpret the falling mechanic. It's just a minor tidbit that says basically "Paladin loses his powers if he betrays his alignment". Similar stipulations exist for monks and barbarians too, who lose their powers if they become chaotic/lawful. But nobody has ever asked "how do I make barbarian fall? force him to do bureaucracy?" while Paladin players are made to play endless guessing games of whether his next action is going to make him fall or not. But RAW, nothing short of the Paladin willfully killing an innocent person for no reason, thus performing a Chaotic Evil act and shifting himself to the southeast of the alignment grid, should make him fall, and failing to prevent a murder definitely shouldn't. Falling paladins shouldn't come up nearly as often as people on /tg/ believe they should, period.

>>48653407
It is your responsibility, AS LONG AS YOU CAN STOP IT.

You rush, you choose to let the innocent die so that you can have it easy and catch the bastard now. Evil act. You fall.

You let the bastard go, but he kills the innocent anyway. HE chose to be evil at that moment and you can't stop it. You are fine and ready to smite evil ass. Fight commences.

You let the bastard go, the right way, where he can't get away without abandoning the hostage. He gets away, you get the innocent saved. You start the hunt to hopefully get him before he can do more evil. You are fine and ready to smite, even if he kills more while you save that one. As you are only human, no god can expect you to stop all evil, only that which you have a choice and the power to do so.

That is the key, the power and choice. You chose to rush the bad guy, you are choosing to let the innocent die. Simple. Not worthy of a paladin.

>>48653562
>Force Barbarian bad cop/guard to write reports to the guard captain.
>He falls.
>All according to plan.

>>48653567
See >>48653505
You're being inconsistent and your morality isn't worth crap.

>>48653567
>You rush, you choose to let the innocent die so that you can have it easy and catch the bastard now. Evil act. You fall.

You're assuming a lot about my motivations.

I don't rush because I want an easy way out. I rush because I cannot trust that the bad-guy will keep his word, and have to operate on the assumption that the hostage could die no matter what I do.

Ergo, the hostage is already dead, and I might as well move to kill the hostage-taker immediately

>>48653557
Then you are playing some edgelord mary sue god of paladins rather then the original. I can't comment on it as it is far too edgy for me. I stick to historical codes of chivalry and virtues. You know, those things that all paladins are based on.

File: SwordArtJimProfit.png (279KB, 470x345px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 470x345px

>>48652523
I'm a paladin... not a white-knight. Probably help the guy out as I guarantee you if I cast detect evil right now all the negative energy is coming directly from the coochie.

At worst, it's just a man at the end of his rope and is breaking a law, oooh I'm TOTALLY going to side with the neutral to lawful evil cunt over a chaotic good bro. Sure thing kiddo...

>>48653595
You're either trolling or retarded and either way you should kill yourself.

>>48652523
Detect and see that he is evil.
Identity myself truthfully.
Tell him there's a risk of a an archer taking a shot at him while we talk and I don't want anyone to die.
Roll a helm of opposite alignment to him

>>48653567

>You rush, you choose to let the innocent die so that you can have it easy and catch the bastard now. Evil act. You fall.

Alternatively: You rush because you are trying to blitz him faster than he can kill her. After all, there is no garentee that he'll let the hostage go and this is genuinely the most reasonable way to keep them alive if you are unsure.

Note: You can't Ready a Coup De Grace (It's a full round, you can only ready a standard or quicker) and you also can't Coup De Grace someone who's fighting back. The odds of her dying before the paladin can beat the ever loving piss out of the kidnapper are pretty damn low unless this guy is a very powerful foe.

>>48653567
>You let the bastard go, but he kills the innocent anyway.

That sounds like a fall. We've established that the Paladin is responsible for the things his enemies do, so by letting that guy get away in the first place he's responsible for that innocents death.

>>48653562
Failing to prevent a murder, that he can stop, is a evil act. Failing to prevent a murder that he can't stop, is a neutral act. It really is that simple. Commiting an evil act, is against the code. Commiting a neutral act, is not.

All that is needed for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing.

It can't be explained better.

>>48653340
You keep assuming they'll abandon the hostage and let the paladin rush and murder them immediately afterwards. You do realize that people in these situations tend to take a hostage with them when they flee right? Because as you keep pointing out it is obviously the only thing that is keeping them from being attacked. Your entire argument falls apart if they just keep a hostage with them which is, you know, the entire point of using a hostage.

>>48653621
But he COULD prevent that murder. He just has to stop the bad guy from getting away.

>>48653562
It's become a shitty joke at this point, no sane gm that wants to keep his players would actually do any of this. It's just idiots here who think they are hilarious or just want attention so they make threads like these to pretend they are having a conversation to simulate social interaction and think they are clever "tricking" people into talking about inane shit.

File: SwordJimProfit2.jpg (137KB, 1920x1079px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1920x1079px

>>48653619
Actually it's the woman's fault. Why the hell was a woman out in public? Is this man her father? Brother perhaps? As I think we've established this is not her husband...

You all suck as paladins and have incorporated some sort of edgy "it's the current year" edition rather than upholding the sort of virtues you come into the paladin fold for.

>>48653590
No, I'm not. You are choosing the easy road. You are choosing evil and easy rather then try to go the longer, harder road that requires more effort and risks failure rather then save an innocent life. You are scum. Simple. Not worthy of being a paladin. Try Wizard. More your speed. You can get that right at least.

>>48653642

Heck, Paladins haven't even been able to fall for 2 entire editions at this point.

>>48653164

Could he sever his hand and throw it at the person and then use it to cast the touch spell?

Worst case scenario it'd be a sufficiently sacrifical thing to avoid the paladin falling, it could also distract the hostage taker long enough for more mundane means to be used as well.

>>48653198

Doubt it, it sounds like a touch spell, most of the hold [non-undead] spells are touch because otherwise they'd be broken as fuck.

>>48653567

Incompetence and impatience isn't evil. Does a paladin fall if they think that rushing is the best tactical option? If paladins fail at their job, does that mean they fall? Does their intent matter or their actions?

Honestly unless they do it for the reason of letting the hostage die, then its not an immoral act. Especially if they have the basic logic of 'If this bad guy gets away, he'll kill a lot more people than this one hostage'.

A paladin falling shouldn't be a 'gotcha' moment or something that they have to take into account for every single action. Falling should be something dramatic and rare and only done by paladins that are having their faiths and beliefs seriously challenged or broken.

>>48652671
Hire someone who specializes in stealthy extractions to rescue the kids from the crime lord, then kick the door down to his office and beat him over the head with his own fancy oak desk. Being a paladin doesn't mean you have to do everything alone.

>>48653595
Ahahahahahaha

Well, thanks anon. At least we're clear that we're not even talking about the same thing, and can stop arguing with each other.

>>48653655
Hahahahahaha

>>48653621
>Failing to prevent a murder, that he can stop, is a evil act.

So if the paladin is protecting a VIP and assassins burst out of the alley and one of them gets past him in the chaos and slits the VIPs throat then the Paladin falls?

>>48653274
In Pathfinder (I don't know about 3.5), even if the criminal gets a fluff immediate action autokill, the Paladin has a chance.

Assuming the Paladin has a 19 in Use Magic Device, and that he and his party can kill the criminal in one turn, he can use the next turn to walk to the hostage and use a scroll of Breath of Life for 1125 gp, or Reach Breath of Life for 1650 gp. Of course, the Cleric can cast these with no material components at 9th or 11th level.

In case someone says the Paladin falls as soon as the hostage dies, his UMD skill is not affected.

If the party is at 8th level, the Paladin and Cleric can both cast Shield Other on the hostage, each taking half the damage done to him. I'm not sure how this stacks, though.

>>48653655
>easy road
>spend the rest of your life wondering if you could've saved the hostage without letting the villain get away to kill again

No, YOU are the one choosing the easy road. You're saying "It's not my fault, I'm not responsible, I couldn't stop him." When you damn well could stop him, you just refused to take the risk that someone might see YOU as partially responsible for what happened. If anyone deserves to fall, it's cowards like you.

>>48653651
Yeah, actually, it's her fault too. She was just asking to get taken hostage.

It's everyones fault but the kidnapper that he started slitting throats.

>>48653651
Careful with the edge

>>48653595
I bet you're fun at parties.

>>48653682
paladins fall immediately upon taking any action after becoming paladins

>>48653615
More words to lie to yourself and excuse yourself from having chosen the evil path. There is no guarantee that he will kill the hostage while you are right there either. If you have to risk him getting away to save an innocent, it's not a question to a paladin. You save the life you can. Not by being stupid and charging, but by maneuvering to get the bad guy to abandon the hostage to run.

He has the hostage, as stated above, to either get away or buy time. Assuming he is trying to get away, as stated above, you let him to save the life. Simple.

Actually accomplishing said task, quite a bit less simple, but you still aim for that outcome. Rushing him, no matter how you explain it to yourself to make yourself feel better, is an evil act. You are choosing to put an innocent life at risk, rather then exercise patience and try to resolve the matter differently. You fall.

>>48653662
Yup, not gonna stop them though, the concept exists, therefore it means they can constantly post about it and tell everyone how wrong they are and how everything a Paladin does risks their powers because otherwise they wouldn't have everyone yell at them.

As they say, even negative interaction is still interaction.

On a lighter note, my current gm and our Paladin have done the whole fall thing, had to do with the story, they actually communicated about the subject and our party currently has a very grey paladin, no ooc pain or tears.(think Palpatine and Anakin but with a necromancer((me)) and the paladin, also less spinning)

File: ZarusIcon.jpg (15KB, 231x264px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 231x264px

>worshiping inhuman gods with their pansy ass morality.
If the hostage was weak enough to be captured then humanity is well rid of such weakness. Y'all be Lawful Supid heretics.

>>48653725
You keep repeating that but you're still wrong.

>>48653727
>also less spinning
a lack of spinning means they should both fall

>>48653725

>Rushing him, no matter how you explain it to yourself to make yourself feel better, is an evil act. You are choosing to put an innocent life at risk, rather then exercise patience and try to resolve the matter differently. You fall.

And it you DO save the hostage by rushing him? The odds are not in the hostage taker's favor unless he's carrying about some +5 worth of enchantments dagger.

>>48653655
I cannot trust the hostage-taker. I cannot trust his statement that if I let him go, he will release the hostage. I do not know him. I do not know what he is capable of.

How in the fuck is recognising my own limited information, and deciding to assume the worst, an evil act? And how in the fuck is that the "easy way out"?

>>48653725
>Assuming he is trying to get away, as stated above, you let him to save the life. Simple.
I cannot fucking assume that, for reasons stated above, so it is not fucking simple.

>>48653725
So if I let him go and he gets down a alley before deciding to slit the woman throat and dump her so she doesn't slow him down, do I fall or am I safe because I wasn't there to see it happen?

>>48653746
Well my necromancer did make up for the lack of spinning my killing over half of the early teir enemies with jolt, rolling max damage 90% of the time, figured he was channeling Palpatine.

Oh and our now grey pally has a home brewed negative energy sword he can summon.

>>48653636
I don't assume anything of the sort. Getting to that point that the bad guy has to abandon the hostage to get away, that is the tough part. The trick of the situation is to exercise patience and wisdom, to maneuver your opponent to the point that he has no option but to play your game rather then you play his.

God you people are so fucking stupid.

By initiating a hostage situation, the BG as made a scenario that you have to overcome. Simple. How do you get me and save this innocent? Most come up with, you can't so rush him. That is because they are evil and lack patience or wisdom. Those that are trying to act in accordance with said virtues on the other hand will try to maneuver the situation to change it. Trying to save the innocent is not wrong. It is not evil. It is the RIGHT thing to do. It's just fucking hard and not immediate. So a true paladin tries just that thing. If he accomplishes it, then great. He did it. If he doesn't, because the BG killed the innocent anyways, that is sad but better to have tried and failed then to be evil. And if he does save the innocent AND get the BG then he is fucking awesome and worthy of great praise and truly worthy of being called paladin.

>>48653666
Impatience is evil. It is greed and pride incarnate. A sin. Try again anon.

File: My Cat DMing.jpg (254KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 900x1200px

Stupid fucking mastermind threads are stupid.

>>48653795

While Patience is frequently praised in the bible, there is no mentions of impatience being a sin. Cite your source.

>>48653795
Depends on the God, YHWH, sure but maybe not to [fantasy God #153]

File: success.jpg (27KB, 960x739px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 960x739px

>>48652523
Innocent bystanders are the reason paladins have healing.

>>48653682
Nope. He couldn't stop them all, obviously. Choosing to not try, because he is likely to fail, that is evil. Then he falls.

But very different then hostage taking scenario defined above. Once the hostage is taken, then the paladin must try to save him a different way. By not fighting. Difficult for simpletons to understand, I know, but there it is.

>>48653805
It's fun to laugh a the mentally impaired, but I agree, it gets old.

>>48653786
So, just to be clear, it's not the Paladins responsibility what the hostage taker does to the woman after the paladin decides to let him go?

But it is his responsibility if the hostage taker kills her in front of him?

>>48653666
>Falling should be something dramatic and rare and only done by paladins that are having their faiths and beliefs seriously challenged or broken
I disagree with this part. The reason they're paladins in the first place is because they're virtuous. If they weren't, they wouldn't have been made paladins in the first place. Paladin isn't just "fighter with cool faith-based powers", it's a way of life. It HAS to be kinda strict, or the whole concept just makes no sense.

>>48653817

Actually, not even YHWH.

The closest there is to that is Galatians 5:22 which states it's a gift of the spirit to be patient but so is Joy in the same list. Someone being sad isn't a sin so you can't really say that impatience is stated to be one by such.

>>48653823

>But very different then hostage taking scenario defined above. Once the hostage is taken, then the paladin must try to save him a different way. By not fighting. Difficult for simpletons to understand, I know, but there it is.

Unless of course fighting is the most reasonable way to get the hostage back. After all, SWAT teams are called into hostage situations quite often for a reason. Heaven-SWAT is going to need to fight sometimes too.

>>48653786
Hahahahahahaha

>>48653823
But the Paladin obviously didn't try hard enough. He should have known that the assassins would try to draw him off and slip past his guard to kill the VIP. If he'd thought for just two seconds instead of starting to cleave and smite I'm sure he could have saved them, maybe looked around for a way to get the VIP to safety, at least taken a few knives in the back to buy a little more time.

He was just too stupid.

>>48653846
Don't forget about the sanctioned Rogue or Ranger snipers lining up a shot from an elevated position to take out the hostage taker should discussion break down.

>>48653837
Yeah, your right, but honestly not like this retard cares, he's probably switched targets to someone who seems less knowledgeable on this subject to get more attention

>>48653846
Yeah. but the current example is more like spetznaz than SWAT
>kill everyone, including the hostage
>HEH, AT LEAST WE KILLED THE BAD GUYS, EH?

>>48653702
No, you couldn't. He has the upper hand. Trying to force the situation rather then be patient and look for another option, that is evil. It is not cowardice to wait for the right moment. To out think evil and maneuver it until it plays by your rules. It is cowardice and laziness to simple lie to yourself and say you had no choice, the hostage was already dead. So I might as well rush and kill the BG now. That is wrong and stupid as well as cowardly.

Play the game, force the BG to make a stupid decision and you could get both the innocent and the BG. Don't play the game and force him, and you likely kill the innocent.

For the paladin, choosing to adopt an evil, reckless, and lazy plan is not an option. He is better then that. Better then you can understand.

>>48653247
Paladin takes out problem and uses lay on hands to heal the hostage.

>>48653786
Hey guy you didn't answer me >>48653760

Who's at fault if that happens?

>>48652523
If I were a pally:
>Oi, that's a nice set of teeth you have here, care if I borrow some?
>implying I give a shit about that bitch you're holding
>See this greatsword? Do you seriously think it won't cut through that meat shield you're holding?
>Oh, he already has a knife in his vitals. Thank you, rodue buddy!

>>48653867

Where has 'Kill the hostage' been stated. In every case it's been 'The hostage taker can't actually kill his hostage faster than the paladin can take him down'.

Which he literally can't. The rules don't allow a coup de grace as a readied action so the paladin gets his full charge and all his tricks before the hostage taker can try...and that provokes. So he's fucked if he tries to do it with the paladin in melee range.

Rushing him is honestly a really good strategy.

>>48653874
What if the killer is also some immaculate, perfect being that has total clarity and knows the outcome of the situation like your hypothetical paladin?

>>48652596

This.

If the hostage is hurt. She shall be given a proper burial in accordance with her beliefs. As is her right.

File: 1338121638491.jpg (48KB, 460x300px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 460x300px

>>48653750
If you have the complete and utter godlike power to stop him, then no don't fall. As you obviously are so far above the guy in power that he can't stop you, then it is not evil to use that power to save a life. But that is not the situation as was being set forth by the OP. The assumption is that the paladin can't stop the hostage taker.

File: image.gif (3MB, 300x237px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x237px

>>48653895
>buried the hurt
>not dead
Your God has some strange rituals friend

>>48653904

No? OP says nothing about the relative power levels and the guy in the picture isn't exactly the image of power.

Heck >>48653507 stops him with a literally level 1 ability.

>>48653874
Yes you could. Far better for the hostage to die than for the villain to get away to kill again. You're just a coward.

>>48653874
>HMMM LOOK AT ME GUYS I'M SO SMART AND MATURE HMMM

I'm still waiting for you to answer this post:
>>48653755

Please oh wise and mighty anon, why is it so evil to acknowledge my own limited perception, assume the worst, and act on that assumption?

File: 1336556286590.jpg (49KB, 640x556px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x556px

>>48653760
You are a moron. You don't walk away and just let him leave WITH the hostage. You make it so he has to abandon the hostage TO get away. Otherwise you have chosen to be evil by doing nothing.

>>48653904
I see no such assumption. I see >Wat do

You're the ignoble defeatist assuming the Paladin doesn't have anything in his bag of tricks that could save the hostage NOW.

>>48653805
If you really want your paladin to fall, look up the more obscure rules of his religion
If he can't eat fish, then arrange for him to get lost at sea
If he can't touch pigs, then train battle boars
If he can't let the criminal element live and must pursue them whenever he sees them, then send him to detroit

>>48653904
The question was
>Are (STANDARD LG!) paladins completely countered by hostages?

So the answer is no, if the paladin is powerful enough.

Where does OP say the paladin can't stop the criminal?

>>48653891
Considering even a peasant won't instadeath from the neck stab, and magic healing exists, hilariously enough your right considering you can just take a round to heal them then beat the piss out of the hostage taker.

File: hotshot.jpg (250KB, 2000x838px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 2000x838px

>>48652523

>>48653927
How do you stop his from taking the hostage when he leaves? Anything action you take that causes him to decide to slit the hostages throat will result if you falling. You can't do shit.

>>48653957
Grey_Paladin.jpeg

>>48653966
I get a better gm

>>48653927
Why would he let the hostage go if it puts you so perfectly over the barrel?

>>48653927

>You make it so he has to abandon the hostage TO get away.

Why would he do that? If you can't take any action against him (Or you'll fall in your stupid example) you have no ability to force him to give up the hostage. Giving up hostages IRL works under 'We'd rather no one die than everyone, so give up the hostage' not 'We'll never actually act against you so please give up the hostage?'

>>48653874
>>48653655
>>48653567
>>48653399
>>48653242
>>48652523
Basically, what you're saying is, a person can take a hostage and basically a paladin can't do shit, forever? The paladin has to just wait around and do nothing?

If there's two of them and they take it in turns to hold a knife to the guy's throat, the paladin is frozen in inaction and can never ever try to do anything, because if the guy's throat gets cut you're literally committing murder by attempting to stop a crime?


I don't think that pans out. If the guy is holding a knife to a hostage's throat and with the other hand methodically shooting each of the other five hostages in the head, would the paladin fall if he tries to bumrush the hostage taker?

>>48653814
Read the bible yourself. There are dozens of stories of impatience bringing ruin and condemnation. Saul and Samuel. Abraham and Sarah. The Jews of the Exodus and the Golden Calf. Learn to read anon.

>>48653987
Remember we're working on that inane kind of gm logic in this thread where God are so anal about their code that even look at someone the wrong way they strip their paladin of power

>>48652523
According to Gygax himself, a standard LG paladin is obligated to kill ex-criminals who have served their sentence and are certified LG so they can't be tempted to become Evil again.
Therefore it's not Evil to kill Good people. They go to the Good afterlife, they don't get a chance to become Evil in the future, so everyone wins! Kill all goodies!

>>48653992

The Golden Calf wasn't impatience. It was 'Hey guys, don't do this one specific thing' then later 'guys, what about that one specific thing I told you not to do'

Also:You still haven't cited a source that actually says that impatience is a sin or even a bad thing. Mostly because the word literally never turns up in the bible.

>>48653874
If the hostage taker says drop your weapon and close your eyes and then I'll shoot you in the throat or I'll kill this guy, then will you fall if you don't let the guy kill you?

>>48654015

Clearly yes under this logic!

>>48653927
"Don't follow me or I kill the hostage.

Bam. If you try to follow him he kills the hostage and you fall instantaneously.

He gets away and tortures the hostage to death.

>>48653795

Having a character flaw is not a sin. Paladins are people that take a divine code, they are not divine beings. If a God only accepted perfect people with perfect temperment and that never waivered or failed, paladins either wouldn't exist or they'd be the most boring player characters.

>>48653835

Again, there's a difference between a virtuous person and a perfect person. If a person makes a mistake with tragic consequences as a result of flaws or other factors they can still be a paladin. If the person's very core beliefs and values of their codes are challenged, and they fail to persevere whilst keeping within their codes then that's grounds for a dramatic fall.

It's like every other class, a paladin should be a person as well as a religious warrior. Obviously it'll be a big part of the character, but it's likely to not be the only part of their personality and varying aspects of their personality may clash with their faith.

>>48652523
God of Merciful Good
>Someone's hands are bound, now, but they are not mine. What is at stake right now is not her life, no, it's your eternity. Will you throw yourself to damnation, or at the mercy of the light?

God of Hard Good
>Spill her blood and I will coat the walls with such gore that only armageddon will wipe away the remnants of your passage to hell.

God of War
>ONLY SINNERS GET TAKEN HOSTAGE, SMITE AND CLEAVE

File: 1342258336267.jpg (153KB, 640x512px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 640x512px

>>48653861
God loves simpletons too. As he made so many of them, like yourself.

So obviously a different scenario then OP's. Said paladin would not fall. Just because he fell for a trap. He only falls by choosing to act in accordance with evil. If he has no power over the situation, he can't fall. If he literally cannot stop it. He can't be held accountable. If he tries and fails, then he doesn't fall, UNLESS by trying he commits evil. If the only way to win the game is be evil, then the only righteous answer is not to play.

>>48653992
In those stories, they commit evil acts out of impatience. So, say, if they had build a farm instead of an idol, or adopted instead of impregnating the servant, nothing bad would have happened.
If the act isn't evil, then doing it swiftly isn't evil.

>wizard or cleric casts hold person
Situation resolved!

>>48653892
Then he is a god and beyond the paladin's ability to stop. He can't fall for trying the best he can, by living to his code.

Even if the hostage is harmed, I have heal and revival spells, so even if her throat gets slit, I can save the hostage.

Checkmate, evildoer.

File: image.png (2KB, 320x200px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 320x200px

>>48654037
>Spill her blood and I will coat the walls with such gore that only armageddon will wipe away the remnants of your passage to hell.
Damn anon that's good.

>>48653925
No, you are just a fool who can't see past his own sloped neanderthal forehead. To the paladin, it's never better for the innocent to die. You can't see that, go to other threads that you can actually understand. Try the 40k ones. Or the elf slave, what do? They are about your speed.

>>48652523
If we are going to talk about paladins falling, we must first decide what is an evil act. Then once we agree on what an evil act is, we can see if the situation fits our criteria.

I propose the following definition:

1. You know an action (or lack of action) is harmful to yourself or others.
2. You freely choose to do such an action.


In a hostage situation, you don't have complete free will to act due to your reliance on the free will of the criminal to cooperate, so you can't fall because of trying your best to do what is right.

Is this just a big thread to give people ideas on how to make their paladin friend fall for lulz?

>>48653472
Its just morally bankrupt, bitter scumbags who are obsessed with making Paladins fall. The mere idea of a truly good person offends them so they construct situations where Paladins always fall. Even though they are too stupid to understand how falling actually works.

>>48654103
No it's a "I'm starved for social interaction so I'll make a thread to simulate it and make myself feel clever" thread.

>>48653242

From the SRD:
>Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.

Committing murdering someone is an evil act.

Failing to prevent a murder is a neutral act.

Protecting the innocent is a good act.

A paladin won't fall for committing a neutral act, and considering he is by his code driven to punish those who harm or threaten innocents, he's still doing a paladin's job by attempting to kill the guy.

Even if the paladin "commits murder" by approaching this hostage taker, he's neither having fun nor is he turning a profit, and so he's still in the clear.

>>48654113
Or that it's not really even a thing in later editions anymore.

>>48654096
>To the paladin, it's never better for the innocent to die
The paladin cannot protect the innocent here. He's already failed by having them put in this situation.

The paladin's code in fact forbades that those who threaten innocents be left unpunished, so he will fall if he a: associate with evil characters (bargain with evil) or b: fail to punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Three things in the paladin code urges them to kill, to maim, to slaughter those who insult the innocent.

Nowhere in the paladin's creed is there a clause saying you must bargain with evil to save innocents.

>>48654096
Except that's wrong and you're retarded.

>>48652523
I'd talk to him get him to know that I'm on his side and that we just want what's best for him and in an act of trust go to him unarmed to take the hostage's place.
Then dig my thumbs into his eye sockets till the screaming stops.

File: 1336092532340.jpg (38KB, 500x340px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x340px

>>48653966
You are hurting my soul with your stupidity.

The hostage taker only takes the hostage BECAUSE as long as he has the hostage, you can't attack him. So you follow him. Everywhere he goes until he lets the hostage go. If he slices the hostage's throat while you follow, then he chose the evil path. Time to smite. If he doesn't, then the innocent is still alive, keep going. If he lets the innocent go, because it is really fucking difficult to run full tilt while DRAGGING A FUCKING PERSON AROUND. Then hey, mission accomplished.

And if during that whole fucking situation, THAT YOU COULDN'T FUCKING UNDERSTAND WITHOUT EVERYTHING WRITTEN OUT, you find a way, or have the power to get the innocent to safety AND get him, with no chance of the innocent getting killed; Then you do it.

>>48654178
But you let him go, and that's evil.

>>48654178
So why can't you approach the hostage? If you approach the hostage taker, and the guy cuts the hostage's throat, then he chose the evil path. Time to smite.

Isn't that literally exactly the same logic?

File: 1342242414318.jpg (102KB, 467x500px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 467x500px

>>48654155
Again, edgelord paladin gods... I can't comment on. I go by the old codes of virtues and chivalry. Sorry.

>>48654178
And when he tells you not to follow or he'll kill the hostage?

>>48654207
Literally the default code, retard.

If a person dies, and a paladin isn't around. Does he still fall?

>>48654228
yes

>>48654228
Obviously whichever choice the paladin made was the wrong one, so yes.

>>48654178
Or you could just use your various Paladin abilities to stop him in a minute and move on to the next evildoer.

Hold person the hostage taker.

Use the defender ability that the other anon mentioned.

Heal/Revive the hostage.

Some paladins in 5e get teleport spells. Literally teleport behind him.

Use command to make him drop the knife.

Use regular charisma rolls to get him to surrender.

Buff the hostage into the high heavens and let them kick the villain's ass.

Use a stun spell and then beat his ass.

I could keep going.

>>48652523
Shoot the hostage. Often times you can shoot the hostage through the shoulder and strike a critical point on the hostage taker.

>>48654203
No, it really isn't. And the fact that you can't see that hurts me anon. Hurts me in ways that make me wish for planet shattering comets and virulent plagues.

Forcing the situation by attacking is not the same as waiting, watching, and following. By standing by, ready to jump to action, you are taking a path that has a decent chance of letting the innocent live. Every hostage taker knows that the moment the hostage is dead, so is he. Otherwise, why take a hostage? If you are powerful enough to fight and stop the paladin in the first place, why not just kill him and the innocent at your pleasure? Or just walk away. If the BG is so powerful, why take a hostage? If the paladin can immediately, with no chance of failure, secure the hostage, WHY IS THERE A FUCKING HOSTAGE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

You all need to be slapped and sterilized so you never happen again.

>>48654207
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/paladin.htm

>Code of Conduct
>A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

>Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

>Associates
>While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Please note:
>paladin’s code requires
>punish those who harm or threaten innocents
>requires
>punish

It's not under discussion. Kantian logic dictates the evildoer MUST NOT GET AWAY.

>>48652523
Sanctuary
1st-level Abjuration

Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V,S,M
Duration: 1 minute

You ward a creature within range against attack. Until the spell ends, any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature must choose a new target or lose the attack or spell. This spell doesn't protect the warded creature from area effects, such as the explosion of a fireball.
If the warded creature makes an attack or casts a spell that affects an enemy creature, this spell ends.

>>48654272
>Forcing the situation by attacking is not the same as waiting, watching, and following.

The moment the hostage taker tells you he'll kill the hostage if you try to follow, it becomes the EXACT SAME SITUATION.

>>48654178
So let me get this straight. If the hostage taker decides to slit his hostages throat because you place him under physical duress (you are charging him to attempt to save the hostage), you fall.

But if the hostage taker decides to slit the hostages throat because you place him under an an equal if not greater amount of emotional duress (you following him everywhere, even as he shouts for you to back down or he'll kill the hostage) then its his responsibility and nothing you did prompted his actions.

>>48653602
being a mgtow retard should make a paladin fall immediately

but i did lol out loud at this post

File: 1334980905791.png (396KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 600x450px

>>48654222
Really? So Sir Galahad walked around with a shield and no sword because he what? Was out to slay all those who insult the innocent with his... ? Really... I can figure it out. Why, if the paladin creed of chivalry and virtue includes slaughter and maiming, why the knights of the round table even accepted a knight with no sword. And how only that knight was able to find the holy grail...

Boggles the mind.

>>48654316
We're not talking about the arthurian legends here, we're talking about D&D paladins.

>>48654332
Specifically, the ones before 4E with defined codes they must follow.

>>48654272
>why take a hostage? If you are powerful enough to fight and stop the paladin in the first place, why not just kill him and the innocent at your pleasure? Or just walk away. If the BG is so powerful, why take a hostage? If the paladin can immediately, with no chance of failure, secure the hostage, WHY IS THERE A FUCKING HOSTAGE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

The hostage is there to manipulate the paladin into doing something that they would not normally condone, so that the evildoer may do further evil things.

Do YOU understand now?

The only reason to take hostages is to slow you down so more evil can happen. Hostage taking WON'T happen if the evildoers know hostages won't stop them from dying. They'll take MORE hostages when they realise you'll back off immediately when they threaten someone.

They'll start holding people to ransom. They'll start making demands. They'll start using innocents as leverage. They'll take random people off the streets and say if the paladins don't withdraw from the region, people will start ending up dead. If the government doesn't pay them 20 million gold pieces they're going to start murdering people. They're going to start rigging public areas with alchemist's fire and threatening to set them off.

So no. What happens is two paladins circle round the guy, crossbows aimed at the hostage taker's head. And he can give up right now, or he can commit murder and die, or he can just die in 20 seconds time when one of them gets a clean shot off.

Anything less is giving into evil demands.

>>48652523
I was playing a game last month where the Paladin ran into this exact situation. Kicks open a door, sees badguy holding (assumed) innocent NPC hostage. Paladin rolls to attack badguy, flubs his roll and shanks hostage instead. Thankfully, she survives, but the badguy gets away to sound the alarm, further complicating our already very complicated prison break. It was a fun session.

>>48654296
Stop trying, you can't argue with this level of cognitive dissonance.

>>48654208
You tell him, "Sorry, I have to make sure the hostage stay alive. I'm going to follow you until you release her." Then he equates releasing her with getting away and either chooses to try it, or say fuck it and kills the hostage. He kills the hostage, smite time. He doesn't, the innocent is still alive, keep going. Until he makes that choice, there is still hope. Trying to rush him and HOPE that he doesn't is far different then just being there until he decides which path is is about to take. At that point, you have chosen to risk innocent life on just your own hubris. Your own impatience and laziness. If you are so powerful, that there was no chance of failure, then no, you don't fall. But if there is a chance of failure, and you do fail to secure the hostage in your greed, then yes, you fall. If on the other hand, you succeed, because you were right, then no of course you don't fall. You got the innocent AND the BG. Way to go paladin.

>>48654316
Sir lancelot boozed, drank people under the table and smote ALL THE EVIL.

He's still a goddamn arthurian legend.

>>48654272
For money. You pay him all your gold and he promises to let the hostage go. Do you fall if you don't pay up? If not, why not?

>>48654399
>At that point, you have chosen to risk innocent life on just your own hubris.

That's also what you do when you say

> "Sorry, I have to make sure the hostage stay alive. I'm going to follow you until you release her."
and keep following him. How does willingly and knowingly endangering the hostages life keep you from falling when you push him to far?

>>48654281
Yes, and so you will be punished for harming innocents when, rather then work around the problem, you force the situation to an immediate conclusion that results in the death, therefore harm, of innocents. You fail, you fall.

File: TLG.jpg (31KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 500x333px

>>48652523
No, they just use the favorite tactic of russian spetsnaz. They leave no survivors.

>>48654442
Except you're not harming innocents. The villain is harming innocents. Huge difference, there.

>>48654442
Come back when your way leads to the guy getting away and everyone starts using hostages against you, and getting away with worse and worse crimes because every time they act against you, they have a hostage so you're powerless.

All they need is a crossbow, so they shoot you in the leg, while holding their guy hostage. You can hold your honour high when the guy gets away to kill a dozen more people. You can say that you made the right choice while more people die.

>>48654399
You're still responsible. You're still the one pushing his buttons in the scenario where you follow him. Coercing him emotionally is no different than coercing him physically.

You fall.

>>48654296
Actually no it isn't. And again, so bad at seeing basic logic. Forcing by attacking, and failing, is different then simple being there watching. It seems like it is the same only to those without patience. If you tell him, no, I'm staying with the hostage until she is safe, you are trying for the best you can do, assuming you can't just fix the situation with your godlike powers. Assuming the situation means something, that the hostage is in actual danger, and you can't just force it right, but also assuming that the hostage taker is not so powerful as to be unable to be stopped, then you have to play along until this point. This is the decision point. This is where he, THE HOSTAGE TAKER, has to decide to be evil and cut the innocent's throat, or keep playing the game to get away. At that point, you force the decision to be evil onto the hostage taker. Then, it is no longer your soul, but his. By simply following, you are commiting no evil.

If you take action, that results in the harm of innocent, it's your soul. So you force it with violence, and fail, then you fall. Impatience is greed and pride, both of which are sins.

>>48654311
Close to correct, yes. He chooses evil at the point that he undertakes a violent action. You do the same. Once you force it to violence, YOU are responsible for the violence. If he forces the violence, HE is responsible for the violence. It's the violence that takes the life of the innocent. The one responsible for it suffers the stain on the soul. Simple really. But so difficult for morons to understand.

File: 1340963982591.jpg (36KB, 599x479px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 599x479px

>>48654332
>>48654361
Sorry, again I don't do edgelord paladin codes. I go by chivalry and virtues.

>>48654565
>If you take action, that results in the harm of innocent, it's your soul.

This, right here, is what makes the two the exact same. You're still doing the exact thing that he has told you will make him kill the hostage and thus causing him to kill the hostage. So either both cause you to fall, or neither does.

>>48654658
Then go back to /his/ or whatever shithole you crawled in from, because you clearly want nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

>>48654470
I can't find it but I remember this one picture on how different spec ops teams get results.
Situation: 5 terrorists, 10 hostages
Spetsnaz results: No spetsnaz casualties, 25 dead.

File: 1338950603547.jpg (41KB, 500x459px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x459px

>>48654406
And he is the Arthurian legend of a FAILURE as a knight, friend, and person.

>>48654565
You seem to be laboring under the assumption that if you rush the guy back when he first takes the hostage then there's no chance that he'll just drop the knife and try to run for it. That he doesn't have the balls.

By following and tormenting him emotionally like you are you're actually making the situation worse if you've got someone like that. You closing in. You're making him jumpy. He's starting to think there's no way out. He would have let the hostage go if he'd just gotten away, but now it looks like this fucker is going to cleave a smite him no matter what. What do I do? What do I do? There's no way out! Stop, don't come any closer!

Then he cuts a throat almost by accident because you cornered him and forced him into a heightened emotional state. Not like you'll ever realize that after you've cleaved and smote. You'll go along conscience clear, because it's not your responsibility. You're the good paladin. You waited and watched.

>>48654557
Nope. As pointed out, it's the violence that condemns the soul. Both the innocent's, to whatever fate their live has led them to, and the instigator of the violent confrontation. Who ever starts the violence, he is the one that is held accountable. Simple really.

File: hostage situation solutions.png (328KB, 1306x5702px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1306x5702px

>>48654686
Found it.

>>48652523
CLEAVE AND SMITE
Heal hostage afterwards

>>48653920
"it's only a stubbed toe, I swear I'm fine guys"

"Sorry my son, our God demands it"

Sounds like a plot-hook to me

>>48654721
Paladins aren't priests. They're not cops. They're holy warriors. If violence condemns the soul, then every last paladin will go to hell.

>>48654677
>/his/ or whatever shithole you crawled in from,
Another anon here.
Is /his/ that bad?
I've never really hung out there.

>>48654565
What happens if you know he will get away 100% if you don't intervene, and you know he will kill the hostage once he's out of sight?

For example, he's on a cart and you're in heavy plate on foot, and can't keep pace if his companion finishes hooking the horse to the cart?

>>48654633
The paladin isn't the one that forced it to violence. The violence started when a man grabbed someone and put a knife to their throat.

You are blaming the victims for the actions of the villain. That's fucked.

>>48654721
Then why should you get off scot-free for inflicting emotional violence, psychological abuse, on the hostage taker?

>>48654715
>By following and tormenting him emotionally like you are you're actually making the situation worse if you've got someone like that. You closing in. You're making him jumpy. He's starting to think there's no way out. He would have let the hostage go if he'd just gotten away, but now it looks like this fucker is going to cleave a smite him no matter what. What do I do? What do I do? There's no way out! Stop, don't come any closer!

Paladins don't go after thieves. Thieves know not to fuck with paladins.

Paladins go after shit like grand fucking vizirs and cultists hellbent on summoning the gods that end the world.

The "good paladin" just doomed the fucking world. You fucktard.

>>48654715
And you are gambling your soul and the innocent's on the assumption that he won't just kill the innocent if he knows he is going to die as well. Gambling, something of a no-no to people of Chivalry and Virtue. And even something of a no-no for Lawful Good paladins I presume.

And yes, I am actually making the situation worse. Because I, in the place of the paladin, would be judgement, waiting to see what he chooses to do. He lets her go, he may live. He kills her, his is going to die and be judged for his sins, right there. RIGHT there, I would be the Lord's instrument. He divine retribution for the BG's sins of whatever came before, and murder.

And no problems with the last scenario either. He chose to have a knife at the innocent's throat. If he was coward from the beginning, he should have just run. Instead he put another at risk because of his sins. His is responsible for her death. He will then be judged.

Until it is time to act, it is best to be patient. That is the virtue and chivalry of a paladin. He takes the righteous path, when so many others can't or don't wish to.

>>48654823
>taking risks is the same as gambling
Nah, you're just retarded.

>>48653002
This must be bait.

They explicitly aren't the paladins actions. A paladin has to knowingly and willingly break a code to fall, usually with intent of evil as well. The paladin isn't the one holding the hostage or doing the deed of killing him, and it isn't the paladins fault for the criminal to kill him either, unless the paladin explicitly said, "kill him, I don't care." even then, you could argue that couldn't be enough to explicitly break his vows depending on the code.

I personally think falling has a lot more to do with a paladin knowingly and willingly embracing an evil deed, rather than failing to properly carry out his duty. Its all about what the paladin thinks is right and wrong, not necessarily the higher power, since paladinhood is a choice of personal lifestyle.

>>48652816
>Abyss has 1000000000000 demons
>world has 10000 paladins
>10000 demons grab a hostage and stall forever
>9999999000000000 demons ransack the earth without any paladins to stop them
>demons live forever so the paladins all die of old age
your theories are wrong

>>48654767
On a good day, there are some decent threads about actual history. On a bad day, it's religious shitposting, historical shitposting, racist shitposting and threads about the train dilemma.

>>48654721
>Who ever starts the violence, he is the one that is held accountable. Simple really.
>>48654715
>By following and tormenting him emotionally like you are
The hostage taker is already commiting emotional violence upon the hostage by holding a knife to their throat.
You must act now as the hostage taker has become violent.

>>48654721
>Who ever starts the violence, he is the one that is held accountable.

So the guy that grabbed a woman and put a knife to her throat. Glad we're finally on the same page when it comes to responsibility.

>>48654823
>Because I, in the place of the paladin, would be judgement, waiting to see what he chooses to do.

I'd ask who the hell you think you are, but that's blindingly obvious.

>>48654754
Again, so fucking stupid. It's the violence that brings the determination of the souls. If the violence saves innocents lives or punishes the wicked, it is not evil. If the violence results in the death of innocents, then it is evil. Learn to read anon. When you choose violence, you are making the statement to the Lord that you deem the situation to be determined NOW. You bring judgement NOW. If you are incorrect in that judgement, you are responsible. Attacking a hostage taker and forcing him to kill the hostage, is evil. It is greedy and prideful. Especially if you can just wait and have a chance to save the innocent's life.

>>48654721
>violence

Are you so deranged you think violence is inherently evil or that its wrong to initiate violence to stop evil?

Are you such a twisted, spiteful person you think evil should always get to attack first?

>>48654786
Actually no. It is the threat of violence. Different thing, but I understand that you are a moron anon. I can see why you can't tell the difference.

>>48654819
Show me in the rules where it says Paladin's can't catch thieves. What, you think there's always an evil cult, or an orcich army, or a demon warlord stomping around? Do good where you can, however you can.

>>48654859
Anon, the world was screwed anyway
The paladins are outnumbered 100,000,000 to 1

Rolled 16 + 3 (1d20 + 3)

>>48652671

You seem to be a little misguided. I am not a hero. I'm not here to save lives. I am your assassin. I don't give a shit what you do, as long as by the end of the day you're 6 feet under and pushing up daisies.

Roll deception

>ITT: Idiot with superiority complex lectures people on his incorrect interpretation of the chivalric code (a code most knights didn't care to follow anyway) in an attempt to apply it to TTRPGs with differing rules.

>>48654924
What happens if you can't wait?
What happens if you KNOW the guy is going to do terrible things?

Is sometimes saving innocents worth the price of one knight's honour and one innocent?

>>48654947
Grabbing someone and putting a knife to their throat is initiating violence you nutcase.

When a mugger pulls a knife THAT is the instant that violence starts and that is why its morally acceptable to shoot him. You don't have to wait until he fucking stabs you.

>>48654947
No, the threat of violence is telling someone that you'll kick their ass or that if they don't pay up you'll burn down their store.

If someone has been grabbed and had a knife pressed up against their throat, violence has commenced.

>>48654955
Paladins wouldn't bother trying to smite a thief holding a knife to a guy's throat. If it's just a petty thief sure, let the guy scarper. Hell, just give the guy a lecture.

If the guy is a serial genocider? He isn't getting away.

>>48654811
Emotional violence is a modern anachronism when being applied to medieval thought, such as the ideals of a paladin. As is psychological abuse. It's a logical fallacy to try to apply it. It doesn't work. By Chivarly and Virtue, the hostage take took that action that condemned his soul. It matters not what difficulties he was under. He chose evil rather then suffer the consequences for his actions and beg mercy. As a paladin you are required to offer mercy, as such he is guaranteed it. The "abuse" as you call it, pathetic really, is merely the weight of his sins coming back to him. He has a choice. He makes the sinful one, that is his decision.

Clearly the lawful good solution would be to kill the hostage first to remove the miscreant's bargaining chip. Then make a new offer, if he gives up quietly you can ensure a quick death from the heads man rather than being put to the question on the rack.

>>48654819
The "good paladin" needs to train on something anon. You don't start with taking down viziers and demon summoning cultists. You need to train up to that.

>>48654947
>putting knife to throat = threat of violence
I the paladin am not committing violence on the hostage taker. However I am attempting to threaten violence by moving my sword to the hostage taker's throat.

Your move, Sir Galahad .

>>48655054
Then he's only a squire, and can't be judged so harshly.

Losing a hostage will be a good learning experience.

>>48655023
>lecture

At the absolute minimum he needs a real punishment, he put a knife to someone's throat for gods sake.

>>48655026
How about you talk about something relevant. DnD Paladins are required to punish evil doers by the code. Mercy is beheading him with your sword instead of having him hung.

>>48655023
He didn't say he was letting the hostage taker go. He said he was following him.
>>48655026
>Emotional violence is a modern anachronism
>Modern Anachronism
>Anachronism
Motherfucker have you ever played Dungeons and Dragons?

BITCH IF IM A PALADI. YOU KNOW I GOT MY SQUAD AT MY BACK. I GOT THE ROGUE AND RANGER ON THE ROOF LIKE GOD DAMN SWAT SNIPERS. I GOT THE WIZARD IN THE CROWD WAITING TO CAST SLEEP ON THAT BITXH. I GOT THE BARD UP FRONT TO HELP ME WITH ME CHARISMA TESTS AND BACK ME UP. AND YOU FUCKING KNOW AS A PALADIN I GOT THE OG GOD ON NY BACK.

YOU KNOW WHAT I DO? I GET DOWN ON MY KNEES AND PRAY FROM WISDOM, BECAUSE IF I GET STRENGTH IMMA SLAP THE SHIT OUT OF THIS FOOL.

WHAT KIND OF FUCKING ADVENTURES DON'T HAVE THE GOD DAMN SQUAD WITH THEM TO BACK THEM UP? SHAMEFUL. BAKA SENPAI.

>>48655080
>>48655054
>the great evil, the one who slaughtered half the nation, who killed your loved one and drank the blood of the king
>he's holding a knife to the throat of a child

>you recognise the great evil
>it's that petty thief you let get away at the start of the campaign because he took a hostage

>>48655171
I know you're being literal here, but I much prefer the metaphorical read of this situation.

Why do the people who love the "your paladin's always gonna fall because of my clever moral quandary" meme seem to think that falling is an automatic occurrence? A paladin's power is god-given, and the paladin's god takes them away. A mortal paladin is fallible, and is judged by their god as such. If they give all that they have for what is good and what is right to honor their god, they will continued to be blessed for their devotion.

This is why I don't play with people who have an insatiable desire to use a fantasy environment as a vehicle for their grievances against religion.

>>48654864
Again, emotional violence, is some sjw shit that doesn't apply to medieval fantasy. See anachronism. Go read anon, it is helpful to both you and others. He chooses how he acts. His action has brought us to this situation where everyone has a choice. The paladin can choose to rush the BG, but then he is responsible for the outcome. If the innocent dies, the paladin falls. Simple as that. The paladin can choose to let it ride and look for a chance to save the innocent and/or get the BG. But again, he is responsible. So if he just walks away he falls. So he has to be patient and wait for his best opportunity. If the BG chooses to slit the throat, when no violence has been initiated, the paladin is free to do what he probably wanted to do at the beginning. If the BG abandons the hostage to run, paladin is good to chase after, once he is sure the hostage is safe. If the BG keeps threatening the hostage but does nothing, they are both locked in the situation until one or the other breaks. As the paladin should be a creature of intense virtue and righteousness, I would bet on the paladin.

Unless it was played by any of you. Then I would bet on the bad guy, as he is way more intelligent.

>>48654865
Nope. Because again, you are a moron and can't determine threat of violence versus actual violence.

Unless you actually have learned something and realized you were wrong and are apoligizing. In which case, sure. Good to finally see someone learn on the internet. You actually have repaired some of the damage to my soul that reading this thread has caused.

>>48652869
But if you kill him, he wins.

File: 1342122207340.jpg (144KB, 771x583px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 771x583px

>>48654936
LOL. A modern atheist fool calling someone who is teaching about the traditions of mercy, patience and justice a twisted spiteful person. Oh I love irony so much. Thanks anon. I feel better.

>>48655383
Grabbing someone and putting a knife on their throat is, in fact, actual violence. You're just retarded.

File: 1409201636611.jpg (50KB, 617x435px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 617x435px

>>48655000
No. That is a threat. Even in modern law, you are of course, wrong. Well done anon. You fucked up in the interpretation of justice from MULTIPLE millennia.

>>48655345
The bad guy initiated violence when he held a knife to an innocents fault. You need to stop repeating this insane, pro criminal nonsense.

>>48655383
So if someone puts a knife up to your throat, you can feel the blade pressing up against your skin, that's not violence?

>>48655444
Look up the definition of assault in modern law

>>48655444
>In criminal and civil law, assault is an attempt to initiate harmful or offensive contact with a person, or a threat to do so. It is distinct from battery, which refers to the actual achievement of such contact.

Are you saying it's nonviolent to assault someone?

>>48655444
>>48655383

Approaching someone also isn't violence. It's a threat. Until the paladin starts swinging, he hasn't committed violence.

>>48655066
Ok, then he walks away with the hostage. As you are a paladin, he knows you can't actually initiate the violence without falling. Your move Edgelord Batman.

If necessary, I can play stupid as well. And as you can understand nothing else, here we are.

>>48655492
>initiating violence makes you fall

Except it doesn't because that would be utterly absurd. You are not required to let a bad guy murder an innocent or hit you first before you use force to stop him.

>>48652523
Well, in the most recent edition, paladins are no longer obliged to be LG, and none are really punished for the death of a hostage.

Of the oaths, however, vengeance cares the least. A vengeance paladin is definitely playing the "you kill them, there's nothing stopping me from hurting you" card.

>>48655345
The Earth didn't actually move around the sun because some idiots way back when thought it didn't. Emotional duress doesn't stop being a thing just because no one realizes it's a thing, and I think beings as powerful and wise as gods would be able to tell whether or not something is in fact a thing. Gods are the ones that decide whether or not a paladin falls.

So either they recognize that putting someone under duress makes the paladin responsible for the hostage takers actions and the paladin falls when the hostage taker cuts the hostages throat or they recognize that the hostage takers actions are, no matter what type of duress he's under, his own and the paladin doesn't fall.

>>48655492
>As you are a paladin, he knows you can't actually initiate the violence without falling
Actually, when I have the blade in position at the guy's throat, I have a 100% chance of removing the blade from the hostage takers throat. Then I have saved the hostage and now have him at MY mercy, where he can surrender or die.

You have at that point outmaneuvered the hostage taker and secured the hostage.

Why the fuck does /tg/ think that all paladins are Pacifist Retards?

File: 1329167856163.jpg (46KB, 418x604px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 418x604px

>>48655480
I have. And it is not assault to pull a knife from it's holder into my hand as I was point out that >>48655000 was incorrect in his second sentence. The violence doesn't start with threats, and most especially doesn't start with just having a knife in hand. As above moron stated.

Violence starts, yes with the hostage being grabbed, and then ENDs. Right there. From there threatening begins. The threat of violence is being used to hold back the paladin from assaulting the BG. Not a threat against the paladin, but against the innocent. So as the paladin, is in theory not of a means to stop it, otherwise as pointed above it is all moot, he has to let it ride until the violence starts again, or until he can secure the hostage.

Honestly I'm bored now. Trying to educate retards has gotten dull. Later.

>>48655383
So a paladin can't draw his sword and save someone if he see's them being menaced with a knife, because that's an act of violence. He has to wait until that person has been stabbed to rescue them.

>>48655530
Anon, you're using the wrong technique.
We covered that, if we assume that the threat is an act of violence, then the paladin may approach without falling.
So he said that the threat is not an act of violence. Then both sides pointed out how ridiculous this assumption is.
You don't need to win this scenario, he already admitted that it doesn't work.

>>48655579
'/tg/' doesn't, morally bankrupt assholes who want the good guys to be useless push that idea.

They cannot handle the fact that a Paladin can outright execute violent criminals and be 100% morally correct in doing so.

File: image.jpg (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

>>48654748
>>48654748
Now your talking,
>party arrived in town to watch the funeral procession of the "late" son of the blacksmith, screams for help aimed at the party muffled by his death mask.

>>48655582
No, violence continues for as long as the knife is at her throat. Him and the paladin are not taking turns.

>>48655582
>paladins are stopped by hostage taking
no they aren't
>yes they are, if they attempt to do anything they fall.
>therefore I'm right because I say I'm right
k

>>48655620
That's usually how these kinds of conversations go, yeah.

>>48655582
Don't ever put yourself in a position where you're responsible for anyone.

>>48655593
He has not admitted anything, he is still pushing his immoral and factually incorrect idea that its not an act of violence to hold a knife to someone's throat.

>>48655603
Yeah. This thread is so fucking stupid.

>>48655582
It was like trying to argue logic with a sovereign citizen. I had fun. God speed.

>>48655713
Huh think about it yeah it kinda is.

>>48652547
>Cops
>LG

Pick one.

>>48652671
I Command him to do something that would neutralize his threat - perhaps grovel, or run. Then I walk up and hit him with my maul.

That spell is in the Paladin list for a reason, you realize. Alternately, I turn to the Sorcerer and ask him to make the nice crime lord take a nap. Or I suggest that the Ranger shoot him in the face. Really, I've got a whole host of options.

>>48652766
You do realize that Command is a Paladin spell, right?

File: dare you enter my magical realm.jpg (68KB, 630x417px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 630x417px

>>48653957
Pure law. He is not just lawful neutral. He IS the law. If some wizard decided to summon a law-elemental, he would get Judge Dredd.

Imagine the possibilites.

>Pic related: All these idiots in this thread going "NUH UH the paladin falls in my strictly defined situation because I say so"

>>48652976
>Waiting for an enemy to give you an opportunity is not sloth. Never will be. War, and all battles, are won by making the least number of mistakes and capitalizing on as many of the enemy's mistakes as possible.
This is an interesting idea but isn't really right.
Most of the world's successful generals in history* espouse aggressive tactics, not just waiting around to respond to your enemy. You instead force your adversary to make a choice under time pressure, in this case the paladin rushing the kidnapper, and hope he makes a mistake.

*Alexander, Napoleon, Genghis Khan etc.

>>48652547
Yes

File: dredd visits other countries.png (439KB, 1300x1462px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 1300x1462px

>>48656361
>Dredd
>Lawful Neutral

He killed half a billion civilians in the Apocalypse War
He broke out of a transport taking him to Titan during The Day The Law Died, after being convicted lawfully by the Chief Judge
He killed children with airstrikes during the Regime Change arc

He's solidly Lawful Evil

File: Pal1.jpg (252KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 640x427px

>negotiate

or

>smite from across the room

whichever fits the situation

>>48652766
Yeah? The thief is using said free will to endanger the life of an innocent. Free will revoked long enough to slap the cuffs on him and stomp him in the nuts. Any form of detainment or incarceration violates their free will. This just saves lives in the process.

>>48652816
>I've been playing this game for over thirty years with the same person, and this is how I always resolve it. Anyone that disagrees with me just doesn't know the proper way to deal with hostage situations created by my friend Frank.

>>48655870

I want BLM to leave

>>48652743

Autism right here. Paladins fall by willfully breaking their code, not from trying and failing.

>>48653164

No, in 3.PF Hold Person is Medium range, in 5e it's 60 ft.

>>48653387

>implying paladins exist outside of tabletop games