The Paladin Falls

>>53230813

Because not everyone wants to go through the fall and redemption art.

As a Paladin player, I don't want to be particularly challenged in my beliefs, because it's usually VERY BADLY DONE. It comes off as contrived. More, usually the DM does it in the most fedora-tipping way possible.

Like, the simplest concept of a Paladin is the sword that cleaves evil. It's hard to fuck that up.

>>53230813
It's fine if the DM isn't a twerp about it.

The issue is that fedora DMs like to fiat the paladin into falling because they're shitty edgelords and can't handle a proper DEUS VULTing in their game.

>>53230853
>DEUS VULTing
That's because no one wants to play with an edgelord, let alone a self righteous edgelord.

File: 632ccb66d7add728ca2d93d1eb38e241.jpg (3MB, 2039x2048px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2039x2048px

>>53230869
I'll smite the Evil anon.

You can't stop me.

Besides it's not like you have to be a complete dick to smite Evil. I'm just not going to burn and pillage random shit, I'm just not going to waffle over the soul of every goblin, fiend, and brigand that fall on my blade.

>>53230869

Paladins aren't meant to be your Bioware protagonist. They're primarily meant to destroy evil like undead, demons, devils and dragons.

You don't have to make every PC go through soul-searching, particularly because you never see a Barbarian becoming 'too civilized' or a Druid 'losing touch with nature'.

And I agree, the DEUS VULT archetype is the most fun kind of Paladin to play. You know, the righteous, unshakeable crusader who kills heretics and Saracens.

Because Paladins don't fall when they "break" their oath, they fall when they lose their faith and conviction. Oaths are guidelines that help you follow the path, not strict programming that causes the system to crash when faced with paradox.
But we have this thread every ding dong day and you are just a baiting quadruplenigger, so go fuck yourself.

>>53230813

Because you don't force other PCs to go through the same.

The Cleric doesn't get the same arc, the Druid isn't at risk of losing his nature powers if the GM wants to be a dick and the Wizard isn't challenged to things that could strip him of all his spellcasting.

>>53230813
Because it's usually done poorly.

>>53230813
Putting the paladin in a situation where he could fall is fair game; putting him in a situation where he must fall is bullshit. Many DMs who try this do the latter rather than the former.

>>53230813
because the PC is the player's character so it's the player that should have the most agency on how he plays it. Forcing a player's PC down a path the player doesn't want is the equivalent of your players blatantly derailing your game for shits and giggles. If the player is being an evil asshole despite supposing to be Lawful good, fall him, but if you want to make an arc about it you should at least make sure the player is ok with that development.

>>53230979
This.

This.

A thousand fucking times, this.

Give the player a hard choice. Make the action that would cause a fall easier and more profitable than the one that wouldn't. And be clear that it'll cause a fall.

But make it the player's choice.

>>53230813
Because it is a clear NO FUN ALLOWED move from the DM. The party's paladin might be interested in it but the rest of the party will only see that their adventure has been brought to a screeching halt and it is the the paladin's "fault." Forcefully inciting party infighting is never a good idea and any DM that does it needs a slap in on the hand.

We just had this thread yesterday.

>>53231410
It's still up, too.

>>53230916
Objective moral superiority shouldn't come easy.

>>53231356
I can't see how you can give a Goblin Slayer-type paladin a truly hard choice.

>>53231506
He's just a fighter. Maybe a ranger with a favored enemy.

File: scuseme.jpg (82KB, 1057x895px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1057x895px

>>53231454
Then how come good-aligned clerics get it all the time without the strings?

>>53231454
If paladins are to be laser-guided evil-killing goblin-baby-smashing berserkers, I don't really see how they're supposed to be morally superior at all.

They just smite evil. That's it. Leave the actual moralizations to priests.

>>53230813
Because you're doing it to be an asshole, not because the Paladin's player is interested in a fall arc.

I don't play DnD much and I've never played paladin.

When a paladin falls they lose their holy powers, do they gain new abilities to compensate or are they purely mechanically punished?

>antagonists are Neutral aligned
What now, Paladins?

>>53231623
The latter.

>>53230916
>the Wizard is never in danger of losing his spell book or being INT drained
>the Warlock never has his patron ask for things that would violate his code of honor
>the Rogue is never arrested
Its like you don't want challenges.

>>53231623
>do they gain new abilities to compensate
If they become an anti-paladin then yes, but you kind of have to go full Sauron for that. Like you have to be straight up evil.

If you just fall then you just lose your powers. It's a relic of when the paladin was actually a high level fighter plus some stuff. When they fell they became a fighter again but newer editions have them as separate classes entirely. When they fall now they just become dudes with martial weapon proficiency.

>>53231642
So long as you are fighting for Good, it doesn't matter if you aren't fighting against Evil.

>>53231535
ranger/fighter multiclass for sure.

>>53231623
In later editions Paladins that fall can become Oathbreakers/Blackguards and gain new abilities.

Paladins can't fall anymore. There's no reason this discussion should even exist.

File: jaime-lannister-they-make-you-swear-so-many-oaths.png (1MB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x576px

>>53230842
That's just wrong. The biggest challenges to the paladin's beliefs come up organically, unintentionally, whenever the DM isn't writing the adventure specifically to be a black-and-white slugfest against fiends or mindless undead. Fighting orcs or other humanoid bandits? Who's to say that they're really evil and not just starving? Even in an edition with Detect Evil where you can prove someone's evil, an evil alignment doesn't forfeit a creature's right to life. Since a paladin is a lone murderhobo and not an actual law enforcer, enemies should be taken alive and brought to civilization to face justice. If that's impossible for the party to do, or if the local laws in the area aren't perfectly in line with the paladin's code, then there's really nothing a paladin can do, being unable to dispense justice personally or to defer to an outside justice system.

File: Hades (2).jpg (21KB, 432x347px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 432x347px

>>53231506
>Goblin Slayer
>paladin

>>53231710
Right, but who plays 5e?

File: something's fucky.jpg (26KB, 627x627px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 627x627px

>>53230842
>because it's usually VERY BADLY DONE
This.

I have seen exactly one well-done redemption arc for a PC paladin.

The rest are infantile tantrums by bitter manchildren who have a grade-schooler's understanding of morality, who have Ayn Rand's books on their shelves, and who grossly misunderstand and willfully misinterpret Nietzsche's work, and who say "moralfag" without a hint of irony.

If ever you have a GM who wants to "teach the players a lesson," then run. Run as far away as fast as you can, because that game is going to be garbage. The entire thing will be bad things happening to everyone through no fault of their own while the idiot GM makes every NPC betray you and every plan you make backfire horribly.

>mfw the GM has The Fountainhead prominently displayed on his shelf

>>53231710
That's false. Paladins can still fall and/or break their oath.

>>53231735
>an evil alignment doesn't forfeit a creature's right to life. Since a paladin is a lone murderhobo and not an actual law enforcer, enemies should be taken alive and brought to civilization to face justice
lol what

>>53231710
Do you mean that Paladins are incapable of any internal dynamic, or that no matter what they do, they are in the right JUST BECAUSE?

File: diablo_3_fanart___crusader_by_m_hugo-d7a3ush.jpg (150KB, 1130x706px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1130x706px

>>53231735
>an evil alignment doesn't forfeit a creature's right to life
Guess who just pinged evil!

>>53231765
Did I stutter? You can't just break into someone's house without a warrant and kill them because you personally decided they're evil. Well, you could, but it would be an extremely chaotic act.

>>53231710
This has to be bait, they can but they become an oath breaker. They no longer have to worship a god, they still can if they want, but they can definitely loose their power if they don't follow their oaths.

>>53231773
I think their powers are fueled by raw belief now. Kind of like the Light in Warcraft? Only there are more stringent rules in 5e than Warcraft light magic.

It's kind of weird.

File: f7FdEdG.jpg (10KB, 260x194px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 260x194px

>>53231765
Yep, and so long as you play under a reasonable DM, you bringing them in to face justice or even starting their redemption arc should bring better results than just smashing their skulls in.

More effort, better outcome, more exp, zero chance of paladins falling. Simple, no?

But then you get the occasional faggot that insists the guy breaks out of jail or the goblin babies kill everyone and therefore paladins fall. Don't play with these people.

>>53231710
Paladin's can still fall in 5e, it's just almost impossible for it to happen, unless the player is completely incapable of justifying their actions as being to the benefit of their Oath.

>>53231788
>right to life
>bring to civilization to face justice

Since when do these exist in D&D

File: 1493312465132.png (140KB, 354x378px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 354x378px

>>53231788
If the setting has a Detect Evil spell, you aren't the one deciding they're evil. It means they ping as evil from a objective moral standpoint.
It like the baby orc problem, if Orcs are born evil then its okay to kill the babies. Its just pest removal at that point. You wouldn't let the young of a wasp nest survive would you?

>>53231802
If it's just
>they are just very confident, but it's not magic!
it's not weird, it's retarded

>>53231827
>if Orcs are born evil

They're not, though.

Didn't we just have this talk yesterday? It's like we just keep throwing our arguments at one another but nothing ever sticks.

>>53231827
I'd give the wasps to the druids for kudos and a favour.

I dont get how you have trouble making the goblin slayer fall. Just give him a hostage situation. Kill innocents and get goblins, or let the goblins go and save innocents.

>>53231788
If any paladin is doing hat they are in the wrong, without proof that someone is guilty they have no reason to. Also any paladin worth anything would find an actual just solution "oh this man stole from the baker, you will work off your debt to him as payment I will inform those around you to keep you honest in this."

The only time there isn't really a need to weigh out the issue is when something this Evil, as in demons, devil's, lichs etc. Any paladin blindly killing because they say "he's evil" should fall because they aren't playing a paladin.

>>53231754
Rand wasn't a moral nihilist, though. She was part of that misguided school who thought you could deduce a whole system of morality from the most basic axioms of logic and jump from "is" statements straight to "ought" statements without justification.

>>53231842
depends on the setting
Old school orcs were always evil 100% of the time. WoW ruined that.
You can still insert any other evil fodder race like Gnolls.

>>53231827
Bring the goblins to a priest or an orphanage to be raised and any reasonable DM will award you with bonus experience points. Maybe they'll do a plot hook about it later but nothing terrible.

I don't see how that's so difficult.

>>53231857
Also a gigantic hypocrite, just like all her idiot followers.

>>53231868
They stopped being always evil 100% of the time as soon as they became player character options. That'd be in Dragon Magazine #141 or the Orcs of Thar, I believe - both still in the eighties.

>>53231825
The first comes from the definitions of the good alignments in the PHB. The second comes from the fact that D&D settings have societies with laws and specific people given the authority by the government to enforce those laws.

>>53231842
>They're not, though.
Depends on the setting, GM, and campaign.

I wouldn't make them evil, myself, but if the GM I'm paladin-ing under does so I'll smite the fuck out of 'em.

>>53231852
He isn't directly killing the hostages so your scenario is bullshit. This is what people talk about with bad DMs making "moral dilemmas" in an objective setting unless he himself kills those people the blood is not on his hands. Therefore he faces no fall, should he attempt to come up with a solution that gives him the best of both yes that is what a paladin is supposed to do, not play this black and white bullshit and come up with different solutions.

>>53231839
You have a power source, but you swear an oath like a bindimg contract.

I.e. a Devotion paladin must show compassion, but doesn't need to spare everyone. Just avoid killing prisoners just because, but if they are lying to you or are waiting to stab you feel free to decapitate.
And an Ancients paladin protects happiness instead of good and other stuff, they can lose their power if they lose hope and see the world as dark and bleak.

Tl;dr: just don't breach contact.

Because so many DM's force the paladin to fall because they hate paladins for some stupid reason
>Oh you kill the surrendering enemies? You fall
>You spare the surrendering enemies? They take up arms later in life and kill others. You fall
>You take the surrendering enemies in to a city for justice? They break out and kill people escaping. You fall

Same with the Orc babies thing
>Kill the babies and you fall
>Leave the babies and they'll die so you fall
>Take the babies into town and they grow up to kill people because they're evil, you fall

And chances are your players don't want to interrupt the main plot line that you've set up to focus entirely on the paladin. Very few DM's in my experience can handle a paladin redemption arc because so many of them force the paladin into situations where they must fall, and as someone who likes paladins it's infuriating to have my character gutted to uselessness because the DM is a fedora tipping cunt who hates anyone that considers religion to be a good thing

>>53231910
He gets the hostages killed by insisting to kill goblins, where he could've done otherwise to save them.

Even if he's not directly smashing their faces in, there's a dilemma there. Which one would you do?

>>53230813
There's nothing wrong with setting up situations to make the Paladin question their code or dedication, or where the Paladin might fall. The part lots of(bad) GM's seem to miss is that if the Paladin does fall, it should be because they made a deliberate choice to act against their code when another way is available, not because the GM set up a no-win situation.

>>53231892
Orcs aren't player character options. Half-orcs are.

So long as the paladin tries his very best to do the right thing, contemplates for what the right call is, and never stops doubting himself and wondering if he could've done even better, he won't fall, and any DM making him fall for that is a retard.

Once he starts to justify the shit to himself, though - like a lot of anons in this thread and all the threads such as this one lately - he's probably about to take the dive.

>>53231735
>Who's to say that they're really evil and not just starving?
Well, Detect Evil for starters.

>>53231955
The sources I posted, as well as the Complete Book of Humanoids a little later, and probably a bunch of other ones I'm forgetting, made orcs a player character race as well.

Or if we're just talking about core stuff, then half-orcs stopped being a character race in the 2nd edition.

The paladin class has a fluffy "Oath" in the setting that his character concept is supposed to incorporate. If the player decides his character has become evil the GM has the option of changing his class feature to the Oathbreaker.
Ultimately it's the same as if the player agreed with the GM to change any class into another for plot reasons. The only special thing about the paladin is the supporting DMG evil class version.

>>53231960
Detect Evil only works on creatures of 5 HD or above, or clerics worshipping evil gods, or of course undead and demons.

File: 546464656546464.jpg (136KB, 1900x900px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1900x900px

What if the paladin believes that truly heinous and evil acts like mass murder can only be redeemed/atoned for in death?
What if you are a paladin of vengeance? Who's anger deserves more attention? Who's lust for revenge is worth more?

>>53231982
False.

>>53231931
I'd need more information on the situation, personally I'd devise a plan to free the hostages, wether it be stealth, subterfuge or ambush. Then slaughters every last goblin.

Also in an objective setting it doesn't matter, he himself did not kill those people even if his insistence on killing the goblins did. It's why objective setting are difficult to play and cause shitty situations for paladins, the rule of thumb is "did he kill those innocents with his own hand and weapon? No then he did not do evil."

The only dilemma is that he isn't the best paladin, but his actions do not fullfil the criteria for a fall in an objective setting.

>>53231997
D
Pends
------------
The setting

This thread reminds me of an idea I had.
A type of mobile church/prison with the "Awaken" enchantment.
Basically it's a huge mobile fortress used for ANYTHING EVIL.
Interrogation chambers, dungeons, orphanages for abandoned children, cleric/paladin training grounds. The lot.

>>53231916
So they get their powers just from the primordial powers of "Devotion" or "Ancients" whatever the fuck is that even supposed to mean in the context of an oath?
This seems like an awfully liberal way of distributing supposedly "divine" powers.

>>53231957
Why is having doubt about your faith a good thing?
You forget this might be a high-fantasy where these is no room for doubt when you have divine power filling your soul, or any other of a thousand interpretations.
What actually matters is that the player chose to create a Paladin class PC. Seems like you are projecting some kind of literally analysis to a character that the player deserves to have his character class options respected.

>>53231855
And that's what I'm saying. A lot of common D&D adventures consist of fighting evil with a lowercase e instead of Evil with a capital E. Adventurers often fight creatures who aren't fiends, undead, or constructs, creatures with some moral complexity to them. Creatures you maybe shouldn't smite even if they do have an evil alignment. And often you can't take them to court or get a warrant or whatever document would allow you to lawfuly kill them, especially since you're just some random guys and not law enforcers.

>>53232000
Do you have a source to point otherwise? In every system I've played, what I said applies.

>>53230813
>The Paladin Falls
>challenging the Paladin's faith/code
Thing is, these two aren't actually the same thing. Most of the time, a DM will have a paladin fall after a single transgression. That isn't testing faith, that's rules-lawyering, and it's truthfully more often directed at the player than at the character. Telling a player that they can't kill the villain or else they fall isn't putting tension on the paladin's faith, it's putting tension on the players' patience.

Testing a paladin's faith should be a process. A series of circumstances in which the faith or code are not only inconvenient, but maybe even flawed. A paladin who has sworn an oath against unnecessary violence shouldn't just be presented with a case in which pacifism allows an entire village to die; instead, she should slowly have her boundaries tested on what is necessary versus unnecessary. If she falls, she falls not because she raised a sword once, but because she has forgotten that violence isn't always necessary.

A paladin falling shouldn't be a "gotcha" moment, and it should never occur because of information that the paladin lacked. It should be the destination at the end of a road paved with doubt. When a paladin falls, he should be able to look back and see how he got there. He should realize that he had been slipping for a while, and that he had been negligent of his faith and himself. Had he simply gone to confessional regularly, his descent could have been arrested. Had he but...

tl;dr Loss of faith isn't like slipping on a banana peel on the way to church, it's like finding yourself in a whorehouse because you kept changing course to avoid the banana peels on the path.

>>53231735
>Who's to say that they're really evil and not just starving?
being starving doesn't mean you get to rape and pillage across the lands, taking the lives and goods of people who work hard every day to earn their keep

>>53232037
>Why is having doubt about your faith a good thing?

Because doubting is good. Looking for other options is good. Thinking of what you're doing is good. Wondering if you're in the right is good. If you're pressed for time, then thinking whether you did the right call afterwards is good.

You can be good without doing any of these things, but it helps a lot. Just marching on and doing things and justifying it to yourself as you being the "HIGHEST MORAL AUTHORITY" will not hold water for long.

>>53232043
Why is finding yourself in a whorehouse an evil act?

File: 1493498565846.gif (677KB, 664x714px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 664x714px

>>53232024
>a mobile crusader hub/kingdom of the righteous

>>53232070
It's not necessarily evil, but it's definitely not the church that was your intended destination.

Not all versions of paladin specify an evil act, just an action against the code or faith.

>>53232063
That's merely your own feelings on the matter, it's not objective fact.

>>53232029
Someone also mentioned that fallen Paladins become Oathbreakers. That would make sense if they switched from a Good god to an Evil god. But since their power source is now just their sense of self-righteousness, how do they get their Evil Paladin powers once they lose it? They automatically become self-righteous in the opposite direction?

>>53231997
>Vengeance paladins

That oath was a mistake because every murderhobo flocks to it thinking it gives them free reign. They are still bound by their oaths

>Fight the Greater Evil. Faced with a choice of fighting my sworn foes or combating a lesser evil. I choose the greater evil.

Pretty self explanatory, if it's between a lesser demon and a powerful lich you fight the lich and suffer no chance of breaking your oath.

>No Mercy for the Wicked. Ordinary foes might win my mercy, but my sworn enemies do not.

Whatever made you have a hate boner is the only thing you can fight without mercy. If a group of things begs for such and you kill them you've broken your oath.

>By Any Means Necessary. My qualms can’t get in the way of exterminating my foes.

Pretty straightforward, even if say hostages would die, your qualm of that cannot get in the way of killing your foes. Does that mean it should be your first option? No but it can be and you suffer no chance of breaking oath.

>Restitution. If my foes wreak ruin on the world, it is because I failed to stop them. I must help those harmed by their misdeeds.

Should your attempt to stop evil not stop them from hurting others you are obligated to help those in need.

>>53232104
At least vengeance paladin is a core option. It keeps the edgelords from asking to play oathbreakers, which are only in the game at the DM's discretion.

>>53232029
Most of them is Gods, but Ancients can be powered by the feywild. You swear your oath and a shard of divinity is rammed into you. An oathbreaker corrupts it and turns it into unholy power, Devotion are vanilla pally, Ancients must keep hope alive amongst mortals, Vengeance turns into a holy hunter of great evils. If you ever see a paladin fighting against a demon prince with the help of devils, that's Vengeance, the ones that go for the worst evils and don't care about the lesser. They also flip the bird at hostages.

>>53232029
Anyone more since they aren't directly under a god I see it as their oaths are merely tools focusing their will to use magic. It simply seems divine because they are pulling it directly form themselves and their own convictions.

>>53232040
Really? Because in every setting I've ever played, it doesn't work that way.

What you referred to are potent auras that blaze like stars to detection effects, and sometimes influence other things. Detect Evil and the detect spells work regardless of the target's level.

If a player in my game plays a paladin, I expect them to adhere to the code of their paladin, which I will discuss with the player beforehand. Just as a warlock will have to live up to their pact, a cleric will have to follow the dogma of their god and so on and so forth. For each of these characters, I will likely present one or two situations that challenge their code, their pact or their faith during the course of the campaign. They can either resolve the situation using the predefined method at the cost of their code, pact or faith, they can maintain their code, pact or faith at the cost of failing to resolve that situation or they can invent a third option that resolves the situation while preserving their code, pact or faith.

There's nothing wrong with challenging a part of a player's character in a game. The problem comes from trapping the character.

>>53232147
Without such a powerful aura, all you can tell is the presence of evil, not its source.

If you've got a bunch of 1HD monsters and you Detect Evil, you can tell there's evil present but not which ones of them are evil and which ones aren't.

>>53232154
This is good.

>>53232160
Kill them all and see if the evil presence goes away.

>>53232154
>talk it through with the player and the DM so that there won't be misunderstandings later in the game
>actual reason and common sense

No, anon, this is /tg/, that can't be allowed.

Hello pen 'n' paper /tg/, anon from the miniature wargaming side of the railtracks here. Something I've wondered for a while, trying to get paladins falling seems to be a really common thing in RPGs from the screencap stories I've read, but I don't think I've heard a story about GMs/DMs trying to make clerics fall or whatever. Why is that? Surely (with my admittedly limited knowledge of RPGs) clerics are still holy dudes with vows and stuff, but it only seems to be the paladins that have the falling problem.

File: 1480550410087.gif (446KB, 300x186px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 300x186px

>>53232154

>>53232193
There's a wide variety of possibilities that could come from that:

A) They were -all- evil and you've done the world a favor.
B) Some of them weren't evil and you just slaughtered them all indiscriminately. Paladin falls.
C) Only a few of them were evil, and spread up among the rest they made the whole pack look bad. Paladin falls.
D) None of them were evil and the presence was actually an evil object one of them was carrying, the dungeon room itself which had been used for profane acts for centuries, or a whole bunch of other possibilities. Paladin falls.

Your odds are 25%. Are you a gambling man?

>>53232160
It specifically says in the 3.PF spell description that as you concentrate, you can single out individual sources.

>>53232219
>Surely (with my admittedly limited knowledge of RPGs) clerics are still holy dudes with vows and stuff, but it only seems to be the paladins that have the falling problem.
Clerics are clock-watching goldbricker company-men while paladins are the real deal closers.

>>53232224
I'll just say that my guy doesn't fall.

>>53232232
It also says that if they're evil-aligned creatures of less than 5 full hit dice, no such aura is forthcoming.

>>53231667
I don't mind challenges, but the challenges paladins get are written out in the rules, whereas most other classes don't have that shit so they never get that challenge, or it happens only as the GM decides (could dodge an arrest or get broken out of jail, could wheedle a deal out of a patron instead of accepting a bad bargain, whereas a paladin can't negotiate or avoid his fall.)

>>53232219
For whatever reason, clerics have had much more relaxed codes of conduct than paladins. The rules for clerics used to say that they just have to be one step away from their deity in alignment, while paladins always had to be one specific alignment. So a LG paladin who turns LN is still in good standing with his LG deity, but a paladin who does the same thubg has fallen. Also, paladins had to take on a code of conduct that prohibited a bunch of other things that aren't actually evil, like fighting dishonorably or telling a lie even to save a life. The only eauivalent taboo for clerics is that in older editions they weren't allowed to use edged weapons, which is pretty easy to follow in comparison.

Maybe I just want to play a Paladin without the entire story warping into yet-another-falling-paladin tripe. I just want to play a guy and have fun, not spend every session sweating over moral codes and orc babies.

>>53232224
>D) None of them were evil and the presence was actually an evil object one of them was carrying
At which point you punch the DM for failing to allow a skill to be used, as it is used. Good going fag

>>53230842
>I don't want to be particularly challenged in my beliefs
Then don't play a character with very rigid and uncompromising beliefs, dummy. I.e., don't play a paladin.

>>53232369
Or a single aura shows and you would've just killed the goblin, thinking he was a powerful evil shaman or some shit.

>>53232315
Plus you don't lose levels in rogue just because you got arrested, and if anything you are the best equipped to get out of that situation since you're a fucking rogue

>>53232360
Paladins are the wiffle-tee-ball class for the fat authoritarian GM to flex his revenge fantasies against chads.

File: paladin logic.png (34KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 360x360px

>>53231788
Why does a paladin have to be restricted by codes of law that criminals gleefully shrug off? They should be above and beyond the law - as long as they can prove that what they are doing is for the sake of punishing evil. So they are held to scrutiny, by their deity and by man, but don't have to wait for permission and a warrant and a testimony of seventeen witnesses just so you can stab a guy that a fighter of the same alignment could have stabbed without any real penalty.

Also remember that Lawful does not necessarily mean 'the laws of the land,' but could refer to a strong moral code or central belief. A paladin might not obey local laws, but he could refuse to kill the unarmed, refuse to act without evidence, and have vows of poverty or chastity or something. So he has his own binding rules that make him lawful rather than chaotic, without having to deal with bureaucracy.

>>53232102
Yes, drawing power from pure edge

File: Снимок.png (285KB, 440x310px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 440x310px

>>53232000
choke on a bucket of dicks and stop corrupting the noble name of paladinhood

>>53232154
Oh look a post that seems to be written by an actually wise person, and it's drowning out in repeating shitposting
People with brains are a dying breed

>>53232610
I'm a survivor.
We're a dying breed.

>>53231668
>When they fall now they just become dudes with martial weapon proficiency.
Can you easily homebrew them into fighters like in the old days, or is that not possible/too much work?

>>53232563
So that doesn't actually tell you if any mortal creature or physical object is evil.

So I guess the paladin can't just go around pinging shopkeepers and noble lords etc.

>>53232563
>1 foot of stone
>1 in of common metal
>thin sheet of lead
Alignment is... radiation? Would explain by using it results in cancer.

>>53232429
There's a rule of thumb for how a paladin should act in a land where the laws are unjust. It's called Kant's categorical imperative: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law." Unjust laws in the books don't mean that you can do whatever you want, nor do they mean that you can kill and rape as long as you compensate by praying or obeying dietary restrictions. You have to figure iut what the laws SHOULD be and live according to those, let them bind you just as firmly as laws in the books.

>>53232360
>not spend every session sweating over moral
Then don't become a paladin. Paladins swore an oath to become paladins.

If you can't or its too difficult to pretend to swore an oath, then there are other classes for simple minded folks like you to select upon.

>>53232640
CONGRATULATIONS! You can read!
And inability to detect evil in non-otherwordly beings means that you can't be a smitebot, and have to actually roleplay things and adhere to a real moral code, like >>53232702! Which means trolls and dullards will always talk about Detect Evil from old, irrelevant edition.

That smug asshole Enfer has a bad influence on me
>>53232699
Evil is a cancer of the soul

>>53232715
Paladins are no longer even restricted by alignment and their oaths are sworn to themselves

File: dist[1].gif (7KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 480x360px

>>53232699
From the moment I read that shit when 5e first came out I can't stop laughing my ass off.

literally fucking Gamma radiation

>>53232742
>CONGRATULATIONS! You can read!
wow rude

>>53232745
>Paladins are no longer even restricted by alignment
It should have never been restricted by alignment to begin with.

>>53230813
Beause this is almost never done well. Instead of putting a moral quandary in the game, most DMs are content in making a no win situation and fucking the paladin player.

>>53230813
Depends on The DM

>>53232070

Figure of speech. Basically making minor slip ups of a code just to avoid dealing with the short term consequence of making a mistake that can be redeemed.

NW2 has a Paladin who maked no pretense he had failed his code more than once

>>53231931
Trick question. He took an oath to slay Goblins, not save innocents. He'd fall if he did that.

>>53231938
This is the best answer

>>53233564
>This is the best answer
It really isn't, there are much better answers in the thread.

The wizard falls because he willfully violated his code and loses his magic powers.
The rogue falls because he willfully violated his code and loses his sneaky powers.
The fighter falls because he willfully violated his code and loses his martial powers.
The monk falls because he willfully violated his code and loses his chi powers.
The druid falls because he willfully violated his code and loses his nature powers.

>>53233743
Wizard loses virginity
Rogue and fighter stop excercising for a long time
Monk's spirit is broken after forfeiting his principles
Druid distanced himself from nature

aka shit that never happens

>>53232342
Paladins are more strict than clerics because in earlier editions you needed godly stat rolls to even be a paladin, and being a paladin basically meant you were the coolest, strongest member of the party

>>53231884
How so?

>>53232798
He thinks you're the anon he was arguing with because he's stupid

>>53230813
The paladin's code is super simple, vary hard to break, a little more flexible than most realize, and most of all has to be something the Paladin WILLINGLY breaks. If a Paladin is forced into it he didn't break his code.

The reason why they got rid of falling for 4th and 5th edition is specifically the fedora tipping retards. And the way they got rid of it was rather a simple plan. "A Paladin cannot fall, because actions that cause a Paladin to fall are now simple considered out of character and the Paladin doesn't do them. The Gods know the heart of who they grant the status of Paladin."

BAM, done. So now when one of the fedora tippers tries to force a situation where all choices cause a fall, they need to come up with the one the paladin would actually do and he doesn't fall.

If you want your paladin character to fall because it would be a cool character arch, just discuss it with your DM and the two of you can cook up some event to bring it into the game.

>>53234899
>[Rand] called altruism a “basic evil” and referred to those who perpetuate the system of taxation and redistribution as “looters” and “moochers.” She wrote in her book “The Virtue of Selfishness” that accepting any government controls is “delivering oneself into gradual enslavement.”

She believed that the scientific research on tobacco and cancer was a hoax. So when she had to have surgery for her lung cancer, the first thing she did was use her Medicare and Social Security, the very things she described as "evil".

>>53231982
>I roll detect evil on the zombie.
>I roll sense motive on the orc stabbing me.

What kind of shit games are you playing in?

>>53237119
>paladin kills zombie
>DM: You fall because it was a Lawful Good zombie

>>53237119
The kind that follows the fucking rules.

So the orc's stabbing you. Great. Do you need to wait for your Detect Evil to ping before you allow yourself the privilege of self-defense?

>>53232104
>If a group of things begs for such and you kill them you've broken your oath.
False, according to your own greentext. It says you may NOT show mercy to your enemies and ALLOWS for mercy otherwise, but it does not obligate mercy under any circumstance.

>>53237253
According to some people in this thread, apparently.

How do you know the orc is actually trying to kill you without rolling?

>>53230813

If you're setting up a scenario 'to make the paladin fall', please stop. Just abandon the effort. There is no way to set up a scenario with that mindset that will not come off as both contrived and annoying to your players. Especially if it's just yet another trolley dilemma reskinned as whatever.

With any sane system and/or GM, circumstances that give the paladin only equally bad options aren't going to cause a fall, nor would any decisions made in good faith that wind up having a bad outcome. Otherwise the very idea of a paladin wouldn't work since the they would all just fall the first time their charity was misused or whatever. Intent matters. A paladin should always be striving for an ideal, but restrained by the very real notion that we are fallible creatures in an imperfect world.

Challenging the conviction of a paladin will hash itself out in play from time to time. There will be temptations to do the wrong thing. When the paladin willingly acts in a manner that contradicts his order, vows, or whatever baseline you got going, then it's simple and justified to push back. But a complete fall should be saved for some equally dramatic breach of virtue, like abandoning his allies in a display of cowardice.

>>53232610
OP just wants to not be called a dick for trapping a paladin to fall

>>53230813
it is not, in and of it self, a bad thing. It is frequently done by bad DM's in a way most closely resembling an asspull, because they dislike paladins on an instinctual level.

That and many roleplay paladins in a way this borders on genocidal or egomaniacal.

I think having a Paladin with a code is great, and occasionally offering morally ambiguous choices can be a fun way to challenge that player; if the player is on board with the plan.

Basically, respect your players agency, and react appropriately should he step outside of the rules he has placed on himself.

Talk out story arcs, potential villains, set expectations and see what works but never, ever just make the paladin fall.

I had a pally pc and I had him go through a trial of faith because his order fell and he was the only one left to carry the torch. He denied random magical abilities I gave the party because he saw them as false and I gave him props in doing so. He followed his code. Even when I had him chose the "right" path or his old orders' path, he chose the old. He's the best paladin I have in my group. My gf plays pally but she often plays them like rogues in the worst way possible. I think challenging the oath is good however you can't fuck with them too hard and kill their casting abilities or exile them cause that's just overkill.

File: crying saber color.jpg (210KB, 686x441px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 686x441px

>tfw I can never play a paladin because GMs always make me fall arbitrarily, and players always assume a paladin is going to be a nofunallowed babysitter.

>>53230813
It's like politics in games. In and of itself there's nothing bad, however nine times out of ten its done in some stupid ham fisted way with precisely zero thought put into it that just ruins the whole thing.

>>53242426
>saber image
Good, people should keep bullying you.

Fuck saber, Iskander for life.

File: disappointment.png (56KB, 262x158px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 262x158px

>>53242426
>tfw I always fall into the 'babysitter' trope just because I don't let the party mug random people in the fucking street

I just wanna be a good guy.

>>53231752
Go and jack it with the other furries in your containment thread.

File: Aika1.jpg (46KB, 568x432px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 568x432px

>>53242611
What, so because I find 5e boring that means I waste time on 'caster superiority: the game'?

You got a lot of nerve, buddy.

>>53231868
>>53231955

Is this bait or unadulterated retardation?

>>53230813

Because every time a person does it it isn't done well. If a DM can do it in a good way? It'd be fun. Instead it's:

>your paladin goes to-
>but I didn't want to go there
>so your paladin walks into a room and sees a guy raping and torturing kids
>dude you cant tell me what my guy does I didn't even want to go to the building
>okay so what does your paladin do about the guy?
>i smite him
>LEL UR JUST AS BAD AS HE IS FOR KILLING HIM! HAHAHA WHAT A MORAL DILEMMA YOU FUCKING THEISTKEK *tips fedora*.

>>53242781
kek

the best part is how you are right

File: what.png (36KB, 376x405px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 376x405px

>>53242781
>>LEL UR JUST AS BAD AS HE IS FOR KILLING HIM!
I never understood this meme. I mean, obviously wanton murder is bad, but I'm not committing wanton murder.

I'm specifically executing a person or persons who are slaughtering people indiscriminately. They're all guilty of horrible shit. I'm not like them just because I'm putting a stop to their atrocities.

>>53242962
its a moralfag meme

>>53243040

it's an unmoralfag meme

>>53230916
Only if you have a shit DM. Ideally the Cleric should face very similar ordeals to the paladin, and druids should totally have some moral and philosophical quandaries to deal with

>>53231735
Ahh yes but God wills it. So beast and heretic must die. God's will is the only right that matters, not the law of the pagan or monster. Only the word of God matters.

This is how I paladin.

So um playing a game of 3.5 E dnd. My neutral evil rogue just got saved by the party's lawful good paladin.

The paladin sacrificed him self taking a shot that would have killed my character.

The gm then procceds to as the paladin is dying and my character is tearing up because this was the first time he's ever felt any real emotion towards losing someone.

>>You fall you protected someone evil.

;-; I want to punch this fuck so bad.

>>53231788
The issue is that detect evil exists and works the way it does. It basically allows the paladin to be a smitebot with no real repercussions because the enemy is "objectivly evil". If bandits/orcs/etc ping as some sort of evil, then any nuance is irrelevant to the paladin's sword. I mean people argue that you can have an evil character who can get along with good characters, have families, or even do ostensibly good things, by evil means and to evil ends.

>>53231868
Evil fodder races are retarded and trite, a sign of bad and lazy worldbuilding

File: does the paladin fall.jpg (236KB, 427x1600px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 427x1600px

>>53243264
That's pretty obviously a fake story, but fuck, man. Even just imagining that hurts.

Well its sadly not. I wish it was. Me and the paladin guy got up and left the game shortly after he said that and were gonna be running our own game.

No idea how were gonna manage it but hopefuly we can make something cool

>>53232104
>If a group of things begs for such and you kill them you've broken your oath.
False. You didn't swear to show mercy to anything. You can choose to or choose not to, but your oath isn't affected.

>>53243264
>You fall, you protected someone evil.

Don't want to punch him. Actually punch him. A lot. Punch him until the red rage fades away from your eyes and your DM learns not to be a fucking asshole for kicks anymore.

Then you'll realize what it's like to be a paladin.

>>53232777
Actually, its literally fucking the restrictions and barriers that stop all but powerful divination spells and quite a few auras since second edition.

>>53242962
It's "violence is never the answer" taken to the level of stupidity encouraged by modern society. The idea of so-called moral high ground and how by taking direct action, one has somehow "lowered themselves to their level."

It's stupid bullshit.

>>53243264
If that story is even real, you call that mindless shitsmear of a pathetic DM out on his stupidity.

Doesn't the PH or something explicitly state that goblins, orcs, gnolls, and the like are literally inherently evil creatures and killing them doesn't even qualify as "murder" so they're fair game?

and murder in self-defense is fair too

like fuck man it's vague!medieval times, the standards for what was and wasn't murder were different then, and they can be different depending on what the DM wants them to be

it feels like DMs just love picking on paladins

If a paladin is strong in his conviction and virtues, putting a simple choice to trip him up wouldn't work. That's the problem with GMs trying to make a hero fall, they don't understand the philosophical concepts or moral conundrum involved to actually recreate it for the purpose of a campaign - see Warcraft and Arthas for an archetype of a paladin fall, but it works because the hero is inherently flawed and fails to overcome that.

If you try to make a paladin fall without identifying an inherent flaw in him to exploit or seeing if he can overcome his weakness, you are doing it wrong. Rather than thinking about a fall, you should think about a test of faith, where the failure would result in a fall, but still leaving an option for success, thus making the choice and subsequent events much more poignant - we see Arthas and think of "what ifs" precisely because he had all the opportunities to pull back at every step and to see him fail each test is what makes the fall impactful, as opposed to a flat "lol you killed an orc baby, so you now you must fall" kinda thing.
you must forget either that the process is gradual, as most evils are, with a slippery slope of conveniences or dubious choices not being inherently bad on their own, but in a continuous succession bringing the paladin to the evil he always fought against.

>>53245002
*you musn't forget

>>53231735
This is the kind of shit that kills fun for everyone.

>>53232043
See its this sort of shit that encourages Players to play blackguards or the new oaths from unearthed arcana in 5th ed. Why have a moral code that means you put yourself at a disadvantage. Oath of Conquest for example, basically means that you should not conduct extermination of races, they are not worthy of being killed by you.

>>53230813
I've seen it done right once, last Saturday when the party's other paladin put my paladin in grave danger just to save his own ass(if your curious he used the binine transposition spell to shove my paladin into a huge sized animated golden snakes constrictor grip, and yes I know that spell requires a willing target, we forgot and by the end it really didn't matter anyway)

He fell because Kord, the god he worshiped saw this act of cowardice and stripped him of his powers. That said he redeemed himself in the same battle by once again using that spell to save my paladin after he was later swallowed by the damn thing, and died redeeming himself as we finished the fucking snake off.

It was a tearful moment

>>53231852
I'm pretty sure this has happened in Goblin Slayer and he killed the goblins without more than two panels of hesitation.

Oh, cool, we're still keeping on doing this shit.

Question: in how many threads have you argued how a paladin should be played by now? And how many times has it given you something new to think of or taught you to think of something you otherwise wouldn't have? And how often do you think you have gotten anything through to another anon?

You're just arguing against brick walls, and you're all brick walls yourself. Give up. Go do something productive.

File: IMG_0172.png (152KB, 456x720px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 456x720px

>>53231642

>>53243342
Oh god, are you one of those "muh shades of grey " DM's? You know that its a game right?
You don't have to give every sinlge mook a sad back story. Its okay to just have a bad guy that is bad and not misunderstood.

>>53245931
Paladin's falling is the new katana bait anon.

>>53243264
reminds of that story from a few threads ago where a Blackguard saved the life of his comrade at the cost of his own. He fell for acting selflessly.
His fighter buddy went on to become a paladin.

>>53246142
I've been here pretty much since the board's infancy and I can tell you paladin falling is older than the katana meme.

File: 1449369296357.gif (872KB, 500x328px) Image search: [Google]

872KB, 500x328px

Wouldn't it make more sense for a Paladin's powers to not work due to a specific circumstance, rather than a deity arbitrarily permenantly robbing his or her mortal representative of power?

Like a Paladin attempts to smite an adversary he suspected of being evil, only for the smiting to fail, leading to the paladin finding out something of importance. Which of course the god intended all along.

That way, the god would act like an actual god rather than some sort of supernatural loan shark.

>>53246176
Well a paladin's power now comes from their own faith and conviction rather than directly from any god. Plus you can smite anything now.

>>53230813
I'm not saying its inconcievable for it to be done in a cool and interesting way, but forcing something like that is likely to be contrived. I think it would be fine to occasionally test the Paladin's convictions but in that case there should usually be a way for them to not fall or at least a way to redeem themselves on the horizon.

>>53231735
Laws of Gods outweigh laws of man, either the law is just and follows your gods morality and thus you're not breaking it, or it goes against your objective real god and thus not worth following.

>>53231735
>Fighting orcs or other humanoid bandits? Who's to say that they're really evil and not just starving?
Actually, even if you are starving you are still not allowed to go and attack others.

You may become a beggar, you may offer to do some low professions. With someone particulary permissive even take a loaf of bread, but the moment you get a sword and go attacking peasants you are a criminal and should be dealt as such.

Motivation doesn't excuse that what you are doing is evil, so you will be treated as such.

>>53231925
This. So much this.

>>53236499
This is really good.

>>53237444
This too.

>>53231735
>paladin not an actual law enforcer
This must be bait, or straight retardation derived of the idea that government is somehow the only just authority for providing order for men. He's literally an enforcer of cosmic order and goodness, a cosmic order which sits above any earthly authority in the setting already. There's no better judge to find than a paladin in most cases, because justice is their entire purpose. Most DMs try to contrive a paladin falling by using their own personal morals even when good is laid out differently in the setting, but you're doing the same thing with law, just to be a dick. If he's playing as a murder hobo he's already got a problem. If they're just traveling killers they fell already.

Consider that you have a right to liberty which cannot be denied to you without committing a crime, and locking you up without cause is wrong, while with cause it's right: it follows that committing a crime, by denying others their rights, is a rejection also of your own rights. If you go to kill some one innocent, you have no right to life, and it's good for someone to do whatever necessary to stop you. You cannot violate others and preserve rights for your own convenience, and allowing someone else to do that is to be complicit in it: it's mercy at the expense of the victims, which is worse than overly harsh justice in that it's not justice at all and is a sure path for evil to flourish without repercussion. You'd be hard pressed to find any government which doesn't acknowledge that in some way. Rights ethics only exist with functional duty ethics.

>>53246118
It's still fucking lazy storytelling. You can have evil bad guys without having to fall back on having an entire race of 100% justifiably killable mooks. It's just dumb

>>53231356
The DM can't make you fall though, he can't set up a challenge and say 'if you do blank, you WILL fall'. Falling is completely on the part of the paladin, it's a crisis of faith, because it's not his god just getting tired of his shut and taking back his power, it's the paladin losing the faith that not only fuels his patron, but himself.

>>53231931
It depends on the paladins moral code. Not all paladins are the same, he may have a bigger preference to killing evil monsters over actually saving people, this it won't bother him much to pick the goblins, and vice versa can be possible. Just because the paladin prefers slaughtering evil over helping people doesn't make him fall, so again, depends on the paladin. And even if he cared for the hostages and they died , if he still has faith in himself and his god, he won't fall.

>>53231827
Your average bandit doesn't ping evil though. Neither are goblins or most non-divine caster creatures. You need to have a lot of hit dice to register as evil.

Most people just don't know that rule exists, but it's there. Most paladins in 3.x are in the dark about the goodness/evilness of the thing they are attacking.
Smite evil will probably have a tell, but if it fails to smite them you've still hit non-evil with a weapon.

>>53230813
Because it's usually not done well, often the DM 'forces' the paladin to fall through some contrived reason. Instead, the paladin's will should waiver somehow.

I really liked this scene at the end of John Wick 2 where the big bad italian mobboss guy narrowly escaped Wick's rampaging revenge by running off to the Continental (if you haven't watched the movie, it's basically Assassin HQ in the lore, it's neutral ground and nobody can kill inside. If you do, you're "excommunicated" and literally every other assassin wants to kills you). The fucker sits in front of Wick, grinning smugly and saying that he can stay there basically forever, implying that he's "won". Wick just fucking shoots the guy in the head.

>>53244156
Magic is literally gamma radiation, got it.

File: TheFall.gif (930KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

930KB, 320x180px

>>53230813
I think it's good to challenge a paladin's faith/code. A paladin should be someone who adheres to an ironclad ideology or belief. It should be almost impossible to make them fall; capable of rationalizing almost anything within the context of their worldview. Or in other words, if it's trivially easy for the paladin to fall, then they were a SHIT paladin and should fall.

And if a good (not as in aligment) paladin does fall then the consequences should be very extreme. We're talking earth-shattering complete upending of their entire life here. They would cease to be the same person, or worse...

>>53231931
He must 'try' to save the hostages and to smite goblins. But he can't allow goblins to leave because they certainly would kill more. He will do an attempt to save the hostages to the best of his abilities but if he can't he won't fall. Though he'll probably get a couple of new nightmares.

>>53232429
It's much easier when paladin is also a knight. Officially.

When a bunch of low level bandits tried to attack the party he killed one of them who got too close, intimidated others and executed their leader on the spot and made his underlings surrender.

Bandits tied each other with rope and walked with the party to closest town. In the end they got send into mines for 10 years.

>>53237063
She literally explained why it wasn't a problem, though.

>>53231506
Goblin Slayer is literally an NPC.

>>53250994
A DMPC, at that.

>>53251097
No, he's an actual NPC. The DMPC is elsewhere.

>>53231754
I'm glad my recurring GM can actually do redemption arcs. The one he did on a Kierkegaard-inspired adventure was great.

But from all other people I've heard it's really hard to do that from a GM standpoint, it's not so much as challenging the beliefs at that point as putting you in a catch-22 situation.

>>53234443
Lol, in the last AD&D campaign I played, the paladin was the worst character by far. You have to waste your best roll on a useless ability score, you can't specialize in weapons so you can't fight as well as a fighter, and your healing/spellcasting ability is practically negligible. If you roll crazy good ability scores in AD&D, do yourself a favor and play some kind of triple-multiclassed half-elf, or a psionicist who can solo any fight on his own with Mind Blast.

>>53230892
>>53231754
Honestly, the DM who wants to 'teach players a lesson' and the PC who plays a paladin to murder anyone who disagrees with him are both terrible people at the table who deserve to find each other.

>>53244156
Please don't interrupt /tg/ when it's feeling superior to DnD, thank you.

>>53231735
>Who's to say that they're really evil and not just starving?

Detect Evil.


>an evil alignment doesn't forfeit a creature's right to life.

Assault, thieving, and murder does. You did say they were bandits, humanoid or no.

Since a paladin is a lone murderhobo and not an actual law enforcer

They kind of are. This isn't a modern setting, warriors who answer directly to god are probably PREFERABLE judicial enforcers than medieval criminal justice dudes. Your average peasant probably trusts HolyMan McDevilKill to do what's right than his local constable. And I find it hard to say they are wrong. Actual gods of good are going to be better moral beacons than man-made laws.