Anyone had a paladin Fall and then dropped the PC?

[Arkham]

While I haven't played a paladin, a player for whom I was GMing did. And through repeated naughtiness, with a warning each time, his paladin fell from grace. He was a paladin of Osiris and during the course of a module looted a shrine dedicated to his own god, and drew power from an artifact created by Set.

But instead of making the player make a new character, or play one that was hosed, I let him retrain his lost paladin levels as fighter levels, since he didn't want to atone.

 

[Jack Simth]

I would like to throw the following question(s) back in response.

Would you continue to play a fallen monk?
Would you continue to play a fallen barbarian?

Paladins, monks and barbarians all ave "Ex" options. I've never seen anyone give serious discussion to a "fallen barbarian."

All a Monk (or Bard) loses is the ability to advance in the original class - the rest is kept. A Barbarian has a little more to lose: Rage, but otherwise, he's in the same boat.

The big difference, though, is that the Paladin has an explicit Code. The Barbarian, Monk, or Bard just has to stick to their alignment. The Barbarian sitting through a single trial (a Lawful act) doesn't make him a Lawful person - he can still be Chaotic. The Monk escaping justice (a Chaotic act) doesn't make him a Chaotic person - he can still be Lawful. The Paladin class, very explicitly, states that a Paladin "loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act." Thus, while the Barbarian committing one Lawful act amongst a hundred Chaotic ones is fine, the Paladin committing a single Evil act amongst a hundred Good ones is up a creek with no paddle.

One thing that bothers me... a lot of people see the paladin losing powers for stepping out of line but nearly no one mentions a cleric violating one of his deity's tenants and becoming powerless. I always felt that the cleric and paladin codes should be very similar... one with a more tactical and militaristic outlook... the other more concerned with the greater good and saving the souls of the damned.

While the Cleric/Druid loses his powers if he steps too far out of line, he's got even more leeway than the Monk, Bard, or Barbarian (in a way), as he only must stay within one step of his diety/ideal. Likewise, the Cleric/Druid doesn't have a specific, defined Code. While the Cleric write up mentions the possibility of one, it also says "grossly violates" rather than the single "evil" violation to make a Paladin fall.

The LN Cleric of a TN diety who puts on a Helm of Opposite Alignment is fine - shifts to CN, no problem (and vice-versa). The NE cleric of a TN diety who puts on a Helm of Opposite Alignement is fine - shifts to NG, no problem (and vice-versa). The LG cleric of a LG diety (while up a creek with a Helm of Opposite Alignment) can drift a step without too much trouble (and will have time, if the DM lets the player know, to fix it).

Thus you don't hear about many Druids/Clerics/Monks/Bards/Barbarians falling, but you do Paladins.

 

[Darren Ravenshaw]

The thing about Paladins is that their "Code of Conduct" means nothing if the player and GM don't talk about what it means exactly, and determine at least a base line of what actions the Paladin can preform in general without falling.

As a player I've always talked with the GM, and players, before hand about wanting to play a Paladin. So that we are at least "On the same page" with regards to actions that might cause a fall from grace, and that the Paladins presence wouldn't hinder/conflict with the other players characters to much, or result in me being forced to sit out on to much of the action to aviod conflict with my code of conduct.

The same goes when I GM.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

But instead of making the player make a new character, or play one that was hosed, I let him retrain his lost paladin levels as fighter levels, since he didn't want to atone.

The codified retraining rules in PHBII definitely add options for the fallen pally... if it was a single classed character, I'm not sure I'd let them retrain all their levels at once, but I would offer the general option.t

 

[Brace Cormaeril]

I'd be pretty interested in playing it through - if I was set up, I'd probably go full bore in the opposite direction. But if it made sense and was fair, I think that the redemption would make for a great hero's journey.

But I have to confess that I did set two Paladins up to fall from grace, many years ago. Two seperate players tried to bring in their munchkin Paladins. I put the smackdown on both of them. The more mature thing would've been to just tell them "no, you can't use those characters," but hey, I was a teenager at the time.

I disagree. As a DM, you offered these players the opportunity to play a paladin well. Even setting them up for a fall, these players either chose to break their code, or you screwed them. Waved the DM wand at the characters and, poof, no more divine crap.
But I get the impression that you just made it really hard on these guys, and they failed to make the choices for the characters that were necessary to maintain their divine crap.

I once played a paladin, and my DM put him through the ringer. This was my very first character, summer of1990. AD&D 1.5e.
So I sit down to make this paladin, and the firm rule on generation of a character was 4d6, no re-rolls. Allocation of each role in succession down the ability list, including comeliness, from Unearther Arcana. This game was house ruled so-much it was out of hand! (My DM had been gamin' since the 70's) This character would be a Cavalier/Paladin, a (Gestalt?) so he would get the Cavalier ability bonuses out of UA (scores other than strength could have percentile bonus), and be a paladin. I rolled straight 18's. Named him Jonathan Holyblade, I was 12, you know.
Anyway, his early adventuring career was one beat -down or bulldung after another. Mercilessly trampled by a rampaging ogre, beaten sensless with him own arm...
Having a sidekick who was constantly trying to kill him, a mage seeking to sell his (a one perfect paladins) soul for entrance in "The Black School of Thoth al'Mon" (sppooookkyyyy..)
Cast into the Abyss, solo, at 9th level, some demon or another viciously flensing him for weeks, wandering around, got trapped in some stone walled cell with no exit, harried by the rogue whose name was "Moments Notice" CN, who could pass as he chose... god, it sucked.

There was so much crap that happened to this character it was ridiculous. My DM was TRYING to get my character to abandon his code, but he never did. Played this character for years, well into my adolescence. I remember being so frustrated, at the game table, that things never, ever, went Jonathan's way. His name was Holyblade and he didn't get a magic weapon until 9th level... but it was a Holysword. But guess what, I fought 3, count em, 3 encounters against CE foes. That's it! But...

1. Some Uber necromancer..
2. A shadow dragon, baddest kill ever.
3. Kostchtchie, no that was the baddest ever...

My characters still believe the DM is always right. I have qualms now and again, but I would never drop a character just because what the DM had in mind wasn't what I had in mind. "What?!, your hobgoblin dealt damage to me, no way dude!"

 

[haakon1]

As long as the fall was justified by the characters actions, hell yes I would play a fallen palladin. That there would be a character I would be ALL into. You could go so many ways with a character like that.

Exactly . . . nice name, picture, and sig, BTW.

"Enter the champion, Prince Bytor appears . . . "

 

[Jack Simth]

A DM can make a paladin fall, it's just tricky, mean, and requires some annoying choices of interpertations (also doesn't work once the Paladin's to the point where he can simply buy food for a town for a year).

Paladin runs across a town that's obviously just barely scraping by. For whatever plot-related reason, he needs to stay in this town for a period of weeks.

After having observed that this place is just barely scraping by, he runs across the only reason that they can scrape by at all - they use (inherited) Skeletons and Zombies for all their manual labor (without the cheap labor, the soil wouldn't be good enough to feed people - they're barely scraping by).

If he doesn't destroy the skeletons and zombies, he's willingly associating with evil, and falls.

If he does destroy the skeletons and zombies, he's willfully and knowingly committed an evil act (condemned a town to death by starvation) and falls.

If he leaves the town, he's left the group, and is no longer viable as a PC.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Whenever I read the ever-running debates about paladins losing their powers, I always think the same thing.

"If I was was playing a paladin who lost his powers, I'd just drop the character."

I've not no interest in playing a fighter without bonus feats, any more than I am a wizard who lost his spellcasting because he Disjoined an artifact. Furthermore, if a DM was rude enough to strip my PC's powers without my agreement, there'd be no guarantee he wouldn't do it again in the future. All in all, time to let it go.

I think that is a really bad attituide on your part, IMO. Of course, I don't know everything about the situation, but it sounds to me that you want your paladin to be able to do whatever he wants without having to worry about falling from grace. If the DM, however, striped you of your powers because you said the words, "damn Pelor to the Abyss," then maybe that might be a bit harsh. But that, to me, is not how your argument is coming across.

On a side note, I wouldn't want to play a fighter without the bonus feats either, but if I had the right DM, I would look at it as a nice challenge to return to grace. Usually such heroes have richer backgrounds and are more rewarding to play. Characters with flaws are always funner to play. Look at Raistlin as a prime example. In game terms, who would want to play that crappy character, Str: 10, Int: 17, Wis: 14, Con: 10, Dex: 16, Chr: 10, specially in 3.5, but add in his attituide and personallity, now you have something fun. Who wouldn't want hourglass eyes, gold skin and the ability to see through time. From a stat stand point though, in any addition, he sucks, almost a fallen paladin/fighter, without the bonus feats.

 

[haakon1]

A DM can make a paladin fall, it's just tricky, mean, and requires some annoying choices of interpertations (also doesn't work once the Paladin's to the point where he can simply buy food for a town for a year).

Paladin runs across a town that's obviously just barely scraping by. For whatever plot-related reason, he needs to stay in this town for a period of weeks.

After having observed that this place is just barely scraping by, he runs across the only reason that they can scrape by at all - they use (inherited) Skeletons and Zombies for all their manual labor (without the cheap labor, the soil wouldn't be good enough to feed people - they're barely scraping by).

If he doesn't destroy the skeletons and zombies, he's willingly associating with evil, and falls.

If he does destroy the skeletons and zombies, he's willfully and knowingly committed an evil act (condemned a town to death by starvation) and falls.

If he leaves the town, he's left the group, and is no longer viable as a PC.

Is that really THAT hard a scenario? Destroy the undead and move the hapless peasants to better lands. If they try to stop the destruction of their undead, destroy the infidels too -- fewer mouths to feed in that case.

 

[danzig138]

To answer your question as a player, no I wouldn't drop him, especially if he fell as a result of my choices - it would seem childish. If he fell as a result of the GM just being a pita, then I'd play him with the same gusto as before but all fallen and angsty and probably angry at the world. To address your question as a GM - if you screwed up and ended up falling, you could drop your character sure, but you would also be taking some time off. If you screwed up, and then you said "Oh well, I;m not playing this guy anymore", I'd tell you that's too bad. I'll give you a call when I can work in another character.

Furthermore, if a DM was rude enough to strip my PC's powers without my agreement, there'd be no guarantee he wouldn't do it again in the future.

Of course, this tells me that we're so far apart on the gaming spectrum that you wouldn't enjoy being at my table from the get-go, long before your paladin could fall. I have never and will never ask for or want a player's permission to hand out consequences for the actions of his character. You come to my table and I'll tell you up front - anything can happen, and damn near anything goes. By letting you at the table, I'm agreeing to not jerk you around for the hell of it. If you don't agree, you don't stay at the table, and hopefully everybody finds some gaming they like.

Concerning people playing a paladin IMG - I won't necessarily detail how I think paladins should be played, but if you go to do something that will cause some issues with your status, I will double check with you about whether or not you want to perform the action. For example, if, in my game, you decide your paladin is going to kill some orc babies because orcs are bad, I will ask you before you do it "Are you sure? Are you positive you want to do this?" And then, whatever happens to your character happens if you carry on.