A charmed life?

[Barnacleez]

If a Paladin or other alignment restricted character is forced to do an evil act through some sort of charm/compulsion or because of losing a will save to an evil sword, do they lose their Paladin status?

The source of my confusion lies in two places.

1) Paladin Class in PH says that a paladin loses his status if he willingly commits an evil act.

2) Atonement Spell says it can be used to restore a paladin who unwillingly commits an evil act.

These seem to contradict each other.

I was unable to find any other rulings. Any help/opinions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[Cloudgatherer]

Since it is "willingly" I'd say a paladin does not lose his abilities. However, it might "cost" him an atonement spell from a cleric of his faith for doing something bad while charmed, dominated, or otherwise controlled.

 

[HeavyG]

-smartalec answer-

If your god is Ahole, the God of Unfairness, Patron of Jerks, he might punish you for something you had no control over (aka being screwed over by the DM).

Otherwise, I'd say that your god, probably having a wisdom score above 10, would understand.

If you've been charmed through your own negligence, though, it's another thing entirely.

 

[Skaros]

However, if it were my paladin, in some situations I'd take it on myself to lose my abilities for a while.

I could easily see a Paladin that loses a battle of wills with an evil sword, and succumbs to its temptations (even magical) being so filled with remorse and a feeling of unworthiness at having given in that his feeling of uncleanliness separates him from his God until he atones.

In similar cases, I'd be thinking "what a great opportunity to roleplay this divine warrior's conscious!"

-Skaros

 

[DMFTodd]

Intersting question. There seems to be some contradiction. I'd rule that what the Class entry says has precedence. So a Paladin only loses their class abilities when they willingly do something wrong. A charm would not work.

There seems to be some wiggle room through for *unwittingly*. What about the paladin that kills the good guy by mistake? I'd make them atone for that. I don't have a rule to back that up though.

 

[Hatchling Dragon]

1) Paladin Class in PH says that a paladin loses his status if he willingly commits an evil act.

2) Atonement Spell says it can be used to restore a paladin who unwillingly commits an evil act.

These seem to contradict each other.

Maybe it's just me, but those are complimentary, not at all contradictory. If you do something Evil on purpose (ie: willingly) then you're no longer a Paladin, and quite frankly never will be again. Paladins get some kick-arse abilities, and are Lawful Good, by doing something so radically 'off-track' you've shown you're neither anymore. One strike, you're out, permanently. Depending on just what you did you could suffer retribution from your God, after-all you've spent your life (till that point) fighting the type of person you yourself have just become, right?

Atonement seems to be a built-in mechanic that allows DM's to get around Evil Swords (tm) or what-not taking over thier Paladins just long enough to ruin thier careers. You were possessed, you really didn't do those things, it was the Sword (or spell, whatever) that was in control. Granted, you did let it take control, so you'll just have to Atone for your failure. This is to prove that you're going to try harder (or something) to resist those evil influences, you're supposed to be above all that after all, aren't you?

Hope that straightened things out for you.

Hatchling Dragon

 

[Artoomis]

Let's se what the catual text says, shall we?

Ex-Paladins: A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all special abilities and spells, including the service of the paladin's warhorse. She also may not progress in levels as a paladin. She regains her abilities if she atones for her violations, as appropriate.

It seems that grossly violating the code does not need to be willingly done, perhaps, but it also seems that anything can be atoned for, maybe. Big maybe - it's clearly up to the DM.

Generally, a paladin may atone for anything done unwillingly or in error. But that's just a general rule - this is WAY into DM style issues.

 

[LostSoul]

It could also be argued that, since Charm and other Enchantment spells offer a Will save, the Paladin allowed himself to succumb. He should have had more faith!

I could see certain gods believing this... the hard-edged ones. But a Paladin isn't likely to follow one of them. Although St. Cuthbert might be included with these hard-ass gods.

 

[Zerovoid]

If you do something evil and break your Paladin vows, you lose your paladin status.

If the evil action was unwilling, you can get an atonement spell cast, and regain paladin status.

If I was willing, then you can never be a paladin again.

I thought this was spelled out pretty clearly somewhere, but I don't know where. Maybe it was 2e or something, but I'm pretty certain this is how it works.

 

[Zerovoid]

If you do something evil and break your Paladin vows, you lose your paladin status.

If the evil action was unwilling, you can get an atonement spell cast, and regain paladin status.

If I was willing, then you can never be a paladin again.

I thought this was spelled out pretty clearly somewhere, but I don't know where. Maybe it was 2e or something, but I'm pretty certain this is how it works.