Can the gods strip a paladin of his class?

[Agback]

Any god, any time, can CHOOSE to be personally involved with a paladin if they want to. Who's going to stop them???

It isn't a matter of anybody stopping them. It is a matter of there being limits to their powers. That there are such liimits is clearly shown by the fact that even a god cannot give paladin powers to a chaotic good character.

By the rules as written, a paladin's powers don't come from his god (if any) any more than a sorceror's powers do. And the restrictions on paladins are not imposed by gods. Those restrictions still apply to a paladin who serves no god. They cannot be waived by a god, and they are not judged by a god.

Would you argue that "Any god, any time, can CHOOSE to be personally involved with a sorceror if they want to. Who's going to stop them???"? If not, why not? And if so, can a god take away a sorceror's spells? Or a rogue's sneak attack?

 

[Agback]

Which just brings up the question: is the "core code" the entire code, or is it just a part of it (the part that all paladins have in common)?

The rules use the indefinite singular "a paladin's code", not the definite singular "the Paladin's Code". While the plural "paladin's codes" would have been more explicit, I would have to accept that the rules allow that different paladins in the same setting to have different codes.

On the other hand, the rules still say that the paladin has to obey the code in fact, not in his god's judgement. They allow no room for a god to either waive the paladin's loss of powers if he or she breaks his or her code or to exercise discretion or judgement in borderline cases. And most especially they do not allow the gods to impose arbitrary penances or partial or temporary suspensions of powers.

I know a lot of DMs are going to Rule-Zero this, and that a lot of campaigns are going to feature gods with virtually unlimited powers (eg. to strip a fighter of her feats or a barbarian of his rage). With all due respect, though, I am not in this instance particularly curious about people's settings or house rules.

 

[Artoomis]

It isn't a matter of anybody stopping them. It is a matter of there being limits to their powers. That there are such liimits is clearly shown by the fact that even a god cannot give paladin powers to a chaotic good character.
...

Would you argue that "Any god, any time, can CHOOSE to be personally involved with a sorceror if they want to. Who's going to stop them???"? If not, why not? And if so, can a god take away a sorceror's spells? Or a rogue's sneak attack?

In the last paragraph you have it exactly right - a god can indeed become personally involved with a sorceror and change his powers.

Mind you, it's not really recommeded for a DM to do this too much and things become rather unpredictable, which usually does not sit well with the players, but the rules really don't restrict what a DM can decide a god can or cannot do.

 

[Lord Wyrm]

If you don't like the gods being able to strip powers then they could always just use the Hand of Death SDA and kill the paladin outright, no ressurection possible.

Paladins cast divine spells and draw other powers from the same source. Divine spells by their very nature are related to the dieties. If dieties don't like someone abusing their power they can remove the ability to use it without any trouble.

And as far as dieties only making Lawful Good paladins the blackguard is the infernal counterpart and UA gave variants for all the alignment extremes.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I would have to accept that the rules allow that different paladins in the same setting to have different codes.

On the other hand, the rules still say that the paladin has to obey the code in fact, not in his god's judgement. They allow no room for a god to either waive the paladin's loss of powers if he or she breaks his or her code or to exercise discretion or judgement in borderline cases.

Unless, of course, you're able to put two and two together and come up with the first item of a given code being, "Above all and in all things, obey the will of [Divine Being X]. Hearken to [his] precepts, given here so that ye might know them, but always turn thine ear to the Divine Voice."

In short, if the will of the god in question is part of the Code (and, really, when wouldn't it be for a deistic paladin?), then disobeying your god would be violating your code, and your god could give dispensation to break and / or ignore another part of the code.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Possibly. But a paladin still gets to cast divine spells even if he or she has no god to begin with. This suggests that paladins don't need gods' help to get divine spells.

Same with Clerics. But does that mean a Cleric without a deity is under the same lines? What happens to him if he doesn't do what his alignment requires of him? Who takes his powers away?

 

[Agback]

Unless, of course, you're able to put two and two together and come up with the first item of a given code being, "Above all and in all things, obey the will of [Divine Being X]. Hearken to [his] precepts, given here so that ye might know them, but always turn thine ear to the Divine Voice."

In short, if the will of the god in question is part of the Code (and, really, when wouldn't it be for a deistic paladin?), then disobeying your god would be violating your code, and your god could give dispensation to break and / or ignore another part of the code.

I agree that the god can legislate extra rules for its paladins. And I guess that by legislating appropriately it can give itself power to dispense its own requirements in advance. But any code that it iimposes only places a requirement on the behaviour of the paladin. Additions to a code of conduct only constrain conduct, they do not give the person follow the code the ability to do things that are beyond his power. So the god could include an item in the code "I will remain a paladin if my god says I must, even if I have broken the code", but that would not make the paladin able to do that. So although the gods might have power to lay extra constraints on paladins, and might even order their paladins not to use their paladin powers, the obligation of the paladin to respect the legitimate authority of the god he or she worships does not create an for the god to give paladin powers to a character who does not qualify for them.

The paladin has to respect his god. If he does not, and if his disrepect is 'gross', he or she loses his or her powers. But the god still can't give paladiny powers to a person who doesn't qualify for them. That means that it is the actuality of alignment, the actuality of association, the actuality of abstinence from evil, and the actuality of respect that determines a paladin's status, not the god's opinion or judgement of those things.

A god (eg. Helm, in Faerûn) might find it very convenient to have lawful neutral paladins. Or to let lawful good paladins get away with just one evil act in the god's interests. But by the rules as written, no god is able to do these things.

A paladin has to be lawful good, not collect a mendacious certificate from a god. If a paladin wilfully and knowingly commits an evil act, even an Atonemment will not restore his or her class.

To attempt an analogy, the legislature in a modern state with separation of powers can make laws that I have to obey on pain of fines or imprisonment. But that legislative power does not give the legislature the ability to try my case. And a law that says "you must escape from prison if the speaker of the house says that what you did was okay" doesn't give me the ability to walk through walls.

Similarly, a god cannot give paladiny powers to a neutral good character. If the gods had discretion to waive requierments of the paladin class in the case of their worshippers they would be able to do that. Therefore, the gods do not have that power. And that paladins' respect cannot give the god a power that teh core rules prove it does not have.

 

[Agback]

Same with Clerics. But does that mean a Cleric without a deity is under the same lines? What happens to him if he doesn't do what his alignment requires of him?

His alignment changes.

Who takes his powers away?

The same 'person' who takes away a ranger's ability to dual-wield when he cuts his own arm off, or a wizard's ability to cast spells when he it knocked down to -21 hit points getting caught in his own fireball.

It you don't have what it takes, you can't do it. No one needs to exert discretion or judgement over that.

 

[Agback]

In the last paragraph you have it exactly right - a god can indeed become personally involved with a sorceror and change his powers.

But a god can't make a neutral good character into a paladin, nor empower a paladin to continue to use his powers if he knowingly associates with evil characters.

 

[Artoomis]

... But by the rules as written, no god is able to do these things...

ROFL. The rules, as writen, do not really restrict what a god can and cannot do. That's like saying the rules, as written, restrict what a DM can and cannot do. They most certainly do not.

It's up to the DM to understand what the rules say and vary them only with some logical reason (well, one would hope, anyway).

If a DM wants to have Paladins all have no spell casting and instead have much greater abilities with mounts, that's okay and allowed by the rules. Remember the rules invest final authority with the DM - who is free to state that "the gods have declared..."

It's just silly to talk about what the gods can and cannot do per the rules as far as what they can do to a character. Gods have all kinds of powers and can do darn near what they please when it comes to individual characters. A DM decides how much interaction the gods have with ordinary mortals for his/her world setting.