Fallen Paladin

[green slime]

Re: Re

Use the old Sampson and Delilah scenario. If he is male rolplayer, and you are a good roleplayer, set him up with a woman over the course of a few adventures. Really draw him in through roleplaying to fall hard for this woman, then have her commit evil acts and the Paladin ends up defending her against armed good people trying to bring her to justice.

I have as a DM sucked quite a few folks in with the woman angle. Very few male player can resist a goodly woman who draws them into a web of intrigue if you are able to roleplay it properly. Then destroy him.

Enjoy!!!

Yeah, but Romance has to be played right:

A DM once fumbled around with his dice and told me my character had just fallen in love with this NPC he had just seen. I mean, he didn't need to have fiddled around with the dice if he wanted to introduce this problem to my character's life. He could've just told me his plans in an aside before the game and it would have been cool. But to be racing around on horseback, slaughtering evil dudes left and right, and then the DM fobs off such an obvious set-up... Well it set my gall running for a few sessions after that. Why bother rolling the dice? Did he really think I'd believe he had a "Random Love Table" hidden behind his screen?

But long term it was cool. Of course she was an Assassin, and my character was trying to get her out of all sorts of mischief. We had fun.

 

[Turjan]

Re: fallen paladin

here is what I would do . . . put him in a situation where the only choices he can make are harmfull ie. the evil villian has 2 of his family members but he can only save one - which one does he sacrafice to save the other. or if he won't choose then both die horrible deaths. Paladins have that "silly moral code" and stuff that they can't just fight but that places them in a moral quandry really burns them. Guilt can be a powerfull weapon.

That's cruel, not only for paladins, but for every player. I wouldn't do that as a GM without consent from the player. Otherwise it's no fun at all, because they don't have any real choice.

 

[Sanackranib]

Just wondering what kind of ways can you all think to make a paladin fall from grace. This has to be pretty extreme to make the typical paladin defy his god.

There is always the "He saw his family get killed by the head priest of his church" But im trying to think of some more unique ways to do it. All ideas would be welcomed. This could also be a nice place to write some tiny stories about it.

I was asked,
so I gave the Evil-Rat-Bastard-DM-just-fisted-me- view

IMO if you paladin does not have to constantly live up to his high moral standards and PROOVE that he can overcome MORAL chalanges then the DM isn't doing his job. the life of a paladin is HARD, it's full of sacrafice -but the rewards are great. thats why everyone's not a paladin. Of course as a DM if the player was able to overcome his trials I would award exta XP. I wouldn't have every encounter go this way but it would be a in the background ongoing part of the game. And I would tell the player ahead of time that playing a paladin is chalanging and there is not always a clear "right" or "good" choice, some choices just suck and then you have to choose the one thats the lesser of 2 evils. OR come up with a 3rd option that the DM didn't concider (or maby he did and just did't present it)

 

[sword-dancer]

Re: fallen paladin

I love this topic -

here is what I would do . . . put him in a situation where the only choices he can make are harmfull ie. the evil villian has 2 of his family members but he can only save one - which one does he sacrafice to save the other. or if he won't choose then both die horrible deaths. Paladins have that "silly moral code" and stuff that they can't just fight but that places them in a moral quandry really burns them. Guilt can be a powerfull weapon. Disguise the bad guys alignment and hire them for a task that seems on the up and up then set them up to kill inocents - Hey nobody ever said us evil types will Ever play fair and since most can't go toe to toe with a paladin use his code aginst them. But thats just the evil bastard me talking . . . Waaaa ha ha ah ha ha

I don`t see any of this as a thing over which the pally could fall.
Why you?

 

[Mordane76]

Originally posted by Sanackranib:
here is what I would do . . . put him in a situation where the only choices he can make are harmfull ie. the evil villian has 2 of his family members but he can only save one - which one does he sacrafice to save the other. or if he won't choose then both die horrible deaths. Paladins have that "silly moral code" and stuff that they can't just fight but that places them in a moral quandry really burns them. Guilt can be a powerfull weapon.

Originally posted by Turjan:
That's cruel, not only for paladins, but for every player. I wouldn't do that as a GM without consent from the player. Otherwise it's no fun at all, because they don't have any real decision.

It's more a question of the right tool for the right job. This scenario is very well suited to use against a paladin: they're set themselves apart as righteous do-gooders, and they have to realize that dastardly evil (the kind that players fight in D&D) will use Machiavellian tactics to further their ends. Sanackranib sets up a classic dilemma for those of righteous fiber, and I personally think this a great pivotal point in a character's ongoing development -- if the character wasn't a paladin, things like this wouldn't be happening to him. If he sees it this way, and renounces his vows, then he falls. If he sees it has a test of the faith, and vows to redouble his effots against those who would harm the innocent (regardless of their potential family affiliation), then he retains his paladinhood and grows stronger for the experience. Also, it gives the character more depth -- there is real tragedy that can be identified with now.

Of course, characters other than fervent LG types shouldn't ever really face such a dilemma; its effects wouldn't be as appropriate in these cases. So while it may seem cruel, and it is, it does allow the player a roleplaying experience, and fleshes out the character by the choices he makes.

Kudos to you, Sanackranib!

 

[Sanackranib]

fallen paladin

"Of course, characters other than fervent LG types shouldn't ever really face such a dilemma; its effects wouldn't be as appropriate in these cases. So while it may seem cruel, and it is, it does allow the player a roleplaying experience, and fleshes out the character by the choices he makes."
_____________________________________________

It's not so much that the other character types will not ever experience these sort of tacticks so much as they will deal with them differntly. (besides it's MUCH more fun to twist and wheel those bossy/preachy paladin types)

Its up to the DM to play the villians - maby that's why I enjoy being a DM. Seriously, all classes have chalanges to overcome, for the paladin the "test of faith" is just one of them.
___________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Turjan:
That's cruel, not only for paladins, but for every player. I wouldn't do that as a GM without consent from the player. Otherwise it's no fun at all, because they don't have any real decision.
____________________________________________________

Maby I'm just old fashioned, but I NEVER ask my players permission when I'm gonna wheel 'um. Most of the time I don't even have to go to all that much effort for the really good players. They are more likly to set/screw somthing up themselves and I just have to watch and laugh gleefully. However there are some rare occasions when NPS's really ARE "out to get you" usually it's becuase you have thwarted some scheme of theirs and now the are looking to get even. All adventure hooks are usefull to a DM as long as no single one is overused. Otherwise the players tend to take it somewhat personally. So far it hasn't been a problem in my game and has resulted in some very memorable sessions and PC's.

Mordane76 - your post was excelent I'm glad that you understood what I was trying to say

 

[Sanackranib]

fallen paladin

"Machiavellian tactics "

what a great choice of words. Good Form! Mordane76.

 

[Oni]

The beginning of the movie Bram Stoker's Dracula, I think would be a good example of one scenario of a fall from grace and the rejection of all they formerly upheld.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I think the relevant question is this: why do you want the paladin to fall from grace. If you're the DM and you just don't like paladins, why did you let the player play one in the first place? I'd be upset if I joined a game, chose to play a paladin, and then the DM decided to get rid of my character by coming up with a series of no-win situations and then told me "you're not a paladin anymore, ha ha ha." There's a difference between setting up decisions for a character to make and just being out to screw the player over. IMO, its the difference between a good DM and a rotten one.

If you really want to set up moral dilemmas for characters, also make sure to make them dilemmas for the character. I see no reason why a paladin would fall from grace for being unable to save someone from the villain. If the villain does the classic "Choose which one of these will die a horrible death routine" it's still the villain who is going to kill them and not the paladin. Just because the villain makes a comic-book speech doesn't transfer the responsibility for his actions to the paladin. The paladin could still fall from grace but it would be because he chose to do so in response to the action--by being consumed with revenge and committing evil acts in order to catch the villain after the fact for instance. Or by torturing the villain to death rather than simply killing him after capturing him at a later point. A paladin may fall from grace as a result of his own actions but never as a direct result of the villain's actions.

 

[Sanackranib]

fallen paladin

I think the relevant question is this: why do you want the paladin to fall from grace. If you're the DM and you just don't like paladins, why did you let the player play one in the first place? I'd be upset if I joined a game, chose to play a paladin, and then the DM decided to get rid of my character by coming up with a series of no-win situations and then told me "you're not a paladin anymore, ha ha ha." There's a difference between setting up decisions for a character to make and just being out to screw the player over. IMO, its the difference between a good DM and a rotten one.

If you really want to set up moral dilemmas for characters, also make sure to make them dilemmas for the character. I see no reason why a paladin would fall from grace for being unable to save someone from the villain. If the villain does the classic "Choose which one of these will die a horrible death routine" it's still the villain who is going to kill them and not the paladin. Just because the villain makes a comic-book speech doesn't transfer the responsibility for his actions to the paladin. The paladin could still fall from grace but it would be because he chose to do so in response to the action--by being consumed with revenge and committing evil acts in order to catch the villain after the fact for instance. Or by torturing the villain to death rather than simply killing him after capturing him at a later point. A paladin may fall from grace as a result of his own actions but never as a direct result of the villain's actions.

This is the point I was making when i said "Guilt can be a powerfull weapon. "