D&D 5E How often do your Paladins actually violate their Oaths?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Arnwolf666]

Most players I've run or played with who chose paladin PCs have acted in good faith. One of the players I played with sticks out like a proud nail. He literally could not/would not acknowledge his actions as evil/wrong/against code.

He was not only willing to commit evil acts (torture, unprovoked killings, poison use, intimidation for gain, property theft and destruction for personal gain), but was the prime instigator. The behaviour started small and escalated as the PC gained power. He was adept at self-justification.

To be honest, that’s a person I wouldn’t even want to play with. He’s not trying. I would have take his paladin abilities away. It’s fine if your table wants to play that way. But not at mine. Or even my friends table for that matter.

Although i do like a good villain game sometimes. The paladin is not good for it imho.

 

[R_J_K75]

Most players I've run or played with who chose paladin PCs have acted in good faith. One of the players I played with sticks out like a proud nail. He literally could not/would not acknowledge his actions as evil/wrong/against code.

He was not only willing to commit evil acts (torture, unprovoked killings, poison use, intimidation for gain, property theft and destruction for personal gain), but was the prime instigator. The behaviour started small and escalated as the PC gained power. He was adept at self-justification.

How was this "Paladin" not immolated in divine fire by his deity?

 

[Nagol]

How was this "Paladin" not immolated in divine fire by his deity?

Because I was playing not running. As I said the player was adept at self-justification and the DM was trying to get along as opposed to enforce alignment/code. It was probably the major cause for the campaign failure though.

 

[R_J_K75]

Because I was playing not running. As I said the player was adept at self-justification and the DM was trying to get along as opposed to enforce alignment/code. It was probably the major cause for the campaign failure though.

Out of curiosity if you can remember what were the other classes in this adventuring party? What was the Paladins supposed alignment vs the rest of the party?

 

[jasper]

...
Most players I've run or played with who chose paladin PCs have acted in good faith. One of the players I played with sticks out like a proud nail. He literally could not/would not acknowledge his actions as evil/wrong/against code.

He was not only willing to commit evil acts (torture, unprovoked killings, poison use, intimidation for gain, property theft and destruction for personal gain), but was the prime instigator. The behaviour started small and escalated as the PC gained power. He was adept at self-justification.......
How was this "Paladin" not immolated in divine fire by his deity?

Because even back them people hated DIVINE SMITE AKA GAWD STRIKE. And due to the social contract we still had to play with the bum.

 

[Nagol]

Out of curiosity if you can remember what were the other classes in this adventuring party? What was the Paladins supposed alignment vs the rest of the party?

Monk LN,
Wizard LN
Wizard/Archer N maybe NG
Rogue NG I think
Cleric LN probably maybe supposedly LG

ETA
It was a multiclass-heavy game (3.5). Those were the base classes/roles.

 

[R_J_K75]

Monk LN,
Wizard LN
Wizard/Archer N maybe NG
Rogue NG I think
Cleric LN probably maybe supposedly LG

If ever there was a party a LG (Im assuming) shouldve worked that was it.

 

[R_J_K75]

Because even back them people hated DIVINE SMITE AKA GAWD STRIKE. And due to the social contract we still had to play with the bum.

There were times when a player just didnt gel with our group and I just said, "Sorry this isnt working out, its not you, its me and I dont think we should play together anymore".

 

[Nagol]

If ever there was a party a LG (Im assuming) shouldve worked that was it.

Yeah I should have listed the Paladin at LG, It was 3.5, before paladins had potentially other alignments.