Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SlagMortar" data-source="post: 3674544" data-attributes="member: 24821">Wow are we ever talking about this from totally different perspectives.&nbsp; I'm trying to address what my paladin character would be thinking when presented with your situation.I'll admit I still think of paladins somewhat in 2nd edition terms.Ok, how's this for an even better plot.&nbsp; My paladin decides to have dinner with the fiend, fully expecting to lose his status as a paladin, and then he doesn't.&nbsp; Now he's just learned something about his faith.&nbsp; Yay for character growth.&nbsp; Me neither.&nbsp; I never said it was true of the campaign world.&nbsp; I said that's what my paladin believes.If the paladin could be convinced it was not a trick, and he had permission (that he believed) from his diety to go, then he would go.&nbsp; It would basically be a pre-atonement without the disillusionment of having actually failed to keep his oaths.Now, I've been thinking about this from a player's perspective.&nbsp; As a DM who decided to present the paladin with such a situation, I would expect and plan for either outcome, and probably allow neither to cause a fall.&nbsp; I would certainly not spend a bunch of time writing an adventure where I expected the paladin to go on the dinner date.The paladin class seems to have been almost intentionally constructed to show that finding a global optimum can not be done by making locally optimal decisions.&nbsp; For example for the non-math people out there, you can't reach the highest point on the earth by starting in New York and walking only uphill.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SlagMortar, post: 3674544, member: 24821"] Wow are we ever talking about this from totally different perspectives. I'm trying to address what my paladin character would be thinking when presented with your situation. I'll admit I still think of paladins somewhat in 2nd edition terms. Ok, how's this for an even better plot. My paladin decides to have dinner with the fiend, fully expecting to lose his status as a paladin, and then he doesn't. Now he's just learned something about his faith. Yay for character growth. Me neither. I never said it was true of the campaign world. I said that's what my paladin believes. If the paladin could be convinced it was not a trick, and he had permission (that he believed) from his diety to go, then he would go. It would basically be a pre-atonement without the disillusionment of having actually failed to keep his oaths. Now, I've been thinking about this from a player's perspective. As a DM who decided to present the paladin with such a situation, I would expect and plan for either outcome, and probably allow neither to cause a fall. I would certainly not spend a bunch of time writing an adventure where I expected the paladin to go on the dinner date. The paladin class seems to have been almost intentionally constructed to show that finding a global optimum can not be done by making locally optimal decisions. For example for the non-math people out there, you can't reach the highest point on the earth by starting in New York and walking only uphill. [/QUOTE]

Verification