Paladin Question

[Kieperr]

I disagree. The BoED and its tennets are most certainly not meant to apply to all good characters. And a DM insisting that it did would be a bright neon sign that he and I needed to part ways.

So you are saying that not all good characters want to be as good as they can be? That is what an exalted character is, a character that is devoted to the highest ideals of good. Sounds like a paladin to me. In fact, the only requirement to become an exalted character is to be good. Simply by having a good alignment (and DM's permission) allows you to take Exalted feats. The BoED is a book for good characters, all good characters. There are spells, PrCs, and magic items that require you to have exalted feats but the tennets of the bok are for all good characters. You do not have to be an exalted character to do what is good, you simply have to be a good character.

 

[Bront]

I would suggest warning the Paladin first, as his intentions were good, but the acts, not so.

Moral issues are sometimes ambigious. Sometimes it's not intentional, as many people view Paladin's as the "Kill all evil" type of character, and in a black and white run world, that may work. But in the real world, or a game modeled in some fasion, the correct moral ground isn't always obvious.

In comment to RA's post above, as a player (and LG character) in that game, my character viewed the actions of that group of Hobgoblins as evil (for a variety of reasons, including demanding spoils for creatures they didn't kill, and trying to take the high road after they attacked us first. Also, my character never did the sleeping CDGs, though he did take part in the ambush on the awake guards.)

Also, in defense of our group, the entire adventure has been moraly ambigious, and though some members of the party have made it worse, it's realy been so murky that I know I hardly know which way's up at this point as a player, let alone a character.

 

[FireLance]

So you are saying that not all good characters want to be as good as they can be? That is what an exalted character is, a character that is devoted to the highest ideals of good. Sounds like a paladin to me. In fact, the only requirement to become an exalted character is to be good. Simply by having a good alignment (and DM's permission) allows you to take Exalted feats. The BoED is a book for good characters, all good characters. There are spells, PrCs, and magic items that require you to have exalted feats but the tennets of the bok are for all good characters. You do not have to be an exalted character to do what is good, you simply have to be a good character.

I think this will vary from game to game. Some DMs do not agree with the definition of good as presented in the Book of Exalted Deeds. In their view, this approach is foolish and impractical because it will be ruthlessly exploited by evil creatures. Hence, good PCs that act in this way in their games will be punished rather than rewarded.

For example, if a DM believes that sparing the lives of evil creatures is a moronic act instead of a merciful one, the PCs might eventually discover that the evil creatures that they spared went on to commit some horrific acts. To such a DM, killing evil creatures that surrendered would be the only smart thing to do, and would not be an evil act provided the PCs did not cause undue pain or suffering.

 

[mvincent]

Certainly blanking the paladin powers is _not_ something that should be done if their is any room for contention.

It doesn't seem like there was room for contention in the DM's eyes, only the player's. Regardless, the DM's expectation here seems reasonable. Again, this is a subjective issue, and you might rule differently in your games (which would also be perfectly fine), but I feel any player that insists that a DM make a different call here has unwarranted (and unfair) expectations. The DM made a fair call, and warned the player before he made it.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

The DM made a fair call, and warned the player before he made it.

I disagree. The fair warning would have come before the player rolled up a paladin.

I don't mind DMs who view Good, Evil, and paladins differently than I do. As FireLance mentioned, we all interpret these issues differently, and what is acceptable to one DM won't be to another. I'm not going to argue with the DM to try and change his view of game morality to match mine. I simply won't play a paladin, (even though I prefer the class,) and the problem is solved.

Waiting until after a player has rolled up a paladin and commited an "infraction" before explaining to them that they're boned by the game world is not fair warning. Now, I'm not saying it's all the DM's fault. A player interested in playing a paladin should, as Hypersmurf suggests, make sure he's on the same page before he rolls that character up. This is an issue that both the DM and the player should be on top of, the minute someone suggests someone wants to run a paladin.

But to suggest that the DM is perfectly justified in boning the player, because, mid-game, he says, "oh, btw, our views on paladins and Good are completely different" just prior to boning him, is disingenuous, IMO.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

So you are saying that not all good characters want to be as good as they can be?

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that not all good characters will be punished if the aren't as good as the possibly can be. Not fighters, not paladins, not anyone that isn't actually Exalted.

That is what an exalted character is, a character that is devoted to the highest ideals of good.

No, an Exalted character is a character that has achieved the highest ideals of Good (if you agree with them as deliniated in the BoED.) That's why they've got Exalted feats. And if they do not maintain that Exalted status, they lose access to those Exalted feats.

Sounds like a paladin to me. In fact, the only requirement to become an exalted character is to be good.

Note the distinction. An Exalted character must be good. But a Good character is not necessarily Exalted. They are two different things. One is a stricter form of the other. i.e. you can be Good without being Exalted. The definition of non-Exalted Good is defined in the PH, and includes among other things the "merciless destruction of evil" (paraphrase)

Simply by having a good alignment (and DM's permission) allows you to take Exalted feats.

Yes, but you are not Exalted until you take those feats, and you are not bound by the Exalted ethical code unti you do so.

The BoED is a book for good characters, all good characters.

No.

There are spells, PrCs, and magic items that require you to have exalted feats but the tennets of the bok are for all good characters.

No.

You do not have to be an exalted character to do what is good, you simply have to be a good character.

This is true. However, you do have to be an Exalted character to be held to the highest standards of Good. If you are not Exalted, then you do not have to live up to those impossibly high standards at all times, or even most times.

 

[mvincent]

I disagree. The fair warning would have come before the player rolled up a paladin.

You do not believe that the Paladin description would lead a reasonable person to anticipate this as a possibility?

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

It doesn't seem like there was room for contention in the DM's eyes, only the player's.

Yeah, but that is just the sort of contention I would try to avoid. Put another way, I reckon blanking the pally powers should happen when player and dm agree that it should happen. Another iteration is that losing paladin status is more fun for all if it is grand and dramatic with a good opportunity to roleplay.

Other times I figure that nipping a little power here or there, coupled with a nagging doubt over some action done can suffice. Give that otherwise useless Remove disease the workout because denying that doesn't wreck the character, but if your friends are like mine they will go to lengths to restore little lost things.

As an aside I do not think the complete loss of powers is a particularly clever mechanic. I can see what it is meant to achieve but ime it has also led to retired pc's, which effectively bypassed the loss of powers. In a future edition I'd hope to see a more street smart mechanic.

 

[Rystil Arden]

In comment to RA's post above, as a player (and LG character) in that game, my character viewed the actions of that group of Hobgoblins as evil (for a variety of reasons, including demanding spoils for creatures they didn't kill, and trying to take the high road after they attacked us first. Also, my character never did the sleeping CDGs, though he did take part in the ambush on the awake guards.)

I think Cade's actions were appropriate for a LG character. The ones who were sketchiest were Scun and Tandi. By the way, the hobgoblins not only didn't attack you first, they never attacked you at all except to defend themselves when ambushe .

 

[Seeten]

As a player who generally picks LE, I'd LOVE to be let loose in the world of this BoED Exalted alignment. As a wizard(necromancer)/Pale Master, I could cry foul, pout a bit and surrender, and teleport without error 5 minutes later every single time I am found.

Wow, would that ever be fun. And I could laugh at the complete idiot fool Paladins, while I kill his family and animate them, make his wife a ghoul, make his children into zombies, and then face him, and say, "Oops, I am sorry Sir, I surrender!" and 5 minutes later, teleport without error again, with a contingency to leave laughter in the air for hours later. Oh, and for his loved ones to attack him.