delericho
Legend
gizmo33 said:
Lawful is not the same as "follows the law". The Paladin's code, and the details of the Lawful Good alignment are spelled out in the PHB. Yes, the definitions are fairly open and inclusive, largely because they have to be to keep the number of possible alignments down to 9.
Per the RAW, the Paladin is allowed to adhere to any valid interpretation of the Lawful Good alignment, provided he also follows the code and doesn't willingly commit any Evil acts. So, there really is no RAW-based justification for the DM to revoke the Paladin's powers in the circumstance described.
There's another really good metagame reason this shouldn't be an issue: the only circumstance in which this will be an issue is if a PC Paladin dies and the player decides not to have the character raised. This only happens if the player wants to leave the game or wants to switch character. Either way, the DM really shouldn't be trying to force the issue - better to leave the character dead and avoid making an issue out of nothing. (If that means the DM has to adapt his storyline to deal with the Paladin not being there, well, that's kinda what he's there for.)
