SHould paladins powers be lost peicemeal?

[fiddlerjones]

I agree though that the bard's restriction to chaotic alignments is silly. However, if a class is blessed by a deity or a force (nature), that deity or force can revoke its blessing at will. Having rules for this is a good thing, as it doesn't leave the player saying "Hey! You can't do that!"

DM/player cooperation is the key here. I think paladins et al should have restrictions and consequences, but exactly what those are and how they manifest is something to be determined differently for each game.

 

[Torm]

I think that a player who willfully causes his Paladin to do something that is Evil or directly against the code should see his or her character stripped of all their Paladin abilities. I don't know that I've ever understood the whole d10 thing, though. I don't see how taking their Paladinhood from them should suddenly reduce them in aspects that don't have anything to do with divine favor, but instead come from physical training - like BAB or HP. Unless they did something really bad and the DM also thinks their deity would have cursed them, as well - in which case, that should probably be described that way.

Most of the time, though, we're not talking about willful violation. We're talking about a player's haste or misunderstanding, or possibly an interesting character concept, that leads them to a questionable action. In which case, a DM should have the power (as Rule 0 implies) to have their deity restrict them from a particular power, curse them in some minor way, or force them to wear a little pink dress to maintain their powers - whatever seems appropriate to the story the DM and his players are building together.

So I voted for piecemeal removal as the option closest to my overall view.

So speaks Torm, God of Paladins.

 

[TheGM]

I am puzzled by the amount of time people waste debating paladin punishments and devising plot traps for code-bound characters. The paladin's code serves no game-balance purpose, and people have very different conceptions of good. DM's should not declare that players should live by their particular worldview as to what is the ultimate moral heights. Paladins should be played to A CODE, but it should only be enforced for a general degree of consistancy and be tied more ot the player's understanding of good (within reason) than the DMs.

That would be a great plan, IFF the player and the GM had vaguely similar views. The paladin's code should be well documented for thier Order, but if you let players run with it, there are players that will claim killing innocents is "good" because it benefits them.

Sorry, it's true. Some of them would even be inventive about it, but we've all had those players.

As to the quesiton: I always remove some and send dreams as warnings.

I should also note that it is rare IMC that a paladin has these problems, because the codes are documented, as is what's most importatnt to the Order.

 

[LostSoul]

That would be a great plan, IFF the player and the GM had vaguely similar views. The paladin's code should be well documented for thier Order, but if you let players run with it, there are players that will claim killing innocents is "good" because it benefits them.

Sorry, it's true. Some of them would even be inventive about it, but we've all had those players.

My question is: so what? So what if he wants to kill innocents and claim it is "good"?

If it's a problem with the setting, just tell him that he's not a Lawful Good Paladin, like in the book, but some other kind of Paladin with all the same abilities.

I personally feel that "killing innocents = good" is a great way to build conflict.

 

[genshou]

I enjoy the Paladin class. It's a role-playing challenge and I wouldn't have it any other way. If a paladin fails to follow their code, they'll be saying goodbye to at least one of their abilities. If a player wants to be a Warrior with UBER MAGICZ!!!!!!11!!~! then they can choose a different class, like the Oathsworn from Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved. That, or they can approach me before the game and say "I like the Paladin class, but I really want to play a Chaotic Good champion of Sune..." And then I would keep the class abilities but alter the code to match the dogma of said CG deity of beauty and love.

The same goes for Anti-Paladins, and though detect good is less useful than detect evil most of the time, the ability to cast contagion X times per week is... well, you get the picture.

I voted for piecemeal removal of Paladin abilities (and replace them with something else at times) because it enforces the ideas behind the class. If players don't want to play a Paladin, then I will allow other options if requested, as I described above.

"Game balance" has nothing to do with losing class abilities. It's all about the role-playing, baby.

 

[Sejs]

Selective alteration or denial of access to abilities as are fitting to the nature of the fall, up to and including the full-package removal in the case of real big A-grade violations.


Damn what the RAW says, the game is supposed to be about fun.