Total..er..partial..er somewhat chaos?

[Vraille Darkfang]

Yes, greed.



Actually, they are both. If I have a +1 longsword, and stumble across a +1 dagger, then yes, that dagger is effectively a lightweight way of carrying 1152.5gp. It is NOTHING more than cash.



Sadly, this seems to be what everyone believes. And certainly what the core ruleset adheres to. Of course, if you trust your GM ...



Yes, yes they are. Most folks, if the item is not exactly what they want, will save it only to sell it so that they can eventually afford to have someone craft the item they really want. Some of those items may be useful in the interim, but eventually they will be exchanged for cash.



Huh, I read that as being forced to drop down to 5 items from this dimension, i.e. only 5 of the items that they had looted from this dimension. I'm not sure I read that wrong, either. Goldmoon, how exactly did this work?

I need to make this clarification about this situation.

I read "The Disembodied voice says you can leave with only 5 magic items from this dimension" as "This Magic Portal will only function if you are carrying 5 or less magical items", and not "Of all the items Created on this Dimension, you may only take 5 a piece".

There is a big difference between being told you can only keep 5 new toys as opposed to giving away ALL BUT 5 of ALL your toys, including the new ones.

If it is only to keep 5 new ones, I can see Greed. If its strip down to whichever 5 you want of all you got, then it's about survival.

I read this as a DM attempt to strip back the PC's Magic Items, not limit how much they could take from the encounter.

I stand by the "It's not Greed" if they had to go down to 5 or less Total, if it was only keep 5 new things, greed might have a had a bit to do with it.

And, if, in fact, the DM threw a opposing party against you armed with everything and a +2 Shocking Burst Kitchen Sink, you have the following options:

If the goons you killed were overloading with Cool Stuff™? So much so you were amazed at how much fire-power they were able to bear? If so, according to the Player vs DM Fair Equipment of Enemies act of 1992, any attempt from the DM to ensure you can’t keep the Cool Stuff™ allows you 1d4 Dice Throws per player at his Skull. (While the d30 is no longer allowed following the ‘Gygax Gen-Con Car Alarm Incident’ Those Heavy Metal d20’s still fit through a loophole. Rules-Lawyer Away!)

 

[Artoomis]

..I stand by the "It's not Greed" if they had to go down to 5 or less Total, if it was only keep 5 new things, greed might have a had a bit to do with it...If it is only to keep 5 new ones, I can see Greed. If its strip down to whichever 5 you want of all you got, then it's about survival.

I think there is no doubt that some self-interest was involved.

What does this paladin's vow have to say about following church rules? And, is there any rule about returning such items to the church for destruction? At times like this it's good to have all that stuff written out.

Gross violations of the code (which I certainly do NOT think this was, even if it was a violation) would strip a paladin of powers.

Yes, it was a chaotic act. No overly so, but "freedom, adaptability, and flexibility" were involved here, and that's part of the D&D definition of Chaos.

A chaotic act will NOT strip a paladin of powers unless it actually is an alignment-changing act. An evil act yes, a chaotic act, no.

Finally, there is of course no doubting that this was NOT an evil act - it was, in fact, a very good act.

Heck, the paladin gave up two shares of "loot" to get the sword and scrolls in his possessiion so the sword could be destroyed. Of course, that may be a meaninlgess personal sacrifice when all but five items must be left behind anyway.

 

[Goldmoon]

Im not sure how to quote multiple sources so I'll answer questions without the quotes.

1. We were allowed to remove 5 items, TOTAL from the dimention. Personally, I came into the dimention with 8, including the ones thet belonged to my Special mount. (My DM considers those to be mine as well and they were included in my 5 total items.)

2. If it matters, the items I took with me were: My Armor(+3 Full Plate/ moderate Fortification), My Holy Avenger, my mount's armor (+5 Full Plate barding), my ring of Regeneration and my Mantle of faith.

3. I asked if I felt that destroying the Sword on my own would voilate any church law or code and I was told "Not that you know of".

4. For the record I did not officially lose my powers till after the fight in our own dimention because my Holy Avenger still functioned as such during the battle. (also, my mount went "poof" along with its armor and all my gear stored in its saddlebags)

 

[Artoomis]

Im not sure how to quote multiple sources so I'll answer questions without the quotes.

1. We were allowed to remove 5 items, TOTAL from the dimention. Personally, I came into the dimention with 8, including the ones thet belonged to my Special mount. (My DM considers those to be mine as well and they were included in my 5 total items.)

2. If it matters, the items I took with me were: My Armor(+3 Full Plate/ moderate Fortification), My Holy Avenger, my mount's armor (+5 Full Plate barding), my ring of Regeneration and my Mantle of faith.

3. I asked if I felt that destroying the Sword on my own would voilate any church law or code and I was told "Not that you know of".

4. For the record I did not officially lose my powers till after the fight in our own dimention because my Holy Avenger still functioned as such during the battle. (also, my mount went "poof" along with its armor and all my gear stored in its saddlebags)

Well, then , it's a load of... well , never mind what.

Since you did not violate your code (how could you have a GROSS VIOLATION of code and not even know it?) and since you did not change alignement, your powers are, by the rules, retained.

Only three things remove a paladin's powers (short of diety intervention and the like):

1. Evil act.
2. Gross violation of paladin's code.
3. Change of alignment.

You should ask your DM if any of thse things happened. If not, what gives? Not previously announced house rules by the DM, maybe?

Finally, why did you get to have your powers during one last fight? Doesn't make sense.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Yes, it was a chaotic act.

I strongly disagree. IMO it was not even remotely a chaotic act. It was a choice in response to a new problem, nothing more. I cannot see any possible interpretation that would call it a chaotic act.

 

[Goldmoon]

I strongly disagree. IMO it was not even remotely a chaotic act. It was a choice in response to a new problem, nothing more. I cannot see any possible interpretation that would call it a chaotic act.

Thats what I said. How can that be considered a chaotic act? I was going to take the sword back, found out later I was limited on what I could take and made a plan to deal with it. Am I not allowed ot change my mind or alter a plan?

 

[Al the Absentminded]

There is only one possible justification for this:

The Evil Sword was destroyed in such a way that it released its evil into the world. Go get the atonement cast. It should tell you that you must destroy the evil, and that while you do anything unrelated, your powers won't function.

That makes it within - barely - the bounds of reason. If you don't get your powers while trying to complete the purging, that goes across the line.

-Albert

 

[werk]

Am I not allowed ot change my mind or alter a plan?

That depends...are you lawful stupid? Lawful stoopid can never change the plan.

The DM was obviously trying to reduce the magical hardware that the party possessed, probably because of miscalcultions that he made resulting in an overpowered party. (Was the conflict in the alternate dimension a little too easy for the party/did he put a lot of time in creating the 'tough' encounter?) There are lots of ways to limit character power, but 'strip down to 5 items says the DM voiceover' is not even on my list.

Destroying the evil item, testing to see if it was magical, then taking it with as a mundane item sounds like a creative solution to a problem created by lack of imagination.

 

[IndyPendant]

Girls shouldn't play DND.

























--Kidding!

It's too bad more girls don't play DND, actually--although the imbalance isn't anywhere near what it was "back in my day!"

As to the original topic of the post. As a player who loves paladins, and has currently 'snuck' a paladin concept in behind the back of a GM who apparently *hates* the concept of good vs evil...that was bull.

Get. A. New. GM.

 

[Sejs]

Actually, they are both. If I have a +1 longsword, and stumble across a +1 dagger, then yes, that dagger is effectively a lightweight way of carrying 1152.5gp. It is NOTHING more than cash.

Or it's a lightweight, concealable, magical backup weapon that you can throw, use in a grapple, or cut your way out with when swallowed whole.