| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1ZickZakApr 18, 2015 17:40:21 | Hello,
I created a lawful neutral Paladin of Vengeance - Bahamut’s follower. Last session we’ve encountered a group of orcs in Lost mines of Phandalver. One of the orcs was some big 9 feet tall, somewhat intelligent, monster – hope you know which encounter it is. It got controlled by a Charm Person.
IMO I broke my “greedy” background, my Oath of Vengeance, code of Bahamut and Lawful Neutral alignment. Now, if I’m not mistaken, what would keep this paladin adventuring, as he has absolutely no ambitions anymore?
|
| #2BRJNApr 18, 2015 18:35:19 | Remind your DM that Paladins no longer must be Lawful Good. He may review the 5e PH if he feels it necessary. Also remind him that he gets to run every single creature in the whole world, this should keep his plate full, stop trying to run MY CHARACTER too.
I play a Paladin of the Ancients in HotDQ, and had to justify why I said that our party should obliterate a frog-monster breeding pond full of tadpoles. I pointed out the 5e Monster Manual entry that stated they are irredemably Evil. (In 4e, they were not only un-natural but anti-natural, and a blight upon all that lived.) My oath is re-fluffed to be for Civilization, not Nature; since these frog-monsters destroy everything they touch, no material progress is possible for them, and they prevent the material progress of others. My character is also supposed to be a "Warlord" prototype, so he thinks strategically. I acknowledged and accepted the potential damage to my reputation, figuring that harm to be less than the wounds and injuries suffered by the future party that would have to fight and kill these individuals if we let them grow into adults. My DM relented.
Feel free to print this thread and give a copy to your DM. Also for review at his convenience.
|
| #3SirAntoineApr 18, 2015 18:48:57 | You can't argue with the DM. He or she should let you change characters, and because you were disappointed you should be given special consideration for the next character you try. I'd try to talk to the DM to learn which characters could do as you want, and ask for all XP and gold to be ported over to the new role since you wasted your time. |
| (Reply to #3)Macv12 |
|
| #5FunkySpunkApr 18, 2015 19:17:35 |
|
| #6TheNovaLordApr 19, 2015 1:02:43 | Apologies to the GM for daring to have some self determination and spoiling his game........say you are sorry you didn't understand what the word vengeance means
I am appalled at his behaviour, it is everyone's game |
| #7KentusApr 19, 2015 2:23:48 | Generally speaking there are some ways to determine the paladin's code of behauvior.
1.) If he's serving a god, the god's code. Bahamuth is a lawful good dragon god, so since the bullywugs are working for Tiamat somehow, this is right in his agenda. 2.) Your oath. The vow of vengeance is more or less the "I'm batman"-card, you do justice, but more in form of punishment and self-justice. You do, what's necessary, not what's allowed to. 3.) Your own moral compass/alignment: Since you're lawful neutral, you do what's right, not what's right and good. Punishment and law must be served, since there is no law to aplly to in the swamps, any form of justice will do. Even if neutral characters rather do good things instead of bad things, they aren't necessarily hesitant when it comes to killing evildoers.
So from my point of view, your behauvior was right, even though I would question your alignment in the first place (since it doesn't match Bahamuth, not that I would forbid it, but I'd need some good reasons). Of course, every DM has other quirks and even the best are pretty stubborn at certain points. Maybe he just can't accept paladins, who are not doing the right things all the time. Ask him about it and if he does seem so, ask him to change your character or accept his reasoning and play it this way. Even though for that, devotion paladins are there for. |
| #8ImaculataApr 20, 2015 2:35:36 | DM's should stop trying to police the oaths of paladins. A paladin is allowed to slip up. You as a player decide the motivations of your paladin, and just because you made a vow, does not mean that you can't make mistakes, or give in to a need for vengeance. A paladin can always repent for his slip up later, in the form of prayer.
When I DM, I allow paladin players to make mistakes. One slip up does not immediately break an oath. But the next time the paladin prays for his spells, I'll inform the player that he feels his god disapproves of his actions. He can play that out any way he wishes. He could pray for forgiveness for example, or he could ignore it and be on his merry way. Only if a player shows an outright opposing view to that of his deity, do I intervene. But I never tell my players that they can't do something because of their oath.
I can give a perfect example from a session where I played a paladin myself. Our party encountered an evil ogre on the road, who demanded toll. Rather than negotiate a peaceful solution to this, my paladin decided that the ogre needed to die. My reason for doing so (the reasoning is really key here), was because my paladin did not want to feel responsible for any future deaths that the ogre may cause. I considered the ogre a liability to the region, and felt that this evil creature did not deserve to live. He was extorting the poor farmers and merchants in the regions in my opinion, which was an evil act. And I saw no reason why this creature would not simply continue its evil ways after we paid it.
Now, did my paladin commit an evil act by lobbing that ogre's head off? Depends how you look at it. The ogre wasn't hostile or threatening us (yet), he simply demanded to be paid. I did not give the creature a chance to negotiate at all. But you could argue I was doing my duty by protecting the region. My paladin wasn't sworn to a deity, but to a local militia. Then again, could the creature have been made to change its evil ways? Perhaps. I didn't give it any chance to do so. I showed no mercy, because my paladin is a bit of a zealot. This was a way I deliberately wanted to play a paladin. I wanted my paladin to often make choices where she bordered on the moral grey area, becauseI thought that would bring up interesting moral questions. |
| (Reply to #2)Coredump00 |
|
| #10GwaithadorApr 19, 2015 6:43:27 | The Oath of Vengeance is different form the Oath of Devotion. A Lawful Neutral paladin is certainly different from a Lawful Good paladin. But, I think neither one of you is absoluetely correct in this matter. I don't know the nature of your character's background or why he swore a sacred oath of vengeance in Bahamut's name. So, my thinking is based on a generic application of the oath and alignment. Orcs are chaotic evil, even one that's charmed. In looking at the oath of vengeance, you're not obligated to show mercy to the wicked. The charm would eventually fail, and I see it would be constitent with your oath to put the Orc to the sword. However, if your motivation was to simply seize the wealth, yes, I think that's a selfish act, a greedy act, and one might even say evil. But, if you took that same treasure with the intent to distribute it to those wronged by the Orcs, I'd say you acted honorably and consistently with your alignment and oath. If you honored the oath by slaying the Orc but only do so for the purpose of taking treasure and keeping it, and do this routinely over a long period of time (once wouldn't cut it), I'd suggest an alignment change, perhaps to Lawful Evil or even Neutral Evil. Either would likely alienate you from Bahamut. So, dear paladin, do some soul searching. Did you seek justice by any means necessary or did you claim justice to mask your interest in personal profit ? I suggest fleshing out the basis of swearing your oath if you haven't done so, it may help as a guide in future conundrums like this.
And, it may be perfectly reasonable to be Lawful Evil and be a paladin with the oath of vengeance. |
| (Reply to #10)ZickZak |
|
| #12GwaithadorApr 19, 2015 14:57:16 | Paladin has always been my favorite class. I've always played them as lawful good, even in fourth edition. But with the sacred oath system, and variant oaths, I could see playing a host of different alignments with the different oaths. I think that's what you need to talk to your DM about. See if an open discussion can get him to see that not every order of holy warrior is cut from the same cloth and the oath system is designed to allow for different concepts and archtypes. Ask if you could change your god to one more fitting to your character's concept.
I think your character is perfectly tenable as a lawful neutral, oath of vengeance paladin, who has broken from his criminal past, but has his flaws. To me, it's a good rp device. Perhaps because he's been in the criminal underworld, he's not afraid to get his hands dirty. He follows his own code, sparing the innocent, merciless to the wicked. In consideration of this concept, putting a chaotic evil orc under a charm to death is consistent with the character, his alignment and the oath. |
| #13BRJNApr 19, 2015 17:35:57 | The classic version of a Lawful Evil Paladin is ... Darth Vader. Despite the awfully-handled explanation in the prequel trilogy, Anakin's motivation has been "I need the power to bring order out of chaos by imposing my will on those who do not agree." An FR version is the Paladin of Bane who protects the peasants from the demon hordes. Not because he loves the peasants or feels nobless oblige (sp?) but because he detests the chaos the demons embody, and a stable society needs enough peasants to grow food for everybody else to eat; craftsmen to make the tools and goods people consume; &c.
I've become more sensitized to the subject since deciding to play a Paladin myself, but many of the "tests of your Paladin's morals" discussed in threads are actually "GOTCHA" torture events.
|
| #14BRJNApr 19, 2015 17:42:51 |
|
| #15WeezelApr 19, 2015 20:01:08 | If i remember correctly it is against the Oath of Vengeance to allow personal moral qualms from getting in the way of destroying evil, so it seems that NOT killing the orc would be breaking your oath not the other way around. |
| #16SaeviomagyApr 19, 2015 23:39:09 | Your DM sounds like he's playing a "versus the players" game and trying to screw you over whenever you do anything.
1. Obviously the charmed creature is not suddenly a goody two shoes or good aligned, not even for the 1 hour that he is charmed. He's a friendly acquaintance of the charmer, and still an evil asshat (as is demonstrated by him still beating up the cleric, a friend of the charmer). 2. There has never been any form of "I will not acquire treasure" codified into Paladin behaviour, nor "I will not kill a guy who is evil but happens to be a friend of someone I know". So even with classic Paladins, the DM is denying a player the ability to take reasonable actions. 3. The new Paladins are governed by their oath. Vengeance paladins must 1) fight the biggest baddest thing they can find in preference to weaker foes. No wasting time reforming petty criminals - go kill the Kingpin. 2) Not show mercy to foes. ie - if you were to have KOed this orc, you could kill him without violating your oath. You can certainly kill him while he's charmed. 3) Use any means necessary to fight their foes. You are allowed to get the charmer to get the orc to close his eyes and put his hands over his ears before you slice him to bits. 4) Restitution. If you fail to kill a foe, all their wrongful actions are your fault, and you have to fix them.
So - looks like Bahamut is completely fine with you getting the charmer to convince the guy that he's going to get a surprise present and then slitting his throat. Feel free to spit on the corpse afterwards.
Vengeance Paladins are potentially downright nasty. |
| #17jaappletonApr 20, 2015 5:08:29 | Paladin problems? He's got 99 problems but a Lich ain't one. In all seriousness, lots of days like to forcibly trap Paladins because.... They're bad day. Paladins have a lot to work with in regards to RP, but most days handle it poorly. |
| #18QwertyAzertyApr 20, 2015 7:07:42 |
|
| #19CCSApr 20, 2015 16:01:30 |
|
| (Reply to #19)ZickZak | I was gonna. Couldn't, apparently. |
| #21SirAntoineApr 20, 2015 18:31:14 |
|
| #22GwaithadorApr 20, 2015 18:35:00 | Lots of sound advice from the previous posters. You're going to have to convince your DM by sitting down and pointing out the the tenets of this particular oath, he's stuck on the more traditional, Devotion style of paladin. As mentioned, while I like playing the traditional lawful good paladin, I love that players can explore alternative oaths and alignments with the class. Add in different religions and you've broadened the playability and interest in the class. For example, I've a player who's playing a paladin just like yours. In my campaign, he was a soldier who, after mustering out and war weary, refused the call to battle again, essentially breaking his bond to his lord. He relocated to a frontier village (not far from a legendary keep on said borderlands). When raiders attack his home village and slew his family, he entered and pledged his devotion to a religious order (St. Cuthbert in my Greyhawk setting), and swore an oath of vengeance. He's Lawful Neutral, and his vengeance will know no bounds. I see some similarities to your own storyline-which is rich with possibility and worth exploring. |
| (Reply to #21)ZickZak |
|
| #24FunkySpunkApr 20, 2015 21:42:15 |
|