[PF] A Good Antipaladin?

[legomaster00156]

So, the more-or-less Good-aligned party I'm GM'ing for recently aided an Antipaladin named Lyndyn. She'd been a Paladin of Shelyn that Dominated by a devil for several weeks, and forced to commit heinous deeds. This ultimately resulted in her making the pact necessary to become an Antipaladin of Asmodeus.
However, she recently broke free of the hold on her mind, and is working to redeem herself in Shelyn's eyes, despite that everyone in the world and churches now think her to be unredeemable. The party took sympathy on her plight, and heard her out in parley. She expressed her desire to bring every devil in existence to it's knees, which, while a slightly noble cause, is still acting on the basic instincts of rage and revenge that fuel an Antipaladin.
Now, I know quite well that an Antipaladin can never again be a Paladin, but I was thinking perhaps she could continue to make use of her new-found dark power for the cause of good. My question is this: if an Antipaladin performs evil deeds for an ultimately good-neutral cause, does he/she keep his/her powers?

Note: In this campaign, an Antipaladin can be any Evil alignment. This particular Antipaladin is Lawful Evil.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Perhaps if said anti-paladin was ruthless enough and constantly used [evil] spells she could keep being evil, having said that AFAIK almost all anti-paladin class features are designed to be completely opposite to paladins and thus useless against Evil targets, so trying to redeem herself and regaining Paladinhood (an Atonement quest+the spell should be enough I think) sounds like a better option if she does wants to punish Devils. She could change (gradually) her feelings of wrath and rage into righteous fury and zeal, her desire for revenge making her crusade much more personal.

[Hylas]

Well from a fluff perspective I think it depends on where the antipaladin gets its powers. If the powers come from just being evil, then sure, being evil will keep your powers. If the powers come from aligning yourself with an evil church, a pact with a demon/devil, or some other organization or being then acting against that source of power will have your magical abilities removed.

You mentioned the antipaladin has joined forces with Asmodeus. I haven't actually done any games in the Pathfinder core setting, but I think in general all of the evils are against each other i.e. demons and devils don't get along. So if I were a king devil and my servant was fighting against demons, then it's fine. As soon as my servant goes against other devils then I'll yank those powers immediately.

You could also always look at making a CG Paladin if you wanted. Paladin of Freedom, Liberator, Crusader, lots of fun available names for it. Could fit the backstory of wanting everyone to be free from domination of others.

[Feralventas]

First and fore-most, I would like to say that while I like using the alignment system for minor aspects of characterization, it is a terrible rubric for determining philosophical standing or moral or ethical compass. Lawful Good characters are capable of atrocious actions while being within their alignment standing, and a Chaotic Evil character is capable of being a loving, supportive individual, even if neither of these is a common event to behold.

That said, using evil powers for a good cause is both a common theme used in these sorts of games as well as a potential for a slippery-slope of character development. For example, if you use evil powers and take evil actions for a good cause, where do you draw the line on what is and isn't acceptable? If you're willing to kill for your cause, are you willing to torture? To extort? To destroy? This can lead to a path of decisions where your character slowly sells away more and more of their original Paladin Oaths in the name of "the greater good."

However, if you'd like to keep a good-aligned modus operandi while wielding evil powers, you'll be hard-pressed to do it as an Anti-Paladin; the class is restricted to Evil, even if you're using it for good causes. You can be Evil and fight for Good causes; there's nothing preventing this. More so, because using evil powers of your pact is an evil act on its own, you shouldn't need to do much to justify that alignment, so no need to go find orphans to pick on or churches to deface. That said, you're also a divine-powered character, so your patron might not put up with a servant being too much of a goody-two-shoes for long, and the excuse of "I'm earning their trust" only lasts so long if you never do anything about it.

I would suggest aiming for a redemption of some sort, working with the DM to treat your Anti-Paladin levels as Paladin levels for the purpose of class features based on levels if you want to continue to build toward a good-aligned character.

You could also simply embrace the Lawful Evil perspective, seeking power and influence for the purpose of putting yourself in charge to maintain order; obviously anyone else would get it wrong, and as a Paladin who has seen and experienced evil from a very intimate perspective, your character would be justified in doing their absolute best to prevent that same sort of befuddlement from happening to anyone else; by any means necessary.

[legomaster00156]

Perhaps if said anti-paladin was ruthless enough and constantly used [evil] spells she could keep being evil, having said that AFAIK almost all anti-paladin class features are designed to be completely opposite to paladins and thus useless against Evil targets, so trying to redeem herself and regaining Paladinhood (an Atonement quest+the spell should be enough I think) sounds like a better option if she does wants to punish Devils. She could change (gradually) her feelings of wrath and rage into righteous fury and zeal, her desire for revenge making her crusade much more personal.
Nope. In this setting, the ritual to become an Antipaladin damns your soul to Hell/Abbaddon/The Abyss instantly (depending on which fiend you made the pact with). You are basically a slave, even if you still have free will. Becoming a Paladin again is not possible after the ritual.


You mentioned the antipaladin has joined forces with Asmodeus. I haven't actually done any games in the Pathfinder core setting, but I think in general all of the evils are against each other i.e. demons and devils don't get along. So if I were a king devil and my servant was fighting against demons, then it's fine. As soon as my servant goes against other devils then I'll yank those powers immediately.

You could also always look at making a CG Paladin if you wanted. Paladin of Freedom, Liberator, Crusader, lots of fun available names for it. Could fit the backstory of wanting everyone to be free from domination of others.
1. Yes, she made the pact with the devils, Asmodeus in particular. In truth, they know about her goals. She's got two "friends" that also are on the path of redemption... except one is actually a spy. They're letting her continue, considering that her goals are either suicidal, or ultimately going to throw her farther and farther down the slippery slope.
2. I'm not homebrewing classes this time. I'm playing with newbies, and the last thing they need is MORE classes.


However, if you'd like to keep a good-aligned modus operandi while wielding evil powers, you'll be hard-pressed to do it as an Anti-Paladin; the class is restricted to Evil, even if you're using it for good causes. You can be Evil and fight for Good causes; there's nothing preventing this. More so, because using evil powers of your pact is an evil act on its own, you shouldn't need to do much to justify that alignment, so no need to go find orphans to pick on or churches to deface. That said, you're also a divine-powered character, so your patron might not put up with a servant being too much of a goody-two-shoes for long, and the excuse of "I'm earning their trust" only lasts so long if you never do anything about it.

I would suggest aiming for a redemption of some sort, working with the DM to treat your Anti-Paladin levels as Paladin levels for the purpose of class features based on levels if you want to continue to build toward a good-aligned character.
1. She's never communicated directly with her patrons outside of the ritual when she became an Antipaladin. They more or less let her do as she wishes, as long as she is aligning with them in the end... whether she knows it or not.
2. I am the GM. This is an NPC that is friendly towards the party.

[Frosty]

I fail to see how she became an Antipaladin in the first place. She was magically Dominated. Pacts made while Dominated would never suffice in my ooinion for something as huge as becoming an Antipaladin. She might Fall because of what she did, but it is very clear that Atonement is definitely possible if one Falls due to committing evil acts unwillingly.

Even if she got Antipaladin levels/powers, she ought to lose them the moment she broke free of the Dominate and reasserted her own alignment (she's no longer evil).

[legomaster00156]

She hasn't reasserted her original alignment yet. If she became Neutral or Good, it's quite obvious that she'd (Fall? Rise?). She's trying to, but I plan for her to more or less adapt to her abilities, and try to keep them since she can no longer be a Paladin.
As for conducting the ritual itself, all I can say is that there are no rules against it, and there is no stronger mind-affecting magic than a Domination. I see no reason that it would not work, if she failed the Will save she gets for being ordered against her nature.

[Coidzor]

This is why mind-control shouldn't be taken as consent.


Nope. In this setting, the ritual to become an Antipaladin damns your soul to Hell/Abbaddon/The Abyss instantly (depending on which fiend you made the pact with). You are basically a slave, even if you still have free will. Becoming a Paladin again is not possible after the ritual.

Why on earth did you make that decision? :smallconfused:

[T.G. Oskar]

This calls for a radical decision.

It's best to gauge what the party intends with her, in both actions and words. Is the party intending to really aid her in her quest for redemption? Are their actions shining examples for the former Paladin to base upon?

Once you gauge their intentions (always suggesting that redemption is impossible), then do a suitably epic moment in-game that reflects what the party wants and what the party does.

If the party honestly wants to help her, and their actions are good enough (they don't have to be actual shining examples or even figurative ones), then let her sacrifice for the party against a terrible evil, and in those last minutes, restore her entire suite of Paladin powers (or essentially let her replace all her Antipaladin levels with Paladin ones, and do thematic switches). Redemption through death is not just a tried and true trope, but also a plausible way to deal with the problem. That should make the party high-five themselves, because it means they've done something for the setting that none other have done (at least, in-setting). Such actions give a bit of life to the setting: even if the setting adamantly and vehemently opposes to the idea of redemption, the party will feel like Good won at the end. Don't forget to give them a suitable reward for it: they'll like you even more.

If the party wants to help her, but they're far from good guys, then let the Paladin try, but eventually give up in anguish and fully embrace her Antipaladinhood. That eventually would make her a brutal villain for the party, constantly questioning their actions, constantly reminding them that they're not up to the mantle of Good (in lieu of saying other things...) Ideally, it should be a moment when she rages against the gods, hinting of a bit of madness.

You should consider carefully whether keeping that restriction is really worthwhile. Having an Antipaladin attempt to redeem but not achieving that purpose speaks leagues of this settings' gods of Good. Alternatively...isn't there a PrC devoted to the hunting and eradication of demons? You could drop into it.

[toapat]

2. I'm not homebrewing classes this time. I'm playing with newbies, and the last thing they need is MORE classes.

Homebrew isnt necessary. the only thing you really need seems to be a Crowbar and the 3.5 DMG, perhaps Unearthed Arcana too.

The Anti-paladin isnt really a good representation of "Everything a paladin despises". They lack the abilities that would flavorfully represent a Paladin Antithesis. ok, they get the ability to summon a fiend, instead of a horse, i call that the 9-5. Ok, so they have a mirror to every paladin aura in PF. Aura stacks are not a paladin thing anyway, a stack of debuff auras isnt going to make me want to murder this dude harder. Sure, as a Paladin and Lawfulish Good, i would want to beat his face in, but possitively destroy this guy? no.

The Blackguard, on the other hand: He is not above using poison, deception, or the Undead. Black guards are commonly Grey Guardsmen who have walked the line too long to see what is right and what is wrong.

[legomaster00156]

This calls for a radical decision.

It's best to gauge what the party intends with her, in both actions and words. Is the party intending to really aid her in her quest for redemption? Are their actions shining examples for the former Paladin to base upon?

Once you gauge their intentions (always suggesting that redemption is impossible), then do a suitably epic moment in-game that reflects what the party wants and what the party does.

If the party honestly wants to help her, and their actions are good enough (they don't have to be actual shining examples or even figurative ones), then let her sacrifice for the party against a terrible evil, and in those last minutes, restore her entire suite of Paladin powers (or essentially let her replace all her Antipaladin levels with Paladin ones, and do thematic switches). Redemption through death is not just a tried and true trope, but also a plausible way to deal with the problem. That should make the party high-five themselves, because it means they've done something for the setting that none other have done (at least, in-setting). Such actions give a bit of life to the setting: even if the setting adamantly and vehemently opposes to the idea of redemption, the party will feel like Good won at the end. Don't forget to give them a suitable reward for it: they'll like you even more.

If the party wants to help her, but they're far from good guys, then let the Paladin try, but eventually give up in anguish and fully embrace her Antipaladinhood. That eventually would make her a brutal villain for the party, constantly questioning their actions, constantly reminding them that they're not up to the mantle of Good (in lieu of saying other things...) Ideally, it should be a moment when she rages against the gods, hinting of a bit of madness.

You should consider carefully whether keeping that restriction is really worthwhile. Having an Antipaladin attempt to redeem but not achieving that purpose speaks leagues of this settings' gods of Good. Alternatively...isn't there a PrC devoted to the hunting and eradication of demons? You could drop into it.
Ok, this is actually a very good idea. They decided to at least temporarily put her request on hold to train their skills and get some decent items (they're only level 1 at the moment), though they know where to find her should they ever decide to help her again. If they don't do so in a near enough time, I'll let this be just one of the consequences.

[The Random NPC]

An idea I just thought of: if the Antipaladin has "redeemed" herself enough, let the Antipaladin keep her powers and free will in the Abyss. She can continue her crusade even after death, and fulfill the letter of the oath.

[Arcanist]

An idea I just thought of: if the Antipaladin has "redeemed" herself enough, let the Antipaladin keep her powers and free will in the Abyss. She can continue her crusade even after death, and fulfill the letter of the oath.

Really? A Good Aligned Death Knight? :smallamused:

[toapat]

Really? A Good Aligned Death Knight? :smallamused:

we already have Malconvoker, and Warcraft Deathknights are mostly good

then again, there is nothing that is "Evil only" in the Anti-paladin class other then smite good, which is a smite, and thus so generic as to be not worth mentioning

[Slipperychicken]

I fail to see how she became an Antipaladin in the first place. She was magically Dominated. Pacts made while Dominated would never suffice in my ooinion for something as huge as becoming an Antipaladin. She might Fall because of what she did, but it is very clear that Atonement is definitely possible if one Falls due to committing evil acts unwillingly.

Even if she got Antipaladin levels/powers, she ought to lose them the moment she broke free of the Dominate and reasserted her own alignment (she's no longer evil).

This. Magical compulsion means the acts of Evil aren't willing, therefore her alignment is unaffected and she retains her Paladin status.


It's kind of like pommeling a guy with his own hands (http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5dqtoXfJe1qgeonpo1_500.jpg), then putting him on suicide watch because "he was hitting himself". It's absurd and nonsensical, because the guy was not trying to kill himself, he was actively avoiding hurting himself, and another person forcing your hands into your own face does not mean you want to hurt yourself.


EDIT: In this case, it's more like drugging a person, clamping his hand over a pen while he literally can't resist, then grabbing his hand and manipulating it to create his signature on a contract he never read, then claiming he agreed to the contract and is in full support of it. The contract is void, and your claims untrue, because the signer neither consented to it, nor did he choose to sign it.

[kardar233]

In 3.5, it's specifically stated that Pacts made under duress (and magical compulsion definitely counts) are invalid.


A Pact Certain can be nullified only by proving that the
bloody signature was extracted involuntarily, through duress.

[Lord_Gareth]

So, wait, lemme get this straight. In the cosmology you're proposing, it's possible for a sapient being to become eternally damned A. while under mental control and then B. for making a single mistake with absolutely no chance for redemption whatsoever? Does this not strike you as weighing the cosmos in favor of evil? Redemption is one of the things Good DOES. It's FUNDAMENTAL to the concept.

[Feralventas]

So, wait, lemme get this straight. In the cosmology you're proposing, it's possible for a sapient being to become eternally damned A. while under mental control and then B. for making a single mistake with absolutely no chance for redemption whatsoever? Does this not strike you as weighing the cosmos in favor of evil? Redemption is one of the things Good DOES. It's FUNDAMENTAL to the concept.

At risk of being silly, Good characters might have the option of doing the same, though that essentially means that there would be reason for the creation of factories of Seal Your Alignment contracts for profit, and presuming that the average population Doesn't want to be a bunch of evil jerks, there'd actually be more of a leaning toward Lawful, Chaos, and Good rather than Evil, meaning that such involuntary conversions on the weak would be the Only way to gain new recruits to evil.

[Kane0]

You're the DM, you can rule things how you like.

As the character slowly progresses, you may switch antipaladin abilities for paladin abilities, like smite good for smite evil, lay on hands from negative to positive, etc.

Then in the end the character has gradually become the paladin they once were mechanically, and let the fluff and story flow accordingly.

[Slipperychicken]

Redemption is one of the things Good DOES. It's FUNDAMENTAL to the concept.

Quoted for emphasis.

[Coidzor]

At risk of being silly, Good characters might have the option of doing the same, though that essentially means that there would be reason for the creation of factories of Seal Your Alignment contracts for profit, and presuming that the average population Doesn't want to be a bunch of evil jerks, there'd actually be more of a leaning toward Lawful, Chaos, and Good rather than Evil, meaning that such involuntary conversions on the weak would be the Only way to gain new recruits to evil.

The problem there is that forcibly taking someone away from their chosen deity isn't exactly, well, good. What with the forcibly doing things to people without their consent. You run into all of the problems with Holy Mindrape and then some.

[Feralventas]

The only alignment that has an issue with taking away free will is Chaos.
The Book of Exalted Deeds explicitly states that it's okay for a Good character to take over control of another individual, so long as the character takes care of their new puppet and ensures that they're safe and generally looks after their well-being.

Of course we're talking Pathfinder instead of straight 3.5, but it does seem relevant.

[Lord_Gareth]

The only alignment that has an issue with taking away free will is Chaos.
The Book of Exalted Deeds explicitly states that it's okay for a Good character to take over control of another individual, so long as the character takes care of their new puppet and ensures that they're safe and generally looks after their well-being.

Of course we're talking Pathfinder instead of straight 3.5, but it does seem relevant.

Not as true as you think it is. The BoED actually states that mind control smacks of Evil methods and that the greatest care should be taken with such a prisoner because you've robbed them of their freedom of will and also their dignity as sapient beings.

[CubeB]

It really depends on how the pact works, people are getting hung up on the alignment thing.

There are three ways for something like this to go.

First: The pact was a demonic contract. An agreement. In this case, domination should invalidate it. At the very least, a Chaotic Good deity would be able to intercede and aid her, because that is their domain. Aid her in terms of blessings, rather than punching Asmodeus.

Second: The pact is not an agreement, but an infusion of infernal energies. The ritual taints the soul. This means that she could keep her Anti-Paladin powers, but could eventually become Lawful Good again. Once again, a Chaotic Good deity could still help.

Third: The pact was not entirely unwilling. A part of her, somewhere, wanted this. This is the most complicated one, and could go either way.

Decide that first. Then see.

[kardar233]

Third: The pact was not entirely unwilling. A part of her, somewhere, wanted this. This is the most complicated one, and could go either way.

This can work well, though it's difficult to do right. I once played a character who was previously possessed by a daemon and was exorcised, and refused to admit to herself that she really wanted to be possessed. It slowly drove her crazy, as she invented a new personality to offset the lack of a daemon in her head. I was planning for her to get re-possessed, but unfortunately the game got cut short before then.

[Coidzor]

Third: The pact was not entirely unwilling. A part of her, somewhere, wanted this. This is the most complicated one, and could go either way.

Unfortunate Implications Ho!

Or at least wording. Yikes.