Paladin crisis

[Kurondo]

I was curious, what is the code of conduct for Paladins and where can I find it? My DM tries to be a stick in the mud and says "Oh even if you talk with someone who has done a bad deed you lose your paladin status." and I really don't want that to be true..I'm kind of a newbie still and not sure if there is one in the many books or something, anyways all help is appreciated, thanks!

[Thurbane]

From the SRD:


Code of Conduct
A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Associates
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

It may be expanded on in greater depth in other books, but that's the basics.

[Kurondo]

From the SRD:



It may be expanded on in greater depth in other books, but that's the basics.


Thank you for the quick reply, I truly do appreciate it.

[LoyalPaladin]

My DM tries to be a stick in the mud and says "Oh even if you talk with someone who has done a bad deed you lose your paladin status."
This bothers me. Not just because my screen name is LoyalPaladin or because I play Paladins mainly. But because I feel like D&D is a place where you do what you want because you want to do it. Whether that be a CE Psycopath or a LG Exemplar of Justice, people shouldn't use their opinions to sway new players away from a class. I feel like that is what that is. "Ugh, Paladins. Don't be that guy."

To help out the actual topic, see if your DM will let you use your deity's (if you have one) dogma as a code of conduct. It semi-loosens the uptight feel of your class and gives you a better direction. It will also make your character feel less flat to your party members. For example. (http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Torm)

[Zyzzyva]

From the SRD:



It may be expanded on in greater depth in other books, but that's the basics.

Huh. Where does Belkar get his "Miko will lose her power by associating with me" from, then? Because I thought the "Paladins must police their parties" came from somewhere...

ETA: Not that I much agree with it, as a play style or a mechanic, but I thought it came more directly from the rules.

[Telonius]

That's from the next line of the SRD:


Associates
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

The question of how closely you have to "associate" with an evil character in order to count against the code, is up to individual DMs.

[Studoku]

Huh. Where does Belkar get his "Miko will lose her power by associating with me" from, then? Because I thought the "Paladins must police their parties" came from somewhere...

From the SRD again:

Associates
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.
The term "associate with" is open to interpretation.

[Flickerdart]

Thank you for the quick reply, I truly do appreciate it.
Note that there are other considerations.

From the SRD:


Associates
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

This is probably where your DM is getting the whole "can't talk to evil guys" thing. Note that this is not part of the code and thus a Paladin will never fall from associating with Evil creatures. She simply will refuse to do so. Also the "knowingly" part is important - if you're just talking to a guy, it's fine even if he's Evil, as long as you don't know it. Since there is no onus on the Paladin to detect evil everybody, you never even have to find out. Hell, you might suspect somebody is evil, but as long as you don't know for sure, it's fine.

On falling, from the SRD:


A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities.


Note the criteria - the paladin must grossly violate the code. This doesn't mean ignoring a begging orphan, this means dousing an orphanage in poison and then setting the poison on fire while singing prayers to Hextor. Committing evil acts is a much more severe thing than breaking the code - the Paladin will immediately fall for any evil act, even one not mentioned in the code, unless it's not done willfully.

[LoyalPaladin]

Huh. Where does Belkar get his "Miko will lose her power by associating with me" from, then? Because I thought the "Paladins must police their parties" came from somewhere...
It is a different part of their entry. Under associates.


]Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Paladin Edit:
It looks like everyone did exactly what I did haha.

[Kurondo]

Once again, I thank every one of you for your informative responses, also just another question, could someone who willingly fights enemies to the death for glory and money be associated with by a paladin?

[Spore]

The people in this thread are correct, however one of my DMs has made an NPC fall because he didn't kill an innocent Tiefling kid. That's right. All the guys that killed Tieflings - evil or not- didn't fall, but the guy that saved his grandchild (the offspring of his now dead daughter and an incubus) did fall. DMs can be quite stubborn some times.

[HyperDunkBarkly]

there could be other aspects of your code of content, flavored based on your Diety's Beliefs. could you tell us who your paladin worships?


Once again, I thank every one of you for your informative responses, also just another question, could someone who willingly fights enemies to the death for glory and money be associated with by a paladin?

a bloodthirsty gladiator isn't really evil unless they exceed being just that by a good margin.

[Geddy2112]

Once again, I thank every one of you for your informative responses, also just another question, could someone who willingly fights enemies to the death for glory and money be associated with by a paladin?

This depends entirely on your code. I strongly suggest writing your code with your DM so you both go in on the same page of what you find right and wrong. Most to all LG aligned people see rule of law as a good thing and life as sacred, but how much of each and when depends on who you worship. A good example is the death penalty. Two paladins of different gods(but both LG people) can disagree and still uphold their god. One sees rule of law as the ideal virtue, and that evil must pay the ultimate price, so long as the judicial process is fair in all steps. Another paladin values life over everything else, and just because a killer broke the law and is evil, spilling more blood makes you no better and solves nothing. Lock em up and throw away the key, but don't kill them.

So, to answer your question, what does your god/morality think of fighting for glory and money? What are the circumstances? Soldier of fortune defending a country from invaders? Or assassin who loves the thrill of ending life and the reward he gets. The answer varies from paladin to paladin.

[Venico]

Once again, I thank every one of you for your informative responses, also just another question, could someone who willingly fights enemies to the death for glory and money be associated with by a paladin?

Depends, if the other party also fights to the death I see no reason why not. But if say someone surrendered to your party and your buddy beheaded him because surrendering in a fight is cowardly or something, your paladin would probably feel compelled to say or do something. Whether that's your characters having a discussion on why killing surrendered enemies will cause conflict or in a more drastic scenario, reporting him to the local guard/arresting him yourself.

As an addendum to that, try to avoid drastic action with other players to avoid OOC conflict and ruining the entire party's fun.

[Flickerdart]

Once again, I thank every one of you for your informative responses, also just another question, could someone who willingly fights enemies to the death for glory and money be associated with by a paladin?
I'd say yes. You've basically described a soldier, and they come in all alignments, even Lawful Good.

[Deophaun]

This is probably where your DM is getting the whole "can't talk to evil guys" thing. Note that this is not part of the code and thus a Paladin will never fall from associating with Evil creatures. She simply will refuse to do so.
Which is one of the rare instances where you can prove the rules wrong in game by being a Paladin and then knowingly associate with an evil character.

[lycantrope]

Sounds like you have the kind of DM who would make a character under Vow of Poverty fall for opening a tavern door because of their taking possession of the doorknob during the process.

Paladin code requirements were extremely poorly articulated in 3.5 and it's up to you to sit down with your DM and qualify the specifics of your code. Given that paladins are known for trying to redeem defeated enemies, I don't see why one would fall for talking with one. Similarly, a paladin trying to convert followers to their deity might have trouble if every time she confronted a nonbeliever she lost her powers.

As a general rule, I think a DM is being unreasonable if a generic paladin (as in, code not settled in depth) falls for anything other than an overtly evil act or a series or continuing pattern of minor acts that weren't met with contrition or penance.