(pathfinder) Help settle an argument

[Azoth]

After our last session a few players feel that my character's actions call for an alignment shift and to lose access to the silver crane discipline.

The events that led to this were going to a dwarven stronghold and finding out everyone there was under strong enchantments to attack a nearby town and not remember it. They had been doing this for about 5yrs by the time we got there.

Two of our party members started spamming dispel magic on the high ranking dwarves to free them of the enchanent. Among them were five members of the order Empyrial Guardians, to which my character is a member.

After the enchantment was broken and their memories came back, there were all crying huddled masses on the floor. My character looked to them all and gave a rousing speech to get them to realize that there would be time to mourn later, but that they needed to stand tall and rally. Your basic "Now is the time to show people what we really stand for and how to persevere." speech.

One dwarf wouldn't/couldn't stand back up and face what he had done. So my character asked him if he wanted to die, and if so would he like to be killed by a member of the order. The dwarf replied that he would.

My character assumed the stance of the crane knight, and gave a eulogy for the dwarf before executing a silver crane strike that healed as much damage as it added. I had passed a note to the DM stating he was going to target the dwarf with the healing of the strike and pull back as much damage from the strike as possible.

It ended with the dwarf only having a shallow cut around his neck after the sword passed. My character then told him to remove the emblem of the order and leave, for he would not look upon a stranger who would impersonate an Empyrial Guardian.


We ended there. I and one other player don't feel I did anything wrong, but the other two players are adamant. The DM said we would discuss it when we get together to game again.



"In my own name, unsullied and bound to my virtue, and in the name of Al'asadriel, this I swear: with my blades I shall defend the innocent from those who threaten them wrongfully. With my eyes I shall look for evil and with my words and deeds seek to turn it back to good, or else destroy it. With my mercy and conviction I shall lead others into the light, and with my courage I shall hold back the shadow, until the day I die or Al'asadriel returns to release me."

[NecessaryWeevil]

Apologies if my lack of knowledge of Pathfinder makes this a stupid question, but what is your alignment and what do the others think it should change to?

[SowZ]

After our last session a few players feel that my character's actions call for an alignment shift and to lose access to the silver crane discipline.

The events that led to this were going to a dwarven stronghold and finding out everyone there was under strong enchantments to attack a nearby town and not remember it. They had been doing this for about 5yrs by the time we got there.

Two of our party members started spamming dispel magic on the high ranking dwarves to free them of the enchanent. Among them were five members of the order Empyrial Guardians, to which my character is a member.

After the enchantment was broken and their memories came back, there were all crying huddled masses on the floor. My character looked to them all and gave a rousing speech to get them to realize that there would be time to mourn later, but that they needed to stand tall and rally. Your basic "Now is the time to show people what we really stand for and how to persevere." speech.

One dwarf wouldn't/couldn't stand back up and face what he had done. So my character asked him if he wanted to die, and if so would he like to be killed by a member of the order. The dwarf replied that he would.

My character assumed the stance of the crane knight, and gave a eulogy for the dwarf before executing a silver crane strike that healed as much damage as it added. I had passed a note to the DM stating he was going to target the dwarf with the healing of the strike and pull back as much damage from the strike as possible.

It ended with the dwarf only having a shallow cut around his neck after the sword passed. My character then told him to remove the emblem of the order and leave, for he would not look upon a stranger who would impersonate an Empyrial Guardian.


We ended there. I and one other player don't feel I did anything wrong, but the other two players are adamant. The DM said we would discuss it when we get together to game again.



"In my own name, unsullied and bound to my virtue, and in the name of Al'asadriel, this I swear: with my blades I shall defend the innocent from those who threaten them wrongfully. With my eyes I shall look for evil and with my words and deeds seek to turn it back to good, or else destroy it. With my mercy and conviction I shall lead others into the light, and with my courage I shall hold back the shadow, until the day I die or Al'asadriel returns to release me."

My policy: Whenever the situation is sufficiently ambiguous, where there are no easy solutions and you try to resolve the situation best you can, let the player dictate alignment implications. Unless it is a very major and clear-cut Evil action, or it is a consistent pattern of amoral decisions, a fall or alignment shift is unreasonable.

Besides, one action isn't supposed to warrant an alignment shift unless it is ridiculous over the top evil.

What you did was clearly better, (to me,) than actually killing the dwarf.

[bjoern]

This feels a lot like a "make the paladin fall hahaha" argument going on here.

Is your order not allowed to fake execute people?

[Azoth]

Apologies if my lack of knowledge of Pathfinder makes this a stupid question, but what is your alignment and what do the others think it should change to?

I am Neutral Good. To be an Empyrial Guardian my alignment must be any Good. They didn't come out and say what my alignment should change to. They were arguing more loudly that I should fall than about my alignment.

[The Glyphstone]

Have you done something to cheese them off that they're trying to screw you over OOC in retaliation, however unreasonable that reaction is? It sounds like there is a big OOC component in the motivations here.

[Elricaltovilla]

Put the burden of proof on the players claiming you broke your oath. Ask them which part of the oath, specifically, you broke. Was it not showing mercy? Because you did. Did you not take action against evil? Because you did. Did you not try to turn it back to good? Because, again, you did.

Anyone claiming that something needs to be changed from the status quo should be able to cite a specific reason why that should be the case. And unless they have some compelling evidence, you shouldn't have to change anything about your character.

As far as I can tell from your story, your actions would have done Sarenrae proud. You fought against evil with strength and conviction and offered mercy instead of outright destruction. Considering that Sarenrae is the big NG of NG goddesses, I think you're in the clear.

[Rainshine]

The link to the Empyreals is here (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/martial-traditions/empyreal-guardians)

The crunch of it covers two possibilities: violation of the Empyreal's oath, and an alignment change. Violating the oath has the expressly designated penalty of losing the save bonuses granted by the organization until atoned, with what constitutes atonement defined. Changing alignment is the only one that actually results in losing discipline access.

Personally speaking as a DM, my NPCs probably wouldn't really accept the dismissing of a member of the order. As far as changing alignment or violating your oath through the described actions? No. The part about "attacking" the dwarf, and not killing him sounds like mercy, which happens to be expressly mentioned as a trait of Empyreals.

[Geddy2112]

After our last session a few players feel that my character's actions call for an alignment shift and to lose access to the silver crane discipline.
After the enchantment was broken and their memories came back, there were all crying huddled masses on the floor. My character looked to them all and gave a rousing speech to get them to realize that there would be time to mourn later, but that they needed to stand tall and rally. Your basic "Now is the time to show people what we really stand for and how to persevere." speech.

One dwarf wouldn't/couldn't stand back up and face what he had done. So my character asked him if he wanted to die, and if so would he like to be killed by a member of the order. The dwarf replied that he would.

My character assumed the stance of the crane knight, and gave a eulogy for the dwarf before executing a silver crane strike that healed as much damage as it added. I had passed a note to the DM stating he was going to target the dwarf with the healing of the strike and pull back as much damage from the strike as possible.

It ended with the dwarf only having a shallow cut around his neck after the sword passed. My character then told him to remove the emblem of the order and leave, for he would not look upon a stranger who would impersonate an Empyrial Guardian.



"In my own name, unsullied and bound to my virtue, and in the name of Al'asadriel, this I swear: with my blades I shall defend the innocent from those who threaten them wrongfully. With my eyes I shall look for evil and with my words and deeds seek to turn it back to good, or else destroy it. With my mercy and conviction I shall lead others into the light, and with my courage I shall hold back the shadow, until the day I die or Al'asadriel returns to release me."

To put it bluntly, the other players in the group are idiots who have no effing idea what they are talking about. You should be applauded for roleplaying that; not only did you do nothing wrong, I am of the opinion you upheld your code and let it shine.

First, you did not kill them despite the fact that they have been killing people. You understood and empathized with the fact that they have been under mind control. Knowing that empyrial guardians are good, and that they have a chance to reedeem themselves, you then rallied them under a cause.The one that refused, you asked if he wanted to atone by death, and if so if he would accept a quick and honorable death. This is " With my eyes I shall look for evil and with my words and deeds seek to turn it back to good, or else destroy it." to a freaking T.

Then, you showed that you would not execute this dwarf, instead sparing him and kicking him out. "With my MERCY and CONVICTION I shall lead others into the light...". You spared a life, despite that in your eyes they might not be cut out for the order. Either they will atone and show that they are, or maybe use this second chance for something else. Sounds a lot like "With my MERCY and CONVICTION I shall lead others into the light...". Just because your character was stern about it does not mean you were evil. Good characters do not have to be "nice".


I am Neutral Good. To be an Empyrial Guardian my alignment must be any Good. They didn't come out and say what my alignment should change to. They were arguing more loudly that I should fall than about my alignment.

You played your code perfectly. If I was DM, +50 exp for good roleplaying. Your alignment might have wobbled a bit, but along the law/chaos axis. On one hand, you lied and refused to provide an honorable death where one was agreed to and mentioned, so maybe a bit chaotic. On the other hand, you held fast to your order and forced the Dwarf to remove the emblem. Upholding the badge of order and not letting others impersonate what it stands for, quite lawful. Either way, that basically balances out to neutral good.

If this is not a neutral good character upholding the code of the empyreal guardians, then I don't know what is.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Nthing that the players complaining need to make an intelligible argument that isn't whining or yelling. If they have a valid point, your story isn't making it for them.

[Vhaidara]

I second that I would have awarded you roleplaying XP (if my groups used XP).

You played this perfectly. Ask them why you should fall? You clearly committed no evil acts.

Also, one act should NEVER cause an alignment change unless it is truly massive in scale or proportion. I'm talking murdering an entire city, sacrificing an innocent child, annihilation of an innocent soul, destruction of a major artifact of Good (with no extenuating circumstance like it being about to be used for an Evil ritual), that kind of thing. Something that causes a serious shift in the cosmic balance.

[Blackhawk748]

As has been said several times, Bravo, good sir, bravo. That is probably the closest thing to textbook Neutral Good i have ever seen. You offered him a chance to right the wrong, he felt as if he couldnt. So you offered him death as absolution (very Samurai of you), he accepted. You then gave him a scar around his neck to remind him of his failure (probably with the intent to galvanize him later in life) and then asked that he leave the order, i assume he complied.

Now, you weren't mean about this, you were polite and concise, no long winded beratements just a clear simple statement. You then acted in accordance with your goddess's teaching and spared his life, probably hoping that at some point he would return to regain his honor.

In short, a Paladin would be proud of you.

[bjoern]

The complaint players are the type of players that ruin the paladin concept style of play and turn so many people away from it.

Its messed up that some people get off on ruining someone else's character .

[lord_khaine]

I second the notion of textbook NG behavior, it should have done your Deity proud.