Mechanics of the Atonement Spell for restoring Paladins

[Madokar]

So apparently my paladin fell during my last session. I can see two reasons as to why he fell. One is a violation of the code, even though non-lethal force was applied, and the other is because the GM might be implementing the Corruption rules from Horror Adventures.

At any rate, my character seeks atonement. He wants to be a paladin again. So here's the question: Can any LG cleric cast the Atonement spell and restore the paladin, or must the cleric be a member of the faith that the paladin belonged to? i.e. My fallen paladin of Iomedae must seek out a cleric of the Iomedaen faith to restore him with the atonement spell, or can a cleric of Torag or Erastil perform the atonement spell in place of an Iomedaen cleric if there are no clerics of Iomedae in the local area?

[SangoProduction]

Honestly, I would just take up the levels as a Cleric from there on in, and just play it as a paladin...without the inherent "hey, the DM gets to **** with your powers." Cool fluff, but nothing a Cleric can't do.

Learned that the hard way myself.

As for how it works: "Restore Class: A paladin, or other class, who has lost her class features due to violating the alignment restrictions of her class may have her class features restored by this spell." Well, by raw, atonement doesn't care who casts it on you, as long as you get it cast, unless Paladin says otherwise, so I'll check now.
The paladin makes no requirements of itself.

So, as long as you convince a caster to cast it on you, you can atone. Hell, if you take up Cleric, you can atone for yourself.

[Tuvarkz]

You might want to explain further on what your paladin do to fall-could be due to a bad DM, and bad game is worse than no game. (And the use of Corruption rules from HA is a red flag in my eyes)

Even so, nonlethal force doesn't go against established canon of Iomedae, which you can bring up, at the risk of having to spoil yourself on part of WotR (although said part is renownedly bad written).

[Geddy2112]

Which part of the code did you break in particular? A single act has to be a pretty gross violation of the core tenants of your code to fall from.

RAW, any source of the atonement spell will get your paladin powers back. That said, you should also be able to atone for your acts without the spell, but that takes time where the spell is a press button solve problem.

[Madokar]

Well, my GM confirmed what I did to lose my paladin powers. It was attacking a party member to knock him out with non-lethal damage. Said party member was the Bladebound Magus, who had failed a will save against his Black Blade. So the Black Blade took control and prompted the Magus to attack and aim to kill an innocent, young silver dragon.

The silver dragon was also possessed by an outside force, equally aiming to kill the magus. Both individuals are good aligned, so this was a tragedy waiting to happen if allowed to continue. Since the magus was my team member, I felt responsible for his actions. That, and I was pretty sure the magus was powerful enough at this point in the campaign that he would be able to kill a young silver dragon before the silver dragon could kill him. So I aimed to knock the magus out to save the dragon.

Turns out the dragon was infused with a Black Blade of his own, somehow merged with his claws. So the dragon failed his will save against his Black Blade. Both Black Blades sought to destroy each other, but the magus could be disarmed if he was unconscious. The dragon could not. In the end, I was able to knock out the magus. He dropped his Black Blade, and the silver dragon destroyed his sword. After which, the silver dragon regained his senses and we were able to heal the magus.

Mechanically, I don't think this would constitute a fall. Gameplay wise, I think this is honestly the GM trying to reprimand me for causing a party member to lose a critical class feature. And I'm okay with losing my paladin abilities if that is the case. It makes finishing the dungeon we're in a lot more difficult, because the rest of the party is comprised of spellcasters who are getting low on spells and now both melee characters lost the major class features that give them an edge in combat. But I see it as a roleplaying challenge to overcome.

[SethoMarkus]

Well, that certainly is an interesting situation.

I agree, mechanically there is no reason for your Paladin to fall.

I would argue that you did not cause the Magus to lose a class feature, your DM caused the Magus to lose the class feature. It certainly makes sense for the scenario to play out as you described, but the DM had no requirement to have the dragon destroy the sword.

I would say that this should be dealt with OOC. If thr Magus's player is alright with what transpired, the DM and they should work together to figure out where the character goes from here (maybe some other class or PrC to regain similar class features from a new source, both mechanically and roleplay wise?). If the player is not alright with what happened, maybe the DM should allow a mulligan and change some of what took place, perhaps going as far as rewinding to just after the Magus lost control?

In any case, I don't feel it is appropriate to punish your character or you for these events. Unless you did this intentionally to cause the Magus to lose those class features (which it doesn't sound like that is the case), and even then it should be dealt with OOC, not by removing your Paladin powers.

Best of luck to you!

[SangoProduction]

OK. That makes no sense. The mind controlled guys were going at it. A neutral person would have sat by, while a good one is someone who would have felt a duty to prevent harm, especially a paladin. He used nonlethal damage. As far as we are told, the paladin didn't even know the source of the mind control.

Even if he did, one was easily knocked out and disarmed while the other one wasn't. I take that to mean that if the magus was knocked out, the mind control could be ended by destroying the blade, but if the silver dragon was knocked out, it would have died.

A blade or the life of a good dragon? Hard choice...for an evil character maybe. The fall makes no bloody sense!

It's almost like falling for killing a prison guard (who's trying to kill the party) after multiple pleas for peace, and to get food and water...not going to rant about my paladin.

Just ask if you can exchange the levels of paladin for cleric, and you will be stronger, more versatile, and not shackled to the whimsy of a DM.

You might also want to show this thread to the DM. Generally, paladin falling stories get pretty clear feedback from a good number of people. It might be enough to convince him.

[Tuvarkz]

It's a bad DM, mate. He set up a specifically convoluted situation, you managed to make it through without breaking code, and the DM Rule 0'd it beyond normal standards. Just leave the game because it's giving very bad vibes.

[Madokar]

Well, that certainly is an interesting situation.

I agree, mechanically there is no reason for your Paladin to fall.

I would argue that you did not cause the Magus to lose a class feature, your DM caused the Magus to lose the class feature. It certainly makes sense for the scenario to play out as you described, but the DM had no requirement to have the dragon destroy the sword.

I would say that this should be dealt with OOC. If thr Magus's player is alright with what transpired, the DM and they should work together to figure out where the character goes from here (maybe some other class or PrC to regain similar class features from a new source, both mechanically and roleplay wise?). If the player is not alright with what happened, maybe the DM should allow a mulligan and change some of what took place, perhaps going as far as rewinding to just after the Magus lost control?

In any case, I don't feel it is appropriate to punish your character or you for these events. Unless you did this intentionally to cause the Magus to lose those class features (which it doesn't sound like that is the case), and even then it should be dealt with OOC, not by removing your Paladin powers.

Best of luck to you!

At the end of the session, the magus player said it wasn't that big of a concern. He has a class feature that allows him to reforge his blade after a week's time. He's willing to do that once we get out of the current dungeon. Though I think that he is a bit ticked I persisted in attacking him. I had attacked him once using lethal damage after I landed a critical using nonlethal damage. I took off around 45 HP in nonlethal damage, so I figured I could just keep doing lethal damage because I did so much nonlethal. He was upset when I started attacking with lethal damage, so I stopped doing that. For the rest of the fight, I continued to use nonlethal damage to knock him unconscious.


OK. That makes no sense. The mind controlled guys were going at it. A neutral person would have sat by, while a good one is someone who would have felt a duty to prevent harm, especially a paladin. He used nonlethal damage. As far as we are told, the paladin didn't even know the source of the mind control.

Even if he did, one was easily knocked out and disarmed while the other one wasn't. I take that to mean that if the magus was knocked out, the mind control could be ended by destroying the blade, but if the silver dragon was knocked out, it would have died.

A blade or the life of a good dragon? Hard choice...for an evil character maybe. The fall makes no bloody sense!

It's almost like falling for killing a prison guard (who's trying to kill the party) after multiple pleas for peace, and to get food and water...not going to rant about my paladin.

Just ask if you can exchange the levels of paladin for cleric, and you will be stronger, more versatile, and not shackled to the whimsy of a DM.

You might also want to show this thread to the DM. Generally, paladin falling stories get pretty clear feedback from a good number of people. It might be enough to convince him.

I already agreed to accept the fall, though if the rest of the party is uncomfortable with me falling, then I'll make an argument to retain my powers. Otherwise, I see it as more of GM trying to enforce a penalty on a player for poor conduct or the like. And I accept that.

[Madokar]

It's a bad DM, mate. He set up a specifically convoluted situation, you managed to make it through without breaking code, and the DM Rule 0'd it beyond normal standards. Just leave the game because it's giving very bad vibes.

I think leaving the campaign is a bit extreme. We've been going at it for a year with no major argument. While there have been some minor concerns. Mostly, if not all, me. But that's because I poor social skills in real life. This game and group have been good for me to improve those social skills.

That, and I'm a still somewhat rookie player. This is my second campaign ever, so I don't quite have a handle on how to roleplay quite yet. So I take this more as a chance to do some learning and growing, both as a person and as a player.

[Flickerdart]

I already agreed to accept the fall, though if the rest of the party is uncomfortable with me falling, then I'll make an argument to retain my powers.
If the powers of your paladin come from faith in his righteousness, you should be able to justify your temporary fall as a lapse of confidence. After thinking about it, the paladin concludes it's not his fault and boom, powers are back.


Otherwise, I see it as more of GM trying to enforce a penalty on a player for poor conduct or the like. And I accept that.
Tell the DM to solve out of game problems out of game.

[Tuvarkz]

I think leaving the campaign is a bit extreme. We've been going at it for a year with no major argument. While there have been some minor concerns. Mostly, if not all, me. But that's because I poor social skills in real life. This game and group have been good for me to improve those social skills.

That, and I'm a still somewhat rookie player. This is my second campaign ever, so I don't quite have a handle on how to roleplay quite yet. So I take this more as a chance to do some learning and growing, both as a person and as a player.

The thing is, you did nothing wrong and are being punished for it. Mechanically, it's much better to deal a mix of lethal and nonlethal so that healing is twice as effective, and it's perfectly reasonable to make your neutralization of a source of conflict in a practical way that doesn't threaten the character's life. And a warrior can't be blamed if he resorts to more dangerous blows if hitting his foe with the back of his blade isn't working fast enough.

Sometimes you also need to stand up for yourself because you should also have a say in what is happening, and this is such a moment. You need to talk with your DM and make him aknowledge that he was abusing his authority and involved OoC into IC to 'punish' you for actions that were perfectly justified.

[icefractal]

How the hell is that even poor conduct? The Magus was mind controlled - sticking together as a party doesn't mean you let someone rampage around while possessed! If you'd killed him in the process, then yes, that would be poor conduct. Knocking him out was the obvious and correct course of action.

Also, I don't see anything about Black Blades wanting to destroy each-other, so that's something the DM introduced himself. Maybe the DM really wanted the dragon to die, put this in as a way to accomplish that, and then got pissed off when you foiled it? Having you fall for nonlethally preventing a murder under the influence of possession is just extremely bad DMing.

Not only should you not fall, but you should reject any claim of poor conduct. The fault here is entirely on the DM. Also, this is why the 4E Paladin approach (no takebacks) is just the better way to go.

[Madokar]

Some clarification from my GM. He sees this more as story potential than as a punishment. So I guess I'm in talks with him for the time being until an agreement can be agreed to. Even if he overrides my reasoning for striking down a party member, the only way I'd really be able to contest his final verdict is if I get support from the rest of the party.

[icefractal]

Man, as "story potential" it makes even less sense. Because the reason the Paladin fell makes no sense from a story perspective. You know what could (arguably) make a Paladin fall? Allowing one of his compatriots to slay an innocent creature while not in their right mind, because he feared any conflict could jeopardize the mission. :smalltongue:

Some armchair psychology of what the DM was maybe thinking:
1) Ok, this will be cool, I'll have this good-aligned dragon show up, but then the Magus ends up killing it because those Black Blades have their own agenda. Drama!
2) Oh ****, I didn't think this through fully. The Magus got punked, and now he's weakened for a while.
3) I'll make the Paladin fall so he's weakened too. That's more fair, right? And it serves him right for messing up my plan. :smallmad:

Which I can understand, but he still should have handled it differently. And definitely not double down on the mistake.

[Mordaedil]

I'd probably stay in the game to see where he goes with this, but I would feel a little bit snubbed.

[Dr.Zero]

Some clarification from my GM. He sees this more as story potential than as a punishment. So I guess I'm in talks with him for the time being until an agreement can be agreed to. Even if he overrides my reasoning for striking down a party member, the only way I'd really be able to contest his final verdict is if I get support from the rest of the party.


Man, as "story potential" it makes even less sense. Because the reason the Paladin fell makes no sense from a story perspective. You know what could (arguably) make a Paladin fall? Allowing one of his compatriots to slay an innocent creature while not in their right mind, because he feared any conflict could jeopardize the mission. :smalltongue:

Indeed, reading all this, my guess is exactly that: the GM planned a fall for the paladin, then the player of the paladin came with a decent solution to avoid it, but the GM had this wonderful plan and story ready, and so made him fall anyway with an excuse.
It's surely quite a bit of railroading, but maybe it will work out well.

[icefractal]

You're probably right, I should remember Occam's Razor. This is why a lot of people don't like playing Paladins. DMs see the class name and the only interesting plot they can think of is "the Paladin falls". :smalltongue:

[Flickerdart]

You're probably right, I should remember Occam's Razor. This is why a lot of people don't like playing Paladins. DMs see the class name and the only interesting plot they can think of is "the Paladin falls". :smalltongue:

I can think of 5 better paladin plots off the top of my head.


The paladin's mount comes of age and leaves for college.
The paladin's god asks the paladin to relax, tone it down a bit - he's making the other gods look bad.
The paladin has to redeem a villain without running afoul of the "can't associate with evil" clause.
The paladin investigates a brand of holy water, proves that the water contains 0% holy. Water's seller claims "nobody would assume, based on the name holy water, that the water is somehow holy."
The paladin trips into a portal, and appears in an alternate universe where everything is the same except the DM can't arbitrarily decide that characters lose all their powers whenever he feels like it.

[Erit]

I can think of 5 better paladin plots off the top of my head.


The paladin's mount comes of age and leaves for college.
The paladin's god asks the paladin to relax, tone it down a bit - he's making the other gods look bad.


Now, things become truly interesting when these two are combined. Paladin starts acting up because they're nervous and worried about their career-long companion, so orders come from on high to take a vacation, maybe pick up a hobby or something to vent the nervous energy. Turn things in the sitcom direction, with Ms. Holy Righteous trying and failing to suppress the workaholic urge to smite evil and proselytize in the name of goodness. Eventually she takes up woodworking, but if she lets her focus drift for even a moment then whatever she was making instead turns out as a holy symbol, so instead she goes to writing but can't stop herself from just recreating the holy book from memory. Et cetera.

Y'know, as a PC that might not go so good, but as a side-character? I sense great potential for such a concept.

[Madokar]

So I was able to pinpoint exactly why my paladin fell. Apparently, this was my third strike. I had made a few choices in playing a paladin (that wasn't Lawful Stupid) which the GM felt was betraying the paladin code. And it wasn't even the fact that I attacked a party member to prevent him from committing a murder while he was possessed. It was because I drew blood against him while doing so. That lethal strike is what did me in.

If I wasn't playing a class with strict roleplaying requirements, it would have flown. But because I was supposed to be a paladin, and that I had built up the two strikes before me, the GM made the call. I don't know if it's Lawful Stupid or not, but I can't be as pragmatic in a fight like other classes. So that means no performing a coup-de-grace, and no dealing lethal damage in combination with non-lethal damage to knock an ally out.

[Tuvarkz]

So I was able to pinpoint exactly why my paladin fell. Apparently, this was my third strike. I had made a few choices in playing a paladin (that wasn't Lawful Stupid) which the GM felt was betraying the paladin code. And it wasn't even the fact that I attacked a party member to prevent him from committing a murder while he was possessed. It was because I drew blood against him while doing so. That lethal strike is what did me in.

If I wasn't playing a class with strict roleplaying requirements, it would have flown. But because I was supposed to be a paladin, and that I had built up the two strikes before me, the GM made the call. I don't know if it's Lawful Stupid or not, but I can't be as pragmatic in a fight like other classes. So that means no performing a coup-de-grace, and no dealing lethal damage in combination with non-lethal damage to knock an ally out.

Except that you can be pragmatic. Paladins are free to trip, flank, use magic in preparation before a battle, you can fight foes while having a numerical advantage, perhaps even stage an ambush without risking a fall. Honor and pragmatism are not mutually exclusive. A paladin musn't always be merciful-a coup de grace is a perfectly valid finisher if the foe is evil to the point where he/she/it doesn't deserve redemption.
Also, if your DM rules on drawing blood, go for an Earthbreaker or any other blunt weapon. And three strikes is not a thing.

[Madokar]

Except that you can be pragmatic. Paladins are free to trip, flank, use magic in preparation before a battle, you can fight foes while having a numerical advantage, perhaps even stage an ambush without risking a fall. Honor and pragmatism are not mutually exclusive. A paladin musn't always be merciful-a coup de grace is a perfectly valid finisher if the foe is evil to the point where he/she/it doesn't deserve redemption.
Also, if your DM rules on drawing blood, go for an Earthbreaker or any other blunt weapon. And three strikes is not a thing.

Yeah, but my GM has pretty much made up his mind and we've been talking about this for almost an entire week over Facebook. I believe we've reached a compromise. While I still fall, it's for a far more valid reason than simply attacking a party member to knock him out. I convinced him of that, at least.

[Flickerdart]

Paladins don't have a "three strikes" rule. No amount of minor code violations add up - the book is clear that only an evil act or a gross violation of the code causes you to fall. I'm sorry you have the DM that you do.

To avoid this happening in the future, get him to tell you what he thinks the paladin code actually says because in-character, there's no way your paladin would not know.

[Madokar]

My GM told me to pretty much read up on Order of the Stick and Goblins to get some sense of how paladins should be played. He specifically quoted Big Ears as an example of what I should aspire to. It looks like he has a strict opinion on how paladins should be played. And I'm pretty sure this "three strikes" rule is a home rule he's cooked up.

[Powerdork]

Then he should have told you before you decided to play a paladin, same deal with the black blade thing, and that's all on him.

A reminder that a black blade is replaceable (24-hour ritual costing 200 gp per magus level, some time next week), while your friend's life, and the silver dragon's life, are less so (5000 gp of diamonds and a 5th-level cleric spell).

[Mordaedil]

Sounds fair to me, I think you can work out an atonement plot with your DM.

[Flickerdart]

My GM told me to pretty much read up on Order of the Stick and Goblins to get some sense of how paladins should be played. He specifically quoted Big Ears as an example of what I should aspire to. It looks like he has a strict opinion on how paladins should be played. And I'm pretty sure this "three strikes" rule is a home rule he's cooked up.

No, no. Not "pretty much." Not "example." Not "pretty sure."

Ask him what the Paladin code IS.

[Madokar]

No, no. Not "pretty much." Not "example." Not "pretty sure."

Ask him what the Paladin code IS.

Our game is tonight. I'll ask him before we start. And I'll bring the canon paladin code of Iomedae from Inner Sea Gods for us both to go over.

[Madokar]

So it turns out in addition to his threes strikes rule, the GM sees me spilling the blood of an ally as an evil action. Apparently, allies come first, no matter what. Even if they are rampaging while under the possession of a Black Blade aiming to kill a good-aligned creature.

[Recherché]

So it turns out in addition to his threes strikes rule, the GM sees me spilling the blood of an ally as an evil action. Apparently, allies come first, no matter what. Even if they are rampaging while under the possession of a Black Blade aiming to kill a good-aligned creature.

What the hell? Just because someone is an ally doesn't mean you should let them do something stupid. Sometimes being Good with a capital G means opposing your own allies because its the right thing to do. In this particular case the ally in question was not in his right mind, you stopped him from doing something horrible that he did not want to do with a minimum of harm. I'd ask your GM what solution to this situation would have resulted in you not falling. Cause every other alternative I see is far worse than knocking a friend out to help him. And if there wasn't a way to avoid the fall then the entire set up was a jerkass move at best.

[Madokar]

What the hell? Just because someone is an ally doesn't mean you should let them do something stupid. Sometimes being Good with a capital G means opposing your own allies because its the right thing to do. In this particular case the ally in question was not in his right mind, you stopped him from doing something horrible that he did not want to do with a minimum of harm. I'd ask your GM what solution to this situation would have resulted in you not falling. Cause every other alternative I see is far worse than knocking a friend out to help him. And if there wasn't a way to avoid the fall then the entire set up was a jerkass move at best.

Everything I've been getting from him and my group is that it's "bros before foes". So I was apparently supposed to attack the dragon. Or let the magus kill him. I keep saying that part of the paladin's duties to ensure that his companions don't commit evil deeds, but that doesn't fly, apparently.

Another part of it is that I had no proof that the dragon was good-aligned. Thing is, I pinged him with detect evil as soon as I saw him and there was no evil to be detected. Now granted, this sliver dragon had a more mercenary approach to his life, and was apparently working for a vampire. A vampire that apparently was putting up symbols of Sarenrae in a desecrated temple of Pharasma in attempt to ward the area.

On top of which, the dragon is from three years in the future. So the timey-wimey ball is going all wibbley-wobbley. We also met up with said vampire. He's one of our party members from the future. And while he's still preaching Sarenrae, he's allied to Driders and a Succubus. On top of which, he's aggressive. My Holy Bastard Sword still does it's extra 2d6 of damage to the Succubus and most likely the Drider too. So the whole thing is a great big hullabaloo.

[Tuvarkz]

Everything I've been getting from him and my group is that it's "bros before foes". So I was apparently supposed to attack the dragon. Or let the magus kill him. I keep saying that part of the paladin's duties to ensure that his companions don't commit evil deeds, but that doesn't fly, apparently.

Another part of it is that I had no proof that the dragon was good-aligned. Thing is, I pinged him with detect evil as soon as I saw him and there was no evil to be detected. Now granted, this sliver dragon had a more mercenary approach to his life, and was apparently working for a vampire. A vampire that apparently was putting up symbols of Sarenrae in a desecrated temple of Pharasma in attempt to ward the area.

On top of which, the dragon is from three years in the future. So the timey-wimey ball is going all wibbley-wobbley. We also met up with said vampire. He's one of our party members from the future. And while he's still preaching Sarenrae, he's allied to Driders and a Succubus. On top of which, he's aggressive. My Holy Bastard Sword still does it's extra 2d6 of damage to the Succubus and most likely the Drider too. So the whole thing is a great big hullabaloo.

Anyone keeping track of how many red flags this DM is setting off?

[Madokar]

Anyone keeping track of how many red flags this DM is setting off?

He's been a solid GM with a good campaign that's lasted a year. This fall is the first major disagreement I've had with him.

[Mordaedil]

Usually that is the case with a lot of DM's and why so many of us learn the hard way. All along he might seem like a real swell dude to play with, but then one day you wait for him to get to the table, so you call him and he's in his car, but he had to turn around because he forgot to put his pants on.

I'm not saying you ought to sever, but I think we've learned about what to not play at this DM's table (don't play paladins).

Not a problem though, just as soon as you finish this character, roll a new class.

[Dr.Zero]

I see only three solutions to this:

Get along: like I said, for me it's pretty clear that he wanted your paladin to fall; your paladin did one of the most paladin-ish thing he could do in that situation, so if that was a fall, everything else would have been a fall; in that case I at least hope that your GM has a really wonderful plot ready regarding that fall
Explain your point: that is, open your book at the page where it is explained what makes a Paladin fall, make him read it, and then, with a really calm and cool attitude, start smashing the aforementioned book on his face till he doesn't agree that, if the code was different, your Paladin should have known it before, to adhere to it.
Rage-quit: self-explanatory


I like a lot solutions #2 and #3 (in sequence, possibly), but #1 can work as well, if this is the first time something so annoying happens and if you think you can still have fun.