Fallen...Blackguards?

[Sardia]

The question of how much evil does it take to cause a Lawful Good character to change alignment is interesting, but how much good and law do you think an Evil or Chaotic character would have to do or think in order to change his alignment?

As a start, would selflessly saving a life for altruistic reasons in any way be of comparable moral weight to selfishly taking one in pursuit of the character's goals?

[Sage in the Playground]

Probably yes.

[headwarpage]

It depends.

No really, it does. A single evil act doesn't always turn a good character evil, and a single good act doesn't always turn an evil character good. It depends on the situation, the magnitude of the act, and the character's motivations.

It also depends on the DM. Ultimately, the DM gets to make the final call on what alignment a character actually is, and different DMs have different views on the issue, weighing intent vs. actions to different degrees, along with their own thoughts on what exactly good and evil consist of. Some DMs will slap you with Chaotic Evil for one bad slip, then make you claw your way back to Neutral, let alone Good. Some won't.

So, are you the DM or the player in this situation? If you're the player, talk with your DM about where your character's going and what you think his alignment should be. If you're the DM, think about the character's motivations and general attitude and figure out what alignment they should be. There's no point in changing a character's alignment to Good if they're going to immediately go out killing puppies and undo the effects of whatever good act they've committed. On the other hand, if they've genuinely reformed, it's probably fair to change their alignment to at least Neutral even before they've committed a large number of good deeds.

If this is a purely hypothetical situation, let the debate begin.

[Talya]

Note that in the RAW there are no situations or circumstances by which a blackguard can lose their powers. Change your alignment to good,you can't advance as a blackguard, but you keep what you had.

[brian c]

Note that in the RAW there are no situations or circumstances by which a blackguard can lose their powers. Change your alignment to good,you can't advance as a blackguard, but you keep what you had.

Well, if your alignment is no longer evil, then your smie good ability won't come in handy very much...

[Sardia]

Well, if your alignment is no longer evil, then your smie good ability won't come in handy very much...

I suppose if you go Lawful Good and really need to explain the Law to a Chaotic Good character...

[Talya]

There's an ability or feat somewhere (i think it's Exalted) that changes smite damage to non-lethal...'


Now, imagine a fallen paladin turned blackguard redeems themselves, atones, and gets all their paladin powers back. They still have their blackguard powers. They still get the bonus abilities for blackguards with paladin levels.

It's silly, I know.

[Mewtarthio]

I think that retaining a Fiendish Servant qualifies as "associating with evil creatures."

Regardless, it should take quite a bit of work to become redeemed. First, the character must somehow recognize that he is evil. This takes quite a bit of work, as most people fervently believe that they are right. After this completely life-altering conversion, they'll probably just be at Neutral. Eventually, they can redeem themselves by performing Good acts which eventually change their outlook. I saw a forum thread once on writing redemption, linked from the comic forum. Lemme see if I can find it...

[url=http://elliotkane.proboards27.com/index.cgi?board=guide&action=display&thread=112163 1317]Here[/ur]. To a certain extent, this holds true for fallen heroes as well, but falling should be far easier than redemption

[brian c]

There's an ability or feat somewhere (i think it's Exalted) that changes smite damage to non-lethal...'


Now, imagine a fallen paladin turned blackguard redeems themselves, atones, and gets all their paladin powers back. They still have their blackguard powers. They still get the bonus abilities for blackguards with paladin levels.

It's silly, I know.

If someone managed to redeem themselves from being a Blackguard all the way back up to a LG Paladin, I'd say they worked hard enough to deserve the abilities. That would probably be two Atonement spells (one to get out of Evil alignment, one to get back to being a Paladin)

[Mewtarthio]

No Atonement is strictly necessary to get back to the Good alignment, but it can probably accelerate the process. It appears to be mostly an spell of DM convenience in this sense, though, allowing the DM to easily state, "This is when his alignment shifts," rather than sifting through the gradual process of redemption.

[MeklorIlavator]

No Atonement is strictly necessary to get back to the Good alignment, but it can probably accelerate the process. It appears to be mostly an spell of DM convenience in this sense, though, allowing the DM to easily state, "This is when his alignment shifts," rather than sifting through the gradual process of redemption.

But for Paladins and clerics, the Atonment spell is the only way to get thier powers back after changing alignmnet, so one spell would be necessary.

[Snooder]

What about magical items? Like a helm of opposite alignment or an intelligent weapon that changes the user's alignment over time?

[Aquillion]

I think that retaining a Fiendish Servant qualifies as "associating with evil creatures."

Have your wizard polymorph them into a humanoid form for a moment, then slap a Helm of Opposite Alignment on them. If you get a two-for-one sale on the helms, you're most of the way to being redeemed yourself.

Regardless, it should take quite a bit of work to become redeemed. First, the character must somehow recognize that he is evil. This takes quite a bit of work, as most people fervently believe that they are right. After this completely life-altering conversion, they'll probably just be at Neutral. Eventually, they can redeem themselves by performing Good acts which eventually change their outlook. I saw a forum thread once on writing redemption, linked from the comic forum. Lemme see if I can find it...

Those would certainly make sense as a house rule, but it should be pointed out that per RAW it isn't required at all... one application of the Atonement spell returns a genuinely repentant paladin to grace instantly with no other requirement. The caster of the spell often requires some sort of quest or geas, but they are never required to do so.

(In other words, if you're DM for a game and the Paladin looks like they're about to decide to fall, make it clear if you're going to require a quest even for PC-cast Atonements before they start, as soon as it becomes clear it's relevant. In fact, it's something you should make clear before the game starts at all, when they first choose to be a Paladin, since it is a departure from the rules they'd expect.)

[Mewtarthio]

What about magical items? Like a helm of opposite alignment or an intelligent weapon that changes the user's alignment over time?

Well, yes, but I think the OP's asking about getting a Blackguard to redeem himself realistically, through mundane means, rather than just how to change an alignment to Good. Brainwashing doesn't really count. I could see the intelligent weapon as being a sort of guide on his quest for redemption ("No, Hylsop, don't kill him! Even those such as he deserve redemption!"). I don't recall items actually changing alignment, though; just forcing the character to take certain actions.

Have your wizard polymorph them into a humanoid form for a moment, then slap a Helm of Opposite Alignment on them. If you get a two-for-one sale on the helms, you're most of the way to being redeemed yourself.

What happens when he un-summons the servant? The servant goes straight back to whatever hell he came from...

Those would certainly make sense as a house rule, but it should be pointed out that per RAW it isn't required at all... one application of the Atonement spell returns a genuinely repentant paladin to grace instantly with no other requirement. The caster of the spell often requires some sort of quest or geas, but they are never required to do so.

(In other words, if you're DM for a game and the Paladin looks like they're about to decide to fall, make it clear if you're going to require a quest even for PC-cast Atonements before they start, as soon as it becomes clear it's relevant. In fact, it's something you should make clear before the game starts at all, when they first choose to be a Paladin, since it is a departure from the rules they'd expect.)

The key phrase here is "genuinely repentant." I'm talking about how to get to a state of genuine repentance.

[Nowhere Girl]

All a blackguard needs to do to "fall" to good is save his own son from the evil Emporer. I thought everyone knew that.

[Rad]

All a blackguard needs to do to "fall" to good is save his own son from the evil Emporer. I thought everyone knew that.

as someone pointed out it is the intentions and the state of mind that influences your alignment, more than the number and magnitude of your direct actions.
After all, since some DMs are so keen to declare a paladin fallen after one questionably-evil act, I find it pretty normal that someone (hopefully it should be the same people) can declare that an evil character has turned to good just out of a single good act.

Ah, and I'm slightly amused by the fact tat everyone finds perfectly normal that a paladin can fall to a blackguard but that it would be incredible for a blackguard to become a paladin...

[Aquillion]

What happens when he un-summons the servant? The servant goes straight back to whatever hell he came from...

Whoops. Er, sucks to be them.

The key phrase here is "genuinely repentant." I'm talking about how to get to a state of genuine repentance.

Players get to decide their character's state of mind completely. Just as a player can say "my paladin is succumbing to evil and becomes a blackguard" whenever they want, they can say "my blackguard has seen the errors of his ways and is genuinely repentant" at any time, and instantly meet all the qualifications (well, the only qualification) for an atonement spell.

Requiring a quest on the basis you implied above just doesn't make any sense--repentant doesn't mean that they've paid for all of their sins, it just means that they want to pay for them. They do not have to show or prove this new attitude in any form. Well, technically they're "proving" it insofar as the atonement spell will fail if their attitude isn't right, but per RAW, simply feeling that way in their heart is enough.

If a player says 'My blackguard is repentant', they're repentant. End of story. I can understand house-ruling that players need to go on quests to atone for serious enough transgressions, but that is a house rule, with no support in the rules, and as such you ought to make it clear to everyone before you start. The rules as written unambiguously make redeeming a Paladin a straightforward and simple process as long as they genuinely want to be redeemed; and a PC's player is the only person who has any say in whether or not their character wants to be redeemed.

...now, with that said, there's another issue here. Jokes about Helm of Opposite Alignment aside, IIRC a Blackguard draws on infernal powers for his abilities. That means, I think, that using any blackguard powers is an evil act. Sure, they don't lose them just for switching to good, but a redeemed Paladin who used any blackguard abilities at all would fall again immediately. Even if your DM allows you to constantly atone after each fall, you'll have trouble getting a cleric to pay the 500 xp eventually...

In the right setting or with DM approval you could use Gray Guard, I guess, to negate the 500 xp cost for atonement as long as you're committing evil for the greater good, but Gray Guard levels won't count towards Blackguard abilities, will they? And you still lose all your Paladin and Gray Guard abilities every time you use a Blackguard ability, at least until you atone.

It might be an interesting character (a sort of trite 'walking the line between good and evil' thing), but hardly overpowering.

[SMDVogrin]

What happens when he un-summons the servant? The servant goes straight back to whatever hell he came from...

Note that the Blackguard's Fiendish Servant does _not_ have the same lines about "magically calling from the realms where it resides" that the Paladin's special mount does. Nothing I see indicates that Blackguards get the Pokeball effect for their Servants.

[Mewtarthio]

as someone pointed out it is the intentions and the state of mind that influences your alignment, more than the number and magnitude of your direct actions.
After all, since some DMs are so keen to declare a paladin fallen after one questionably-evil act, I find it pretty normal that someone (hopefully it should be the same people) can declare that an evil character has turned to good just out of a single good act.

Ah, and I'm slightly amused by the fact tat everyone finds perfectly normal that a paladin can fall to a blackguard but that it would be incredible for a blackguard to become a paladin...

Well, it should be harder to go from evil to good than vice versa. Evil represents self-interest and greed, which are far more natural than sacrifice and altruism.

Players get to decide their character's state of mind completely. Just as a player can say "my paladin is succumbing to evil and becomes a blackguard" whenever they want, they can say "my blackguard has seen the errors of his ways and is genuinely repentant" at any time, and instantly meet all the qualifications (well, the only qualification) for an atonement spell.

Requiring a quest on the basis you implied above just doesn't make any sense--repentant doesn't mean that they've paid for all of their sins, it just means that they want to pay for them. They do not have to show or prove this new attitude in any form. Well, technically they're "proving" it insofar as the atonement spell will fail if their attitude isn't right, but per RAW, simply feeling that way in their heart is enough.

If a player says 'My blackguard is repentant', they're repentant. End of story. I can understand house-ruling that players need to go on quests to atone for serious enough transgressions, but that is a house rule, with no support in the rules, and as such you ought to make it clear to everyone before you start. The rules as written unambiguously make redeeming a Paladin a straightforward and simple process as long as they genuinely want to be redeemed; and a PC's player is the only person who has any say in whether or not their character wants to be redeemed.

I'm assuming that the characters are decently realistic. Sure, you could perform heinous acts of blatant Evil whenever it suits you and then immediately state, "I feel really bad about it and am truly repentant," but that doesn't mean any sane DM should let you.

[Aquillion]

I'm assuming that the characters are decently realistic. Sure, you could perform heinous acts of blatant Evil whenever it suits you and then immediately state, "I feel really bad about it and am truly repentant," but that doesn't mean any sane DM should let you.

That's a horrible attitude towards DMing. We aren't talking about some obscure abuse of the rules here, we're talking about a player taking perfectly normal and by-the-books options to choose the direction their character is going. Players are supposed to be able to change the alignment of their character with near-complete freedom; that's why spells like atonement exist in the first place. The only time a DM should have to step in is when a player is acting extremely deviantly from their declared alignment or changing at an absurd rate, and even then, all they're supposed to do is say "change your alignment or change your behavior, it's up to you."

Telling a player, with no advance warning or discussion of house rules, "Oh, of course a repentant paladin has to undergo a long and painful quest" is comparable to saying (for example) "Oh, of course you can't take Barbarian and Wizard levels in the same character, look at how opposed they are. If you take the wizard levels you lose your ability to rage forever."

Of course there's a place for sanity checks when a player's decisions get to the point where it's impossible for anyone to interact with their character without laughing, but a DM shouldn't constantly be looking for chances to shout 'gotcha' at a player's decisions... alignment is ultimately intended to be a tool for players to use in roleplaying their characters, not a straitjacket.

For the record, the easy-atonement redemption for paladins is very much a central part of the rules; the Gray Guard, for instance, is almost completely dependant on it, and has easy atonement as a class feature. Their flavor suggests that they receive atonement for evil deeds committed in the name of good fairly frequently. Now, a character changing their mind about being a blackguard is a bit more of a shift than that... but it's hardly unimaginable.

And if a DM just can't stand the EZ-insert-coin-gain-redemption offered by the atonement spell, they should at least tell the players whatever their houserules are before the game starts, so they'll know not to start a build based around redeeming a blackguard or whatever. Doing it any other way only leads to arguments and bad blood.

[Sardia]

Well, it should be harder to go from evil to good than vice versa. Evil represents self-interest and greed, which are far more natural than sacrifice and altruism.

That would seem to imply that the majority of the NPCs that characters interact with would be evil, then. Merchant? Evil. Barmaid? Evil. Ship Captain? Evil, along with his evil crew. Most political structures and clergy? Evil to the core.
If it's far more natural, shouldn't it be far more prevalent? The Paladins are going to get a workout...

[Falconsflight]

Firstly, Evil is Self interest and Greed at the expense of others. I.e. your willing to see a man go bankrupt and live on the streets so you can have change in your pocket. self interest and greed are not inherently evil. It's only when you do them too much. But the reason why i posted is not an ehtics alignment argument.

My question is, If you drop as a blackgaurd, you keep ALL the blackgaurd abilities is that right? And lets say you start up as a paladin again. Okay. Now you have Aura of Good and Aura of evil... What exactly does that mean? By that I mean when your Paladin and Blackgaurd levels are the same. Level 5 blackgaurd/level 5 paladin. When someone casts Detect evil and detect good... what happens? "Your evil... AND good?"

Also, do Dark blessing and Divine Grace Stack? (What, plus 12 to all my saving throws. Why thank you.)

[Tokiko Mima]

Really, the best way to do this is to take your Blackguard levels first, THEN change your alignment voluntarily to Lawful Good and take your Paladin levels. Barbarian would make a good class to start off.

6-7 levels of Barbarian, then 7 levels of Blackguard, then an alignment switch and 5-6 levels of Paladin. You would have an insane Fort save, and get to count double your Charisma on Saves on top of that. Additionally, you'd be healing others (or yourself for Cha * 5 or 6 damage) and could heal yourself or your fiendish servant for Cha * 7 damage. You could Smite Good 4/day, or Smite Evil 2/day. A very interesting character, probably best suited for an "Internal Affairs" type job at a large Good aligned church!

[Rad]

I would have found it to be perfectly normal if the blackguard, as all other divine-related classes, had an ex-blackguard entry sorting that out. I'd have seen favorably a level trade-off from blackguard to paladin as well, similar to the one that exists the other way round.
The only in-game reason I can find for t not to exist, however, is that a blackguard is a very particular agent of evil, that operates on a very, very long leash... so long that the evil powers that grant her powers just did that once and cannot take them back.
This is pretty much the only possible explanation for retaining any supernatural ability upon falling, but has the huge disadvantage of not fitting with how D&D deities are supposed to work.

The BG abilities, however, allude to the fact that you make a pact with evil outsiders rather than gods, that could be very interesting as the ex-BG might have to "take his soul back" from the demon holding it, or the demon might simply beleive that his servant will turn to evil again, and leave her his powers as a token of this "trust". If the BG turned good, retaining her evil powers is going to be upsetting, especially if his ex-"employer" keeps sending dreams and visions like "your soul belongs to me" or "you will come back... you know you will" all the time.

[Rad]

Well, it should be harder to go from evil to good than vice versa. Evil represents self-interest and greed, which are far more natural than sacrifice and altruism.

This is VERY arguable... I would not want to start a theology dispute about the inherent good present in everyone here, but I would not let this pass as assured either.

Leaving all real-life philosophy and religion aside, the D&D system is constructed so that there is symmetry between good and evil at all time; it is also assumed somewhere that the average person is neutral, implying that good and evil are roughly balancing forces in the soul of everyone. Then some people choose to follow good and make themselves good suppressing their evil tendencies, and some others becoming evil suppressing their good ones.

[Caledonian]

I think this thread is an excellent example of why people shouldn't approach RPGs from a purely mechanical perspective.

A Barbarian... becoming a Blackguard... and then a Paladin... in order to gain cool powers.

[Falconsflight]

actually, upon further inspection, you can't, well - You can't fall as a paladin, become a blackgaurd and come back. Rules state that once a paladin multiclasses he can't go back into paladin. But the big question is - Would he regain all his powers if he does the atonement spell?

[Snooder]

I think this thread is an excellent example of why people shouldn't approach RPGs from a purely mechanical perspective.

A Barbarian... becoming a Blackguard... and then a Paladin... in order to gain cool powers.

Actually that works out much better than lot of the multiclass builds you see out there. Hell it even makes more sense than the entire cleric class.

Simple, a barbarian from the wilds makes a pact with an evil outsider and becomes a Blackguard. He continues merrily hacking his way to evil glory when he has an epiphany and decides to start being good. Ergo, becomes a paladin.

If you think about it Darth Vader went from barbarian to paladin to blackguard to paladin again.

[BabbageCliolog]

Actually that works out much better than lot of the multiclass builds you see out there. Hell it even makes more sense than the entire cleric class.

Simple, a barbarian from the wilds makes a pact with an evil outsider and becomes a Blackguard. He continues merrily hacking his way to evil glory when he has an epiphany and decides to start being good. Ergo, becomes a paladin.

If you think about it Darth Vader went from barbarian to paladin to blackguard to paladin again.

I am SO going to make this character and soon!

That is an awesome build. How come I didn't think of that?

/BC

[Roderick_BR]

I'm not very sure, but in the Book of Exalted Deeds, there's an entry about redeemed villains. It doesn't really talk about how or when an evil character changes alignment though, I guess.