quickest loss of paladinhood

[Fitz]

Ok last thursdays game our party paldin fell!
this wouldn't be such a big deal but, it was only the 3rd gaming session (each only 3 1/2 hours long!) and he had a warning in that same session.

the previous session the character spent 20 miniutes burying fallen foes rather than leave them to rot (not a bad thing really, the other players thought it might not be sensible but not that odd for a paladin) latest session, after the half-orc ranger takes the full brunt of a half-ogres attack and goes straight to -9, my wizard fails to stabilise the half-orc and he dies before anyone else can get there. The paladin refuses to help build a cairn for the half -orc because "he's only an Orc" (this caused the warning of the holy item ceasing to work) when the rest of the party start to question this he responds with a torrent of "well what do you expect, " " he was a stupid orc" and "like all orcs he smelled" ..cue loss of paladinhood, an wandering monster encounter (due to the noise) and the rest of the group being a bit put out. when the party had retreated to town, the player seemed put out that he no longer had his powers...and we had only just got to 2nd level.

this in no way seemed a deliberate attempt to fall, but was shockingly fast, has anyone seen a non-deliberate faster paladin fall?

Fitz

[Godna]

long story short he tripped

[leperkhaun]

It seems.....rather odd that he would fall for something like not wanting to bury someone....in fact i would say your DM was bieng very very heavy handed.

anyway no, i have not seen a pally fall that fast....well i havent seen a pally fall that fast in a situation where the player wanted to keep playing a pally.

iv seen pallies who wanted to go blackguad fall really quick.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

@leperkhaun:
It looked like he fell not for the not wanting to bury someone, but for being a racist who openly didn't care about the death of an ally. I'd definitely try to make that Paladin think about "Lawful Good" for a few minutes.

[Fitz]

to clarify it was the opinions voiced that led to his fall, not the not burying his companion, he stated he didn't want to bury him because" he was only an orc.." and "he smelled like an orc"

it wasn't the action but the loud justification in poor terms

Fitz

[Tsotha-lanti]

How do you bury even one corpse in 20 minutes? And was burial in the ground actually the fallen enemies' funerary custom?

I agree that losing paladinhood for this seems a bit odd. It was third-grade level prejudice, but an evil or chaotic act? Hardly. If paladins can't have prejudices, it makes for awfully dull paladins.

[Hallavast]

K... sidestepping your dilemma for a moment, how do you bury someone (much less several foes) in 20 minutes using only level 1 magic? Did you mean real time or game time?

Now, I find it odd (though perhaps not unexpected) that your Dungeonmaster decided not burying someone to be an evil act. Unless it is the paladin's specific duty to bury certain people (like your fallen orc friend), then I would even say the act wasn't even chaotic. What's the reasoning behind the fall, exactly?

Edit:I see i have been ninja'd... and hard.

Also, It sounds like the paladin fell due to an act of ignorance rather than malice.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

So the Paladin fell because he refused to bury his comrade, or because of the epithets? Either way, that's a bit quick to make someone fall, though I suppose he had fair warning.

Quickest I've seen a Paladin fall was in a group of evil/CN characters (CE Barbarian, NE Rogue, CN Sorcerer). Let's just say the Paladin didn't have the most astute player controlling him. His comrades were trying to sneak civilian deaths behind his back as a game (my Barbarian, oddly enough, had the highest tally, though the Sorcerer wasn't really trying... 'cmon, it wasn't exactly a serious campaign, and it was a while ago), and the Paladin finally rolled well on a spot check against... we'll call it a bold beggar kill by the rogue. He pretended he didn't see a thing. The DM asked if he was going to confront the rogue about it. He said "No." Boom, fall.

Yeah, that player then rerolled a wizard who tried to backstab the entire party a few minutes in. Unfortunately for him, his surprise round was magic missle on my Barbarian, who then proceeded to beat him in initiative and take down most of his HP with one swing. The Rogue finished him off with a good kidney stab after that while the Sorcerer just sat and watched (low init). Good times.

[Talic]

@leperkhaun:
It looked like he fell not for the not wanting to bury someone, but for being a racist who openly didn't care about the death of an ally. I'd definitely try to make that Paladin think about "Lawful Good" for a few minutes.

Well, that's a slippery slope.

He didn't commit an evil act. He didn't violate a code of chivalry. He just didn't show respect that is, today, a culturally accepted norm. Is respecting everyone equally a requirement of the paladin class too? Will he lose his powers if he helps one old lady across the street, and not another?

Paladins should lose their powers by doing bad things.

Not for choosing not to do a good one, once in a while.

[warmachine]

Wow! If a paladin could fall for spouting racial prejudice, Miko would have fallen a long time ago. In a pseudo-medieval society, racial prejudice would be pretty common, even amongst paladins.

Never seen a paladin fall myself. The trick when playing one is to take a nanny attitude and demand they surrender when the enemy is losing, treat prisoners well and even give them a weapon and some food when you kick them out. Kind of hard to be punished for immorality when you're the one on the moral high horse.

[Dervag]

@leperkhaun:
It looked like he fell not for the not wanting to bury someone, but for being a racist who openly didn't care about the death of an ally.

I honestly don't think that's an evil act.

Modern civilized societies are firmly convinced that "racism is wrong." But that doesn't make racism D&D evil. I mean, must Evil characters in D&D be racist? Must Good characters be non-racist? I don't think there's a lot of evidence for either of those things.

I'd say that burying one fallen enemy and not burying another, for whatever reason, is a neutral act. Burial customs are incredibly different across societies, and there's no obvious right or wrong way to do them. And nobody would normally expect a paladin to fall because they didn't bury fallen enemies- that is not part of the paladin code to the best of my knowledge.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

This Paladin openly belittled a fallen party member who had died in honorable combat, insulted him repeatedly, and failed to show him the same respect the Paladin showed to people who attempted to kill him. It's probably not fall-worthy, but it needs to be pointed out.

And yes, there should be a mechanic for that.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Wow! If a paladin could fall for spouting racial prejudice, Miko would have fallen a long time ago. In a pseudo-medieval society, racial prejudice would be pretty common, even amongst paladins.

In a D&D world, racial prejudice can be required of paladins. I can't see a dwarf paladin of Moradin or Clangeddin showing respect to orcs or goblins - in fact, treating them like regular people might violate enough strong social rules to count as a Chaotic act.

[senrath]

Personally, I think that it wasn't the prejudices that caused the paladin to fall, per say, but the refusal to honor a fallen comrade. Prejudices in a paladin, fine, in fact I expect pretty much every character to have prejudices (unless they're a Saint, but that's another story altogether), but refusing to honor, and in fact insulting, a comrade who fought and died at your side is a bit low. I wouldn't have made a paladin fall for just that act, but I would have warned him that continuing to act in such a manner in the future would make him fall.

[happyturtle]

Whether or not racism should be considered evil in D&D terms, loyalty to one's comrades in arms has been part of the chivalric code forever. A paladin definitely should not show more respect for the enemy than for his party members. (I'd also argue that any good alignment should include simple kindness, but by that reasoning, Miko could never have become a paladin at all.)

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Whether or not racism should be considered evil in D&D terms, loyalty to one's comrades in arms has been part of the chivalric code forever. A paladin definitely should not show more respect for the enemy than for his party members.

Precisely.

(I'd also argue that any good alignment should include simple kindness, but by that reasoning, Miko could never have become a paladin at all.)

Yeeeeaaaahhh. How about that?

[Bender]

I'd say this paladin would have fallen if he showed an attitude like that over an extended period of time, requiring an alignment shift. But everyone can have a bad day.

The quickest I've seen a should-have-fallen paladin, was in one of the first sessions (possibly the very first, I don't remember). He forgot to bring food and decided to summon his mount and eat a part of it. I was very lenient and after making clear that a paladin would not want to hurt his faithful, celectial partner, he decided not to proceed. Actually, I had to persist three times that it was not a good idea...
He still occasionally shows minor chaotic-nongood behaviour, but I guess the player just should not play a paladin.

[Tengu]

I agree with happyturtle: it's not racism that's an issue here, but the fact that he completely disrespected a fallen comrade. That's not the way a paladin should act - not every DM would make someone fall for that, but such a decision on the DM's part is not outside reason.

Oh, and there is one way for a paladin to fall quicker than having a party who likes Neutral Selfish, Chaotic Stupid and all kinds of Evil characters too much - it's to have a DM who likes Neutral Selfish, Chaotic Stupid and all kinds of Evil characters too much. But then you should probably leave the group no matter what kind of character you play, as such people don't tend to be very mature.

As for Miko, well, she is on purpose an example of a badly-played paladin who's extremely self-righteous and good only on the character sheet.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

There needs to be a punishment mechanic that is less severe than "Fighter Without Bonus Feats", but can still get a message across. Something like a penalty on certain rolls, or the steady revoking of class features. Maybe make it so that if you lose all class features, you can never recover. *Muses*

[Tengu]

Maybe they'll introduce something like that in 4th Edition, seeing that they are ditching many other relics of the past (like random hit points)?

[Green Bean]

Oh, and there is one way for a paladin to fall quicker than having a party who likes Neutral Selfish, Chaotic Stupid and all kinds of Evil characters too much - it's to have a DM who likes Neutral Selfish, Chaotic Stupid and all kinds of Evil characters too much. But then you should probably leave the group no matter what kind of character you play, as such people don't tend to be very mature.

I've seen faster. Two words: "Baby kebab".

[KillianHawkeye]

This is rediculous.

Having a racist attitude is not Evil. It's not even an action, it's just an attitude.

Disrespecting someone is not Evil, it's roleplaying. You're not going to get along with everybody, even if (or especially if) you're a Paladin. That's just life. Corollary: Respecting someone is not Good, it's just how you feel about them.

Burying someone is not Good, and thus refusing to do so is not Evil. In fact, refraining from doing Good in general is not Evil, it's Neutral. D&D morality is not black and white, it's black and white and gray. (And it should take quite a lot of Neutral acts to actually step your alignment towards Neutral.)

At no point in any of this did the character commit an Evil act, disrespect a legitimate force of authority, act dishonorably, withold aid to someone in need, or refrain from punishing anyone who harmed or threatened the innocent. So tell your DM to quit being so petty, and that this guy is still a Paladin.

[Talic]

Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment
Of each new-hatch'd, unfledged comrade.

- Shakespeare, Laertes's blessing to Polonius

What's a comrade? It takes more than being in a party to be a blood-brother. The paladin can agree to travel with someone so long as they're not evil. He can even work with them. But he's not required to consider them a comrade.

Would a knight of old be chastised for not building a funeral cairn for the boy that scrapes the horse poo off his boots in the evening? How about the one that he shared a fire with one evening, and was found dead in the morning?

Just because a paladin TRAVELS with someone, does not require he regard him as a trusted and honored comrade. I could see a loss of powers if he went from showing him the respect of a comrade to this, but there is no evidence of this. As long as he maintained a steady view and opinion of the orc, and role played the dislike/distrust, there's nothing wrong with what he did, from the perspective of the Paladin's Code.

[Dannoth]

Question 1: What was the Half-orcs alignment?
A) If it was CNL-Evil the Paladin should never lose his status for this act (he might even be justified in landing the killing blow himself)

Question 2: Does the Paladin have a back story to justify his actions?
A) If his family was killed by orcs or he has a reason to despise the race I would call it petty, but not something he would lose status over.

All in all I think there is a lesson here:

1) The Paladin should have been playing a character that allows for a Choatic Good Alignment or he should just go whole-hog and become a blackguard

2) Some party members just do not get along (Choatic evil rogue + Lawful good cleric for example)

Personally I think the GM needs to re-think his decision or atleast allow the Paladin a geas side quest to restore his status.

[hamishspence]

Exalted deeds book tells us paladins and other characters must treat others with respect. That doesn't mean being a pushover, but courtesy is pretty expected.

Similarly, it says that even if world is full of prejudice, slavery, etc, doesn't make them any less evil.

Now if the justification was "I'm not allowed to touch dead bodies" would have been reasonable (Vow of purity) Or if it had been: "we haven't time, we're on urgent mission, we'll have to do it when we come back" that would have also been reasonable.

Now prejudice does not have to take strong form, it can be a weak one, a permanent distrust of orcs and half orcs, that would not make him fall, if he never does evil to these creatures- fighting them in self defence or defence of others only. But when it takes a strong form, its a problem.

On the other hand, it is difficult to wrong a corpse. Not impossible, but difficult. Orc is not going to get any deader if burial is delayed.

[Tengu]

On the other hand, it is difficult to wrong a corpse.

Hmm, I wonder if there any way for a paladin to be a necrophiliac and still keep his vows?

[Fitz]

OK to clarify the half-orc died saving the paladins (and rest of the partys ) lives, (especially as the paladin had only 4 hp left.)

he fell not for not burying a comrade but for being disrespectful of someone who just saved him.

as to over-ruling the DM, i would never do that, as far as i am concerned the DM is the referee, what he says goes, i may question it after the game , but i will stand by his ruling.

I think our DM has decided this is a tempoary thing, ie needs to buck his ideas up, not the full atonement spell plus quest deal.

I will see how this continues next session. but as a final point the rest of the group was appauled at how the paladin was played, we all thought that what was said was crass and out of order, it was at the least a black mark on the paladin, a paladin is a adherent of pure good and pure law, not simply a knight. he should rise above the commonplace to a purer morality.

Fitz

[Fitz]

and to answer the posts made while i was typing.

the half-orc was neutral good (raised by Druids and sent on a quest by the spirits of said druids)

fair point on comments like we don't have time, i think that might have not passed too much comment, certainly not the level which his comments did achieve.

Fitz

[Talic]

OK to clarify the half-orc died saving the paladins (and rest of the partys ) lives, (especially as the paladin had only 4 hp left.)

he fell not for not burying a comrade but for being disrespectful of someone who just saved him.

as to over-ruling the DM, i would never do that, as far as i am concerned the DM is the referee, what he says goes, i may question it after the game , but i will stand by his ruling.

I think our DM has decided this is a tempoary thing, ie needs to buck his ideas up, not the full atonement spell plus quest deal.

I will see how this continues next session. but as a final point the rest of the group was appauled at how the paladin was played, we all thought that what was said was crass and out of order, it was at the least a black mark on the paladin, a paladin is a adherent of pure good and pure law, not simply a knight. he should rise above the commonplace to a purer morality.

Fitz

Correction. A paladin is a paragon of Order and Good. He is not pure in every regard, or he would fall for neutral acts, nor must he follow all law, lest he follow evil ones. He must respect legitimate authority. He must decide for himself what is legitimate, though the DM can certainly force that decision somewhat (authority sanctioned by his church or order, for example).

Paladin does not equal perfect. Nor does it equal politically correct, or culturally sensitive. He's not required to have many of the views held commonplace today.

Perhaps the paladin thought that the orc, full of the stupid hubris so prevalent with his kind, thought he could take the entire enemy force, and was shown, by divine guidance, how foolishly lethal his ideal was, and how foolishly frail his mortal body is, next to the will of the gods.

It's already been shown that the act was not evil. Nor was it chaotic. The paladin's alignment has nothing to do with it. The only possibility is the chivalric code. And that, well, is highly debatable. Chivalry greatly depended on the worthiness of the person you dealt with. If you viewed him as inequal, as lesser, you owed him little, unless he was a lady. Chivalry was (and is) a very chauvenistic concept. It's based in preferential treatment to those with status, and those of a different gender. What else can you expect? It was a system designed to be used from one noble to another, and to delineate courting. It was not to guide how knights treated lessers. While being nice is an added bonus, chivalry, law, and good... Well, none require being nice. You can be a rude, arrogant jerk, who does the right thing, and upholds order, and you're still lawful good. If you're careful on who you're rude to? You're still the paragon of chivalry.

[Dannoth]

"he fell not for not burying a comrade but for being disrespectful of someone who just saved him"

Not good enough.
*see what I did there with that pun*

Talic makes some very good points.
Disrespectful =/= evil

Fitz, you are correct in not over ruling the DM, his word is law ... all I am saying is you either need to talk to him ... or the fallen Paladin. If I was the Fallen Paladin at this point I would either be gunning for Black Guard or re-roll a Choatic-Neutral character because if the GM is going to hold me to those kind of standards, I would rather play the game sans-morality conflicts.