As most of you may know, paladins are required to be lawful good and stick to a code of honour.

This means that we cannot travel with evil characters, at least, that is how the dm's see it.

But this ruins paladins, there have been several situations where I have had to realy on help from evil chars, not "wanted" their help but "needed" it, and have had my alginment altered for this. Admittidly if I had no suitble reason for assosiating with evil chars, then I should suffer the consquences, but sometimes, in not doing so, I am forced to do things such as refuse to help in quests such as slaying undead. This in itself creates problems, as in refusing to help I am commiting an evil act by letting undead roam for instance, or by allowing a group of monsters to take over a place and not helping out even though I am more than capable. Also, if by not being allowed to assosiate with evil, then really paladins should be unable to do any quest given by Durrgar in the mines, or even purchase weapons and armour as all weapons and armour on this module are made by them. I'm not asking that the rules be cahnged completely, just that they are a little more flexable, otherwise paladins are just going to be ruined completely.

I played a paladin to level 9 and was the epitome of awesome. Given, I had an easier time because I was a higher level/averaged with most evil PCs.

Regardless, there are ways you can explain it and in my experience the DMs only give you shifts when it's obvious you screwed up. (In most cases >.>). You can also discuss it with them if you feel it was especially unjustified.

If a group of evil people set off to slay undead you aren't to work along with them, there're several reasons. You can't know their true intent. A good deed is a selfless deed, perhaps they're only doing it for the reward. Helping evil attain their reward is not an act of a paladin.

You can't always stop evil from being present, they may bump into you and tag along during the action (Such as a battle or an invasion, whatever) in those instances the DMs are usually pretty lenient unless you're blatantly allowing evil to transpire.

In anycase. To conclude, it isn't impossible to play a paladin and in my experience it's often the fault of the own player when their paladin of Selune ends up fallen and in a bottom-less pit, especially because they were on a quest with evil.

I witnessed your paladin yesterday in that dilemma. I can explain exactly what happened, and the alternatives you could have chosen if you want me to, just drop me a PM. But forced? No sir, being a paladin takes some social maneuvering, but it's not impossible.

About the armor and weapons- this is not true. There are other places and ways to get armor that are just as good, if not better, for the same prices. But that's an IG thing you should look around for.

About the duergar- you are absolutely correct. Paladins cannot help the duergar, for doing so would only help the wicked achieve their wicked goals, namely mining more to further exploit the people of the city. But EfU has SO many quests, you'll never need to go help them, so it's not really a problem anyways!

You're completely wrong. Paladins are not just LG fighters. They have a very strict code about being a force for good and not helping evil. Questing alongside evil PCs is something that paladins who wish to remain paladins should not do consistently, since it leads to situations where they're helping with and associating with evil.

This has been discussed at great length on these forums (and elsewhere).

Again, if you see the paladin code as being something that ruins the class, then the class is not for you. They are not just good-aligned characters. They are a FORCE for good, the EMBODIMENT of LG. This strict, uncompromising code is what makes the class interesting.

Nero24200 Also, if by not being allowed to assosiate with evil, then really paladins should be unable to do any quest given by Durrgar in the mines, or even purchase weapons and armour as all weapons and armour on this module are made by them. I'm not asking that the rules be cahnged completely, just that they are a little more flexable, otherwise paladins are just going to be ruined completely.

There are indeed evil-aligned questgivers. Detect Evil will pick up on the alignments of NPCs as well as PCs.

There are shops where you can purchase armor and weapons that are not made by duergar -- although, indeed, it is true that the vast majority of Sanctuary's arms and armor are sold by evil-aligned duergar who paladins shouldn't be buying from. If you look around, though, you can find non-evil merchants who sell basic arms and armor. These merchants were added a long time ago with paladins in mind.

I think i should add my two cents in this since I play most of the evil characters the original poster has quested with.

In one case, the paladin and one of my evil char's have become quite friendly, since my char is a strange kind of evil(I could have given her alignement good at the beginning, and it wouldn't change anything), and she has shown herself to be perfectly honourable and respectable all the time, even seeking redemption. So there you can't blame a paladin for encourageing this kind of char by questing with him/her

In the other case, my other evil char tagged along on a quest, unasked for, sneaking through the group, in order to spy on them (and pick up a few items in the meanwhile). So in a sense, the poster's paladin didn't Truly Associate with evil.

Where I think the problem lies is the ideas behind the Paladin's code and its phrasing. There are so many problems and contradictions in the code itself that its normal for players to have headaches about it. A paladin can't help good it says : so a paladin shouldn't quest with evil, but then a paladin who stays out of evil's way is helping evil get away with their evil doings SO paladins are helping evil whatever they do. BUT the code also says paladins must Fight evil, but if a paladin is never amongst evil chars, he won't be doing his job to keep evil characters in check. Honestly, that part of the paladin code causes too many direct contradictions and limits RP.

As it stands, what happens is evil characters and paladins never meet/talk/discuss/confront each other on a regular basis ( There are times when -yes- a paladin might do something, but its not as common as the code seems to want it to be)

The solution would be tolerating an inbetween position : a paladin should seek confrontation with evil chars, and make sure they are kept in line. If a paladin goes on a quest with an evil char, he should be allowed to do so IF his main preoccupation is making sure the evil char won't do anything evil, and punishing him if he does. This would encourage more proactive paladins, not simply reactives one (The beggars guide to good discusses this more)

Another point is, that as it stands, there is no room for non-(stereo)typical good and evil interactions if the DM's will mechanically strip paladinhood from a player who has quested with evil. Being so mechanical about it means that important things like WHY a char is evil, WHAT has he done so far, etc, get forgotten, even though those things are the most important and relevant factors in the decision to quest with the evil character.

To sum it all up, what I'm saying is that there has to be flexibility in everything, and more attention to the circumstances.

I agree with Akeula on that, Checking my large collection of D & D Rule books i cannot find anywhere that it states that A Paladin can not work with Evil Charchters, just that they cannot abide Evil acts, as such unless an Evil act is commited in front of the Paladin and he does nothing about it surely it would not affect his allignment.

The Book of Exalted Deeds also mentioins Good Charchters (Paladins in paticular) trying to convert and Evil Charachter as such to do this they must spend some time with them. Now if the standard approach is taken the suerly that can never happen, what is required here is an interpretation of the rules by the DM.

I find Paladins to be very rewarding to play and would like to point out that Paladins are not all cut from the same cloth - A Paladin of Sune has a very different outlook to a Paladin of Hoar.

The Paladin's code of conduct needs to reflect the personal dogma and teachings of the Deity the Paladin worships. Any time I play a Paladin I work out the Paladin's own personal code of conduct - what he/she will and won;t do and his/hers own goals.

I would write this up and keep it on hand - maybe in Journal notes so you can easily refer to it.

This way if down the Track you are questioned on your actions you have your Personal Code of Conduct and beliefs to fall back on.

Reagrds, Nestek

Nestek has a point to. For example, If a gods dogma doesn't mind punishing evil people even if the law is on the their side, a paladin can't be punished alignement wise for breaking the law in order to punish the evil person. The "basic" paladin code should be more of a "guideline"( as in pirates of the caribbean).

edit : clarifying what i mean

Guideline, schmideline.

You are a paradon of good, holy, virtue, and honor.

You can not sully yourself with base, villains. Supporting them, aiding them, befriending them, helping them enrich themselves, covorting with them all makes evil, something you are sworn to destroy, more comfortable, amiable, easy, and plentiful.

Your god gives you the ability to detect evil so you can not in any way, ever associate with evil doers.

I can see a few exceptions:

1. You think you're going to be capable of redeaming a specific soul. You may travel with him, assuming you keep an eye on him and continually help him be a better person.

2. You are forced into working with evil to prevent a greater evil. This isn't just a 'let's destroy the undead in the temple' its more a "the soul of a good man is in danger from a devil seeking to claim it, and only by working with one of the devil's disciples who is also seeking freedom from its yoke can this good soul be saved". Even then, its a horrible mortal struggle and you shouldn't be shocked when yes, some of their corruption rubs off on you.

Evil is not a subjective force in the Forgotten Realms. Its a real, palpable taint on the souls of evil. Contact with evil will corrupt anyone, the ability of evil to tarnish and corrupt and destroy is in fact part of the definition of "EVIL". Being sworn to uproot and destroy, or cleanse and purify all evil in the cosmos essentially requires you to avoid any contact with evil unless you have the wisdom and the karmic good to tolerate even the briefest of corrupting contact.

The alignment shifts make perfect sense in the 1 to 5 point category with larger shifts if you're blatantly putting your paladin's soul at risk or aiding the forces of evil. Even a greedy shopkeeper who over charges his patrons but wouldn't otherwise hurt them is in the cosmic world view of the Forgotten Realms a contemptable *although not unredemable* tool of the forces of evil to be either redeemed, controlled, or stopped in his foul behavior which daily through taking money dishonestly causes less good to exist in the universe.

That is the world view of a paladin. They may risk themselves to combat evil, but that isn't the same as being friends with evil adventurers--or claiming you joined their party to learn more about them to stop them later because that is part of a slippery slope that leads to the path of a fallen paladin. Which is entirely in keeping with the world, so I fully support alignment shifts.

I know Ivandur got many, often times from an evil character I played who specifically tried to tarnish him and corrupt him even by offering him the chance to *do* good acts but based on evil knowledge, motivations, or propelling other evil acts through good ones.

so basicaly your'e saying that 'gods law' is above 'mans law'. That is well and good for someone like hoar, but Tyr, for example requires that we uphold the law of the country we are in. Though it also puts a heavy emphasis on 'order through application of law' which could lead the paladin to fight against unjust or laws that cause chaos.

So he'd befulfulling his duties and should not suffer an alignment shift on either axis.

So as far as who the paladin is following, that can change the whole perspective.

And I do believe that the DM's should listen to the reasons given before any shift is doled out.

Though I know howland has a very strict interpretation of this, probably for the sake of not having to get into long winded philosophical discusssions like this threat has just generated.

However I feel this is a one way street. Rarely do I get lawful or good points for doing anything. My response from the DM's is 'that's what a paladin should be doing'.....well...DUH! so let my alignment shift appropriately then since they're so quick to send me packing the other way.

Just a bit more feeling for our characters would help. Though I find it odd considering there is no 'detect evil' in NWN normally.

One last thing here, on the portal quest, when you go in to face the man, you should get an alignment shift towards good and lawful if you opt to report him to the watch, and an alignment shift to evil and chaotic if you kill him. The game has scripted shifts for all events and quests normally, I can't imagine its too hard to do the same for a quest with such an obvious chance to do either right or wrong.

Mikhail The Heretic Checking my large collection of D & D Rule books i cannot find anywhere that it states that A Paladin can not work with Evil Charchters

Player’s Handbook While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters.

Mikhail The Heretic Now if the standard approach is taken the suerly that can never happen, what is required here is an interpretation of the rules by the DM.

Interpretation: Paladins do not adventure, quest, or travel with characters of any evil alignment.

Aekula The "basic" paladin code should be more of a "guideline"( as in pirates of the caribbean).

The Code of Conduct is a requirement, not a suggestion.

Uhh, I can't agree. A code is a code, it's an absolute vow. You must follow it as closely as possible. That is the way of paladins. It cannot be broken unless a direct specification is made, which would be VERY limited. i.e. someone's life is on the line and it's the only choice. And I mean only.

Last I checked, a paladin was positive that GOD's law is above man's law.

On account of being a personal servant of a god.

I don't believe the paladin's code is to be faulted, just the paladin alignment constrictions applied regardless of a given god.

The fact of the matter is that the class details were ported over from earlier versions of the D&D game. Sadly the paladin evolved very little with the advent of newer incarnations.

If only there was a paladin arch-type for every alignment/god...

Or better yet, down with alignments! Up with sin points! ;)

It has always seemed to me (and I do have some experience with this) that our DMs do an excellent job with alignment shifts, particularly involving paladins. They've also made their stance on it very clear in the past, so why expect anything different?

https://efupw.com/efu1-forum/topic/37/3743/an-rp-question/index.html?amp;postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

I feel Casperzero summed up the paladin very well with his numerous posts in this thread. I'd love to see paladins played like he descriped them, I might eventually make one like that myself

Aekula Another point is, that as it stands, there is no room for non-(stereo)typical good and evil interactions if the DM's will mechanically strip paladinhood from a player who has quested with evil. Being so mechanical about it means that important things like WHY a char is evil, WHAT has he done so far, etc, get forgotten, even though those things are the most important and relevant factors in the decision to quest with the evil character.

To sum it all up, what I'm saying is that there has to be flexibility in everything, and more attention to the circumstances.

When people think of good and evil in terms of D&D they oftentimes associate it with good and evil in the real world. The thing is, on this fantasy planet they call Earth, good and evil is subjective; what is good to one person is inherently evil to the next person. This is because the terms good and evil don't really exist, rather, we think of right and wrong, both of which depend entirely on our own point of view.

In D&D, however, it's different. Here's right and wrong as well as good and evil. Right and wrong both are as subjective as they are in the real world and depend solely on the character's own moral code (which, for paladins and clerics, is often the deity's moral code). Good and evil, on the other hand, reflect your character's soul. If you're touched by demonspawn, you become tainted; if you embrace it, you fall. Right/wrong does not equal good/evil, respectively. The latter two are simply objective terms needed for the system to function. There's nothing more to it than that, and there doesn't have to be.

An example: Anakin getting it on with Amidala wasn't an evil act - if anything, it was a neutral (good) act. This doesn't change the fact that it in many ways was a bad choice, though. When later Anakin slaughters all of the padawans in the Jedi Temple, many saw this as both a wrong and an evil act. Darth Sidious, however, saw it as a right act. The act itself was still very much evil, and would've made even the most righteous paladin fall.

djspectre One last thing here, on the portal quest, when you go in to face the man, you should get an alignment shift towards good and lawful if you opt to report him to the watch, and an alignment shift to evil and chaotic if you kill him. The game has scripted shifts for all events and quests normally, I can't imagine its too hard to do the same for a quest with such an obvious chance to do either right or wrong.

Mr. Cheez-It

Aekula The "basic" paladin code should be more of a "guideline"( as in pirates of the caribbean).

The Code of Conduct is a requirement, not a suggestion.

[Edit] And Tristan, fix that signature. It's very difficult to read. -.-

Snoteye

Good and evil, on the other hand, reflect your character's soul. If you're touched by demonspawn, you become tainted; if you embrace it, you fall. Right/wrong does not equal good/evil, respectively.

On a side note, I'm happy to learn here that one of my char deserves her evil alignement ( people were telling me she should have a good alignement and it was annoying to argue with them)

On the main subject, I don't feel that giving a purely "background" argument will convince me that the code hasn't got a problem : its addressing two different issues.

What I would like to see tackled is the contradictions and paradoxes within and caused by the code.

Player’s Handbook While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters.

Well that quote is not in the Players handbook that i have and i have checked it twice. (mine is Version 3.5).

In my Players Handbook (3.0), it even said that paladins would tolerate differences with others (mine is french, and its written under the "other classes" section, I think)

I feel that i should point out that they removed the part of the code that said that Paladins couldent work with evil charecters in version 3.5 of the fules there reason being (as stated in Dragon magazine at one point) that it was much to easy to get into situations where the code would contradict itself. An example of this in would be the Drughars daughter quest from the mines A paladin should not really take a job from the drughar because Drughar are evil charecters but if he does nothing then the daughter remains in the arms of The Gnolls which is also an evil act.

Dilandau Kale ...the daughter remains in the arms of The Gnolls which is also an evil act.

it clearly states that a paladin can not tolerate any evil act no matter who it is between so by not helping save the daughter that is an evil act.

We play 3.0 not 3.5. Don't quest with evil and expect not to get evil points. I'm not going to elaborate as to why because you've liekly seen a ton of peoples posts regarding this already. Just don't do it, you can't justify it regardless of the situation no matter what you gain those evil point. Dms have made the stand clear. Don't play a paladin and then expect to be treated special because YOU feel the guidelines the DM's have set out to be incorrect.

Naga is going against the whole point of talking about it.

Naga We play 3.0 not 3.5.

That isn't an argument. If WotC noticed the problems and edited the code because there were contradictions and problems with the code, then that means there ARE problems with the code that the DM's promote now.

I think the main mistake here is that some people are thinking of specific types of characters receiving Evil points as some sort of punishment or slap on the wrist for not "properly" playing a Paladin, rather than an indication of the dark and harsh server setting taking its toll on what would otherwise be a goodly soul.

Bring on the evil points, I say.

Something which concerns me a little more - how do you stop the 'Oh, it's just another paladin' feeling you tend to get?

The paladin code, the lack of fear, the utter conviction of a paladin all go without saying. How do you personalise inside this?

The code exists for a reason. The code exists because paladins are intended to be such a pure force of good that any involvement in an evil act is intolerable. By questing with someone evil, they're helping that evil person get rich and grow more experienced. Who knows what the evil person will subsequently do with that knowledge and wealth?

The helping evil NPCs is a bit different. Helping to rescue someone's daughter from a band of gnolls is probably something a paladin might do, since gnolls are evil themselves and the daughter should probably be rescued. But accepting the presence of an evil person into your adventuring group, allowing someone evil to become your partner, is a very clear violation of the Paladin's Code of Conduct on this server.

I might also add, not having this rule would blur the lines between paladins and other classes, take away a lot of the interesting situations they get put in, and otherwise lead to a situation where paladins questing with evil becomes increasingly and increasingly common. Then the Dms would probably make paladins an application-only class in order to maintain its integrity -- and then we'd have even more paperwork to read!

The DM's are very firm on associating with evil being a break of the paladin's code. You are not going to convince us otherwise. All of us have been involved on debates on the topic for years, and we are in agreement about it. It should be very clear. If you want to play a paladin and stay a paladin, you won't go questing with evil. If you are going to play a paladin, you just need to accept that, and work with it. Otherwise play a LG fighter.

1) Redemption - Redemption is often used as an excuse to travel with evil. When we hand out chaotic points, we watch first. If you are actively redeeming evil, we see that. If you are only using redemption as an excuse to go questing, we see that too. I can tell you that two of the DM's have played through this scenario before as players. On was an evil character on the path to redemption, and one was a paladin trying to redeem him. Here is how we made it clear that this was serious, and not just an excuse to quest. A) An applicatoin was sent in for the evil character, asking the DM's to watch for good acts and such as they were working on redemption. B) Hours and hours of NON-QUEST discussions and RP on topics like morality, the nature of good and evil, why the character was evil in the first place, steps to improve themselves, etc. This is a key component. If all we see is questing together, that is not trying to redeem them, that is helping evil get xp and gold, so that you can get some too. C) Others were involved as well. Although one paladin was the key figure in the redemption, a number of others were also involved in discussions, to get more points of view to the evil character. D) The paladin was willing to just eat the evil points along the way. He was willing to risk tainting himslef to redeem a soul. It's the risk you take. The paladin is likely to take alignment hits along the way. It's just something to live with when you associate with evil.

2) The alignment scale I think one big complaint that keeps coming up is that it's hard for a paladin to get good and law points. You are right, and that's the way it should be. Think of alignment as a sliding scale. If you have 80 good, this is your level of expected behavior. There isn't much room on the good side, but lots of room on the evil side. It is difficult to do something so good, that it will shift you even more to good. You have to do something extraordinarily good to be "even more good". On the other hand, nuetral and evil acts are outside your current behavior, so it is easy to shift that direction. This is also true of evil people. Getting more evil points should require more vile and evil actions to continue to slide down. I personally have given good and law points before when I've seen actions out of the ordinary, or more commonly, actions by neutral characters where that isn't their normal expected behavior. So, if you are a paladin and want to gain law or good, you have to do something above and beyond the call of duty to do so. Have discussions with DM's on how to do so. I'm sure something can be arranged.

3) On discussing before shifting To be honest, it's easier for us to shift first, and then let someone plead their case to get it back. At that point, it's in their court to convince us that the action was too harsh instead of us trying to convince them it was warranted. We do listen, but players need to remember that we won't automatically agree with them, and they have to be ready to accept that. I have given points back in the past, although more often than giving them all, I give a comprimise ammount.

4) Ammounts of shifts We are trying to make it a policy to only do 1-5 point shifts at a time. This means it takes repeated offenses to actually lose your paladin status. You shouldn't be surprised if you actually lose status, as you've been working towards it for a while at that point. Now, if you commit active evil, that's different, and you will get larger shifts, usually resulting in immediate loss of paladinhood, just like it is deserved.

5) IC vs OOC Remember, alignment shifts are an IC punishment, not an OOC punishment. Banning is an OOC punishment. You didn't get an alignment shift because the DM's hate you. You didn't get it because DM's are spiteful in general. You got it, because your character earned it through IG actions. Alignment is a character development tool, whether some people don't like the system or not. Alignment is given out like experience, although not as often, it reflects how the character is being played.

6) Fallen Paladins What happens if you do fall from LG? Is it time to quit the character? No! A fallen paladin has a ton of potential for character development. Should they go evil in spite and apply for black guard? Probably not, especially as most fallen paladins will be NG. How will having divine blessings stripped away affect a character? There is so much potential to tell great stories here. So many interesting directions to go. Will they try to regain their status? Will they go on trying their best to follow the code, knowing they are unable to? Will they take up drinking to drown their sorrows? Will they stay good, but have hatred grow against the god who turned on them? Sure, you lose some of the abilities. However, if your whole reason for playing a paladin is the abilities, I have to be honest with you, not only is a paladin the wrong class for you, but you may be on the wrong server. The story comes first. Stats and abilities should be secondary.

to follow up on thrawns comment on fallen paladins: fallen paladins are interesting if the char doesnt give up! sure youre not going to get paladin levels but that is not the purpose of playing here! its telling an interesting story. And if you work hard, strive to uphold goodness, redemption is possible and a rewarding journey. hell i feel like making a fallen paladin now but i bet it will be a fad everyone will choose (psyche)

Aekula Naga is going against the whole point of talking about it.

Naga We play 3.0 not 3.5.

That isn't an argument. If WotC noticed the problems and edited the code because there were contradictions and problems with the code, then that means there ARE problems with the code that the DM's promote now.

Changing rules for future versions is fine, we play D&D 3.0 here, if it was 3.5 bards could cast in light armour, gnomes would get favoured class bard etcetera. If you can't have ALL of it you don't want some of it.

Also they did'nt notice problems wit the code they just decided to change it, thats how companies such as WotC make cash. The code they promote now is the 3.0 code.

I think thrawn completely summed it up. If you don't like the code for paladins on this server *gasps* maybe you should'nt play a paladin instead of just making one and deciding you can make the rules as you go along.

Anyway as I said thrawn made an extremly awesome point!

Alright. I'm convinced now.

to follow up on thrawns comment on fallen paladins: fallen paladins are interesting if the char doesnt give up! sure youre not going to get paladin levels but that is not the purpose of playing here! its telling an interesting story. And if you work hard, strive to uphold goodness, redemption is possible and a rewarding journey. hell i feel like making a fallen paladin now but i bet it will be a fad everyone will choose (psyche)

the only problem is, I have yet to seem dm's reward someone for trying to uphold the code or redeam any sins they have. I once assosiated with an evil cleric, succesfully turning her to good, but not received any reward for (not that I have a problem with that), but if no reward is given then it means by trying to turn others to the path of good we lose our powers, despite the fact that paladins are given their powers to promote their god's way of life.

Also if you take the Paladin alighment situation to it conclusion then under the current rules no Paladin would willingly stay in sanctuary since it is a place where evil charecters are allowed to come stay and even do trade which is against everything the paladin stands for.

Dogma: Reveal the truth, punish the guilty, right the wrong, and always be true and just in your actions. Uphold the law wherever you go and punish those who do wrong under the law. Keep a record of your own rulings, deeds, and decisions, for through this your errors can be corrected, your grasp on the laws of all lands will flourish, and your ability to identify lawbreakers will expand. Be vigilant in your observations and anticipations so you may detect those who plan injustices before their actions threaten law and order. Deliver vengeance to the guilty for those who cannot do it themselves.

The section higlighted is also impossible to do if Paladins are forced to stay away from evil characters.

They aren't forced to run away from evil, just not help it in any way. It's not all that complicated.

Anyone with more questions, read Thrawn's post, this argument is very, very tired.