Paladin of Red Knight Code of Conduct discussion.

[Hawke]

More like 3 posts up. But whatever.

Heck, if you want to see a modern day paladin, fictional of course, Captain America.

Boom. Done.

/thread

[DM Ioulaum]

The following is under discussion by the entire DM Team and pending review after internal discussion arose regarding lore sources

The DM Team on Baldur's Gate doesn't enforce a 'universal paladin code'. We consider the code to be a set of principles which each Paladin interprets for himself based on his faith. For inspiration you are encouraged to use the pointers and examples included in the D&D 3.0 / 3.5 edition Player's Handbook, the Complete Paladin's Handbook, Paladin's Virtue / Quentin's Monograph, Champions of Valor (source book), and the Book of Exalted Deeds (source book). We are happy to examine drafted personal codes and lend our approval if they adhere to the core principles of Paladinhood.

The core principles of Paladinhood:

• A Paladin supports and defends Good and opposes Evil.
• A Paladin prevents harm to the innocent and prevents unnecessary suffering.
• A Paladin is loyal to his deity and church, personal vows, liege(s), and laws or edicts decreed by a legitimate authority. (observe the order)

Besides living by these core principles many Paladins also take additional personal vows. Together with the core principles these form a Paladin's personal code. The way in which the principles are incorporated in a personal code depends on the fashion in which they are interpreted by a Paladin, usually influenced by the patron Deity and Paladin Order. The core principles must be embodied in every Paladin's personal code, including vows, within the room that is available for their interpretation.

For example most Paladins and Holy Orders interpret the principle of 'preventing harm to the innocent' to mean that association with Evil is forbidden, even if it is contained to the best possible degree. Because it is the nature of evil to hurt and abuse the innocent, thus aiding it any form is wrong. But other Paladins interpret it more broadly to mean that a temporary truce or even collaboration is not out of the question, so long as that evil is not permitted to hurt innocents and steps are properly taken to prevent that, and deal with it. There is therefore room for different interpretations so long as the principle isn't 'compromised' (Paladins may disagree about when a principle is compromised)

Another example is the principle to avoid unnecessary suffering. Its normally interpreted to mean that mercy must be offered to the vanquished, and to avoid collateral damage and the hurting of innocents. But just what is necessary can be more broadly interpreted in the struggle against evil, so that harm to innocents is justified if no more reasonable path is available. Even stringent adherents of the principle can accept such a line of reasoning, for example when commanded by a deity to proceed with all speed and haste because a quest or task is urgent.

Mercy can moreover take many forms. It can mean letting a defeated opponent leave, but it can also mean a quick death. Some form of disfigurement could also be justified to avoid an opponent from committing evil deeds, but to give him the chance to better his life. Most Paladins abhor the broader interpretations, such as permitting disfigurement, because it lies close to cruelty.

Broad interpretations carry risk because they set a trend for repeatedly broadening the interpretation of a principle, so as to be able to justify or do something that would otherwise be forbidden. It encourages compromising on the Paladin code by gradually widening it until the principles themselves are merely flexible 'ideas' robbed of their sanctity. If a Paladin heads down this path he begins the process of falling from grace. A Paladin either adheres to their holy principles or stops being a Paladin. This reflects what the Paladin class is: an uncompromising beacon for all that is good in the world in opposition of all that is evil.

Examples of optional personal vows:

Hidden: show

• Charity: Give succor to widows, orphans, and other needy people.
• Chastity: No sexual acts before marriage.
• Courtesy: Pay respect to those who deserve it as befitting to their abilities, accomplishments, and station.
• Celibacy: No flirting or other further such actions.
• Chivalrous: Ensure a fair fight, help a downed opponent. Ambushing fails to show who is the better warrior.
• Humility: Accept praise with humble thanks, and do not seek attention unless necessary.
• Mercy: Be merciful, offer quarter to vanquished foes who are not beyond atonement.
• Truthful: At all times speak the truth and avoid deception. (including feinting, but not poisons or sneak attacks)
• Just: To eschew unfairness, meanness, and forms of deceit. (including poison and sneak attacks, but not feinting and other skillful 'sword work' deceptions).
• Unbreakable: To never to turn the back upon a foe.
• Poverty: Do not posses nor accept ownership of any objects or entitlements other than necessary for the task at hand.
• Proselytize: Convert evil or non-good heathens to the goodly faith of your deity, saving their souls.
• Perseverance: Once a quest or task is undertaken it may not be abandoned.

Variations on these vows are also possible, for example one Paladin might interpret poison to be at odds with 'causing unnecessary harm' while another might not, but might take a vow preventing its use instead. Truthfulness could exclude limiting yourself in combat to avoid feints and melee deceptions, so that it only applies to social interaction. And so on. There is a lot of leeway.

[Thorsson]

More like 3 posts up.

Mea culpa; it was in the other thread, which was referred to in the original post... But no I don't expect you to have read all that as well; maybe just the posts immediately before yours...

Thanks DM Ioulaum (how do you pronounce that? Wee-lamb? I-owe-lorm?). I think you need to clarify just one thing - broader interpretations. Do you mean things that fall outside the (universal paladin) code of conduct?

PS Read my sig.

[Atlas]

-

[Cel'Daren]

I think you need to clarify just one thing - broader interpretations. Do you mean things that fall outside the (universal paladin) code of conduct?

• A Paladin supports and defends Good and opposes Evil.
• A Paladin prevents harm to the innocent and prevents unnecessary suffering.
• A Paladin is loyal to his deity and church, personal vows, liege(s), and laws or edicts decreed by a legitimate authority. (observe the order)

I'm pretty sure DM Ioulaum means that the above three tenets are the enforced "core Paladin code". Everything else is up to personal vows and interpretation.

A Paladin could lie to an evil man's face if it "supports and defends Good and opposes Evil."
A Paladin could poison his weapon with sleeping poison and strike someone with it so they would "prevent unnecessary suffering". After all an unconscious man doesn't feel pain so well.

These are personal interpretations, and another Paladin might very well feel these interpretations are wrong. However, if I'm reading Ioulaum's post correctly, it's not a matter of one Paladin being wrong. Two Paladins can thus have radically different modus operandi without penalty.

I support this. It leads to good RP potential in my opinion (Two differing Paladins in the same adventuring party arguing and debating their beliefs with one another), and it'd be a funny situation to see a Rogue and a Paladin discussing the best way to put an opponent down in one move, or a Paladin and a (good) Assassin discussing the properties of poisons and which ones are effective for certain targets.

In short, I think the main thing to take away from Ioulaum's post is this: Paladins defends and helps the good and weak, opposes the evil, prevents unnecessary suffering, and remains loyal to his ideals/lord/church, whatever those ideals/lord/church may be. Everything else is up to personal interpretation.

[Thorsson]

I'm pretty sure DM Ioulaum means that the above three tenets are the enforced "core Paladin code". Everything else is up to personal vows and interpretation.

I'm pretty sure it's not that simple.

[NegInfinity]

I'm pretty sure DM Ioulaum means that the above three tenets are the enforced "core Paladin code". Everything else is up to personal vows and interpretation.

I'm pretty sure it does not mean that.

A Paladin could lie to an evil man's face if it "supports and defends Good and opposes Evil."

Why lie when you can remain silent?

A Paladin could poison his weapon with sleeping poison and strike someone with it so they would "prevent unnecessary suffering". After all an unconscious man doesn't feel pain so well.

Killing defenseless is evil. That is covered by book of wile darkness and exhalted deeds, actually.

In short, I think the main thing to take away from Ioulaum's post is this: Paladins defends and helps the good and weak, opposes the evil, prevents unnecessary suffering, and remains loyal to his ideals/lord/church, whatever those ideals/lord/church may be.

This code is 100% compatible with blackguard. So, how does this define paladin?

Honestly, just play divine champion or blackguard already. Less hassle.

[Cel'Daren]

I'm pretty sure it does not mean that.

Dont just tell me I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong, or don't tell me I'm wrong, please.

Why lie when you can remain silent?

Because the bad guy might go "If you don't answer me I'm going to do something evil right now".

Killing defenseless is evil. That is covered by book of wile darkness and exhalted deeds, actually.

Who said anything about killing a defenseless man?

This code is 100% compatible with blackguard. So, how does this define paladin?

Indeed, that code would be compatible with a Blackguard, if a Blackguard were capable of being Lawful Good. Considering a Blackguard is considered the anti-thesis of a Paladin, it seems poetic that despite their inherent alignment differences, they could hold true to the same tenets of a code of conduct. And I believe it easily defines the Paladin as "A Lawful Good warrior in service to and gifted power by a deity who follows a personal code that promotes Goodness and Law"

A Paladin doesn't need to be further defined, does it?

[NegInfinity]

Dont just tell me I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong, or don't tell me I'm wrong, please.

Because, in my impression, you appear to be cherry-picking by trying to "obey the letter of the law" - i.e. pick portions of responses that supports "sneaky backstabbing paladin liar" while ignoring the general idea of paladin being beacon of light and hope. There is no hope coming from a liar. Lying is for bards. Also there is not much honor in backstabbing. That is for rogues.

Because the bad guy might go "If you don't answer me I'm going to do something evil right now".

Option 1: "I'm not allowed to tell you". You answer him, and you don't lie.
Option 2: Subdue bad guy.

Additionally: What makes you think that bad guy will honor his word and don't do "something evil" anyway?

Also, breaking your vows to fight evil is unthinkable thing that has wider consequences than evil to be prevented. Described in book of exhalted deeds.

Indeed, that code would be compatible with a Blackguard, if a Blackguard were capable of being Lawful Good.

There is nothing inherintly good in that code. It can be used by evil organization like zhentarim, if you approach it as devil would.

1. defend and help the good and weak,
2. oppos the evil,
3. prevent unnecessary suffering,
4. and remains loyal to his ideals/lord/church, whatever those ideals/lord/church may be.

How would we turn that into evil? Very easily.
You define "good", "evil", "unnecessary", and play "whatever those ideals may be" in separate law issued by the paladin's lord. Your character does not necessarily know what is "objective" good, right? So here you go:

This is the same code:

1. "All those who follow our lord's will are good"
2. "All those who oppose it are evil"
3. "All those considered good* are to be protected, so they may further our lord's ambition"
4. "All those considered evil* are to be destroyed"
5. "All those unable to to advance and reach promotion are to be considered weak"
6. "Defend the weak*, so they may work our fields and serve the strong"
7. "Suffering that does not advance our lords goal is unecessary"
8. "Do not cause unnecessary* suffering, since it is a waste of your strength. Strike your foes swiftly and without mercy. And make example of them if the lord wills it"
9. "Always obey the lord and do not stray from the path, since only death awaits you if you do so"

All you need to do is move #1, #2, #5, #7, into law of the church/lord, make evil parts implied (meaning they don't need to have stated anywhere outright), and your code turns into tyrant's law fit for the vilest of blackguards. Because of this part:"whatever those ideals/lord/church may be".

This is how devil's operate and pervert their agreements.

-----

The issue with your approach is that you seem to concentrate too much on letter of the paladin's code, while ignoring spirit of it and looking for loopholes that allows you to bring your concept into existence. That's not how you do it, and that's not "good" behavior. LG may decide to look past letter of the law, and ensure that spirit of the law is still, well, "good". LN will stick to the letter of the law. LE will stick to the letter of the law look for loopholes.

My impression is that arguments you keep presenting amount to "but because X is stated in Y, I can poison and backstab people as paladin". That is fit for blackguard. Perhaps you might want to play blackguard that thinks he is paladin?

[Cel'Daren]

Because, in my impression, you appear to be cherry-picking by trying to "obey the letter of the law" - i.e. pick portions of responses that supports "sneaky backstabbing paladin liar" while ignoring the general idea of paladin being beacon of light and hope. There is no hope coming from a liar. Lying is for bards. Also there is not much honor in backstabbing. That is for rogues.

Enjoy that interpretation of a Paladin then. To me a Paladin is a warrior blessed by their god in order to fulfill that god's will and to protect/help innocents.

Option 1: "I'm not allowed to tell you". You answer him, and you don't lie.
Option 2: Subdue bad guy.

Additionally: What makes you think that bad guy will honor his word and don't do "something evil" anyway?

I'm not gonna get into a discussion like this again. Make the situation as simple as possible. If you're in a position where lying prevents suffering and evil, and telling the truth or remaining silent does not prevent that suffering and evil. If you've no vow against lying, the answer is clear.

Also, breaking your vows to fight evil is unthinkable thing that has wider consequences than evil to be prevented. Described in book of exhalted deeds.

I don't even know what you're talking about. The DM team (according to DM Ioulaum) is not enforcing a tenet against lying, so no vow is broken.

There is nothing inherintly good in that code. It can be used by evil organization like zhentarim, if you approach it as devil would.

1. defend and help the good and weak,
2. oppos the evil,
3. prevent unnecessary suffering,
4. and remains loyal to his ideals/lord/church, whatever those ideals/lord/church may be.

How would we turn that into evil? Very easily.

Stop. You take what I say, and then say "how would we turn that into evil?" Anyone can take a code and pervert it. That is indeed what a devil does. A good person simply wouldn't however. A paladin is not a programmed automaton where their Paladin Code is their coding. A paladin is a person who should naturally strive to do good things.

People rule. Laws help. Paladins are people not machines. They have an inherent desire to do good, and the Code is merely a tool to help. The fact that the code can be manipulated by an evil person shouldn't invalidate its use as a tool for Goodness.

The issue with your approach is that you seem to concentrate too much on letter of the paladin's code, while ignoring spirit of it and looking for loopholes that allows you to bring your concept into existence. That's not how you do it, and that's not "good" behavior. LG may decide to look past letter of the law, and ensure that spirit of the law is still, well, "good". LN will stick to the letter of the law. LE will stick to the letter of the law look for loopholes.

My impression is that arguments you keep presenting amount to "but because X is stated in Y, I can poison and backstab people as paladin". That is fit for blackguard. Perhaps you might want to play blackguard that thinks he is paladin?

The spirit of the Paladin Code is a set of GUIDELINES that are used to help a Paladin do Good and promote Law. My concept does not go against Good or Law. Beyond that, Ioulaum has already stated that:

The DM Team on Baldur's Gate doesn't enforce a 'universal paladin code'. We consider the code to be a set of principles which each Paladin interprets for himself based on his faith. For inspiration you are encouraged to use the pointers and examples included in the D&D 3.0 / 3.5 edition Player's Handbook, the Complete Paladin's Handbook, Paladin's Virtue / Quentin's Monograph, Champions of Valor (source book), and the Book of Exalted Deeds (source book). We are happy to examine drafted personal codes and lend our approval if they adhere to the core principles of Paladinhood.

The DMs have stated that they do not enforce a universal Paladin code. They say they are happy to lend their approval to a personal code if it adheres to the following principles:

The core principles of Paladinhood:

• A Paladin supports and defends Good and opposes Evil.
• A Paladin prevents harm to the innocent and prevents unnecessary suffering.
• A Paladin is loyal to his deity and church, personal vows, liege(s), and laws or edicts decreed by a legitimate authority. (observe the order)

That is all the DM team is enforcing according to Ioulaum's post. There is no "issue with my approach" because it does not go against what the DMs are enforcing. Lying, Sneaking, Feinting, and Poison that are specifically used for the core principles of Paladins are fair game. To me, poisoning a powerful but redeemable foe with a knockout poison is fair game. Once they are subdued instead of killed I can go about attempting to redeeming them. Lying to an irredeemable evil in order to prevent suffering and bloodshed is also fair game. At least for MY Paladin. Your Paladin can do whatever they want, I don't care, but MY Paladin will lie and use poison in order to promote goodness and law, thanks.

[Archaos]

Your Paladin can do whatever they want, I don't care, but MY Paladin will lie and use poison in order to promote goodness and law, thanks.

The Code of Conduct in Player's Handbook states clearly that Paladins must not lie or use poison, full stop, not ifs or maybes.
Not lying and not using poisons are in the Core about what is forbidden for Paladins.

Also lying may not be evil but it is a Chaotic act. Period.
Lying for a good cause is Chaotic Good. Lying for a Lawful and Good cause is Neutral Good.

Someone that uses lying (not the same as Bluffing) for lawful reason, is Neutral, in the Paladin's case, he will fall and be Neutral Good because he acted with no honor.
Because his words were dishonorable and deceitful, even if it was done for good (Neutral Good).

Know how to subdue an evil foe? Using non-lethal damage in PnP or just Knockout Mode here.
Or using Sneak Attack to surprise them and then knock-them out, Batman style.

All this is advise. For something that can help you play a Paladin as defined by lore and the Core rules, properly.
If you choose to ignore it, that's up to you. But don't complain if more and more shun you ICly and OOCly for lying and using poison as a Paladin.

You could argue that summoning a demon to make a deal can save thousands, but it's still an evil act and it will cause you to fall.

Falling doesn't work only vertically (Good to Evil) but also horizontally (Lawful to Chaotic).

"Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents." - Player's Handbook.

If you choose to ignore the Core lore of a Paladin's Code of Conduct, then do it. But you wouldn't be playing a Paladin in lore, only in mechanics.

And I would ask the DMs and the OP to read the quote above carefully.

TL;DR: The ends don't justify the means.

[Thorsson]

I think we have a fine example here of a host trying to lead a horse to water. But, guys, it ain't gonna drink. Probably time to move on.

[DM Ioulaum]

To clarify: the core code is a set of principles. A paladin who calls them guidelines lessens or denies their holy sanctity. He would begin the process of falling. See the last paragraph of my previous post.

You may interpret the principles and form your code from that, but always remember they are the uncompromising heart of your personal code. If they cease being so then you are fallen...

[NegInfinity]

I'm not gonna get into a discussion like this again. Make the situation as simple as possible.

"Subdue bad guy", then. Most obvious immediate solution.

Stop. You take what I say, and then say "how would we turn that into evil?" Anyone can take a code and pervert it. That is indeed what a devil does. A good person simply wouldn't however. A paladin is not a programmed automaton where their Paladin Code is their coding. A paladin is a person who should naturally strive to do good things.

All I was saying that your code is not inherently good. And that blackguard could follow it to the letter, while remaining evil. I also explained why it is not inherently good.

The spirit of the Paladin Code is a set of GUIDELINES that are used to help a Paladin do Good and promote Law. My concept does not go against Good or Law. Beyond that, Ioulaum has already stated that:

If your code is set of "guidelines", then your character is neutral good, not lawful good. Lawful good requires char to obey their code. As a result, paladin would have divided loyalties - obey the code and strive towards good. But what do you do when you need to chose between good and law? That's important part of being paladin.

That is all the DM team is enforcing according to Ioulaum's post.

You may elevate matter to head dm, if you want.

Aside from that, I can say you are free to roll whatever character you want, just don't get upset when it falls by alignment shifting towards chaos or evil, which should happen very quickly if paladins are actually monitored. People kept explaining this stuff long enough, you are not listening. Which means there is no reason to continue explaining.

[Atlas]

-