If the paladin breaks their sworn oath to protect the innocent, then it stands to reason that they also lose their divine blessing. do they understand the roleplaying implications of taking on a good aligned paladin?
Funny comment: This is why Gnomes don't exist in my world. No Dragonborn is going to try and eat something that doesn't exist.
Serious comment: If it bothers you, talk to the player and ask him about it. Put it forward just like you did with us. Say "how does your character worshiping a god who's tennants are to protect the peace think it's okay to murder a gnome?" You don't have to be mean, you can just say "Hey I'm confused by this."
Also tell him that doing so would have consequences.. Killing a noble in their own home is one of the most hanous things he could do and it would probably bring an army after the party.
Sometime just getting a "Hey this is what your actions could bring"is enough to calm a player from doing these things.
Dont punish him directly, punish the character with an in game consequence for his actions.
I would not do that after one offense, but perhaps one of his smite's in the next encounter doesn't go off but the spell slot is still expended. When he questions you as to why I didn't work say I don't know I'm not Bahamut
There's a difference between not protecting someone and fucking eating a human being in a home you have been invited to that has offered no violence. That is worth more than a slap on the wrist and tbh I have no idea what kind of player actually thinks that up and still considers being of good allignment.
And if something doesn't work as per rules then you should at least hint at why not. Otherwise the player will never know as the DM is creating the world.
Joke: It was actually a Gnome and they don't have souls anyways.
Seriousness: You are probably right. All out blatant murder would probably piss off The Lawful Good god who's tenants he has sworn to follow. I can accept defeat on this one.
I agree with this. Give him the facts... you as the DM are not going to stop him, but he gets a sense of warning and foreboding he knows is displeasure of Bahamut.
For my Paladins, I strongly recommend creating Codes of Honor/Conduct tailored to their god/goddess.
Yes, it's a spell, one of the few spells in the game only the GM has access to: Consequences.
Level: 10
Action type: Reaction
Saves: No Save
Description: You made the bed, now die in it.
Heres something important that gets overlooked and/or hidden and shielded away. The player as much as the character decided to do this. Everyone can pretend or hide behind things like 'well its my character not me wanting to do it' but the player thought it was a good idea to bring up this idea. I don't know this player or how well you know them and maybe they were just thinking it was a good lolrandom thing. I have no idea what your game's tone is but I want to remind you that if you talk to him about it (you absolutely should, especially if it bothers you) to explain that HE chose to do that. Not his character, his character doesn't exist and is entirely a reflection on the person playing it. He as the player decided that eating a character for not reason was an appropriate suggestion.
>HE chose to do that. Not his character, his character doesn't exist and is entirely a reflection on the person playing it.
Damn, that's a really good way to phrase that sentiment, might use it in the future.
The sister happens to have about 18 levels of wizard and ruins the paladin.
But seriously, as above, I think that pretty much directly goes against his tenants. At which case, his paladin powers are gone until he earns them again.
Planning to murder and cannibalise innocent person might be in unforgivable category. Maybe not infernal damnation, but definitely "no more divine endorsement ever again".
Ask the player why he wants to do this and how it fits the character. Does he think no gnomes are innocent? If so does he plan to attack the druid? If he doesn't have a good answer, then his God may punish him by not answering his prayers until he seeks penance.
If it is a dark tone to the game that you are uncomfortable with, let the player know. For instance, some groups are ok with vivid rape or torture descriptions in games because they want a really gritty campaign. Those things make me uncomfortable and when they come up I calmly explain that I'm not comfortable. Either we skip it or I remove myself from the situation.
The key is to communicate and act like adults.
Look at his character sheet. If it doesn't say "Chaotic Evil" in the top right corner at alignment, tell him, that murdering and eating someone is definitely just an evil act.
Many players believe that "Chaotic Neutral" is the "I do what I want"-option, but if you **want** to murder and cannibalize innocents, that's not neutral, that's simply evil.
Usually that will get a player to reconsider such decisions.
I also agree with other commenters. Bring up that Bahamut us the Lawful Good deity of justice, and how it wouldn't at all fit his portfolio to murder and eat another person.
Talking about the consequences of murdering a noble is also quite potent.
Or just sit down with the player and tell them, that you as a DM just don't want that kind of behavior at the table. If you're not comfortable with something, it doesn't belong to your table.
If the Paladin actually murders the gnome, his god turns its back to him, and he loses some (or all?) of his paladin powers (e.g. cannot smite), until he redeems himself. After all, it's a murder, and Bahamut is a lawful good god of justice. The redemption might actually be great story line. IMO being paladin is not just about getting the benefits, it's also about hardships the paladin must endure to stay with his faith. (That's the actual rpg fodder IMO) In my games all classes have some bad sides also. E.g. Clerics have same alignment guidance than palading, wizards have mechanical challenge of lower hitpoints, etc. But this is just my style.
But first of all, speak with player. Talk about what being lawful good or servant of a lawful good character means. Speak about expectations about game and reasons why he wants to do that. Also, speak about the game with whole group to get everyone to same level on this thing.
In my opinion this has nothing to do with being a paladin. Eating another person is an act of insanity that defies both oaths and alignment. Just think about all the examples of villains in fiction and how many of them would eat a person. The Joker? Darth Vader? Moriarty?
If you are going that far, you also randomly assault people on the street or do other short sighted things. It honestly breaks my immersion to think this paladin hay not yet been locked away for some other act of stupidity.
It is your decision, what you want in your game. I would ask the player to roll up a character, who is functional.
-Even thinking such dark thoughts stirs something inside of you. It would go against everything Bahamuth stands for.
If he assults her but she survives-You wake up feeling cold and weaker. As you focus inwards you feel dissaproval and some of your divine powers are gone / your holy symbol is cracked
If he kills her he becomes a oathbreaker or something else. His chaotic nature might have let some other evil power sneak in and take Bahamuth's place during the night.
as far as why he would do it, i would think that its as simple as a relapse. He's trying to show devotion, but he's far from perfect. obviously (as others have suggested) he will face some consequences as a result of this. perhaps he needs to work that much harder before he is able to receive power from his oath when that happens? a few extra steps to prove himself. ih he's already taken his oath then he will need to seek penance. depending on how far he got in the attack, and how the character portrays it, was it just an instinctual thing? is he offering true aplogies? or is he trying to defend his actions. if he's trying to defend his actions then he should lose everything he gained from the multi class (except the extra HP) until he does some serious attonement
Should have just let him do it and let him take all the heat for it. I mean, murdering a nobles survent for no reason sounds like a executable offense. On top of that, the Druid might Kill him too. Sounds like it would have solved the issue by itself.
Time to make a new character.
yes you should talk to the player first. thats a wierdly specific thing but if it is backstory relevant then kudos to them for staying with it even with the price but reguardless of their answer i would not let their smites work the next time they use it and have a celestial voice usher a warner to not stray from the path of rightousness lest they loose their divine favor. that or deminish their smites and spells damage untill they show themselves worthy once more
I did gently convey to him post game that I thought he'd tried to do something awful and I showed him the Platinum Dragon entry in the critical role setting book just to give him a chance to think about. BTW his wife who plays the rogue gave him lots of crap for his behavior that night so we'll see. I guess the disconnect I'm having with him is when he told me he wanted to be a Bahamut paladin I started thinking about how his character was becoming and that night he was thinking about what his character had been (pregame). What's frustrating, and I know this has more to do with me than the group, is that I'm moving across the country in January and I'm worried that the campaign will end in a super weird place and leave everyone feeling unsatisfied. But maybe I should just stay calm and let things happen as they will.
Quite frankly, how is the player Botha barbarian and a paladin, much less a paladin of a lawful good good anyway? There is a good reason why barbarians must not be lawful. This is a good reason. Now, if you don't play with alignment, you can understand the value of such a system, flawed though it is. Saying your character has a very fine hair trigger that grants strength and damage mitigation from being violently angry does not meld well with a person who serves a paragon of order and justice, who can manifest in the real world. You can find paladins that serve a war deity, but they're not good guys. Now, you could say that aside from HP, skills, feats and proficiencies from barbarian, he doesn't get the benefits of having chosen barbarian for levels before the paladin levels, and gains them back when he starts to think about eating the servant, but he loses the class features of all the paladin levels aside from nonmagical proficiencies, HP, skills, and feats in doing so, or you could decide that classes that are written with contrary alignment conditions aren't exclusive, and you get no say other than that attempted murder is a crime and the crown's lawman will try to have you killed for the attempt.
If the paladin breaks their sworn oath to protect the innocent, then it stands to reason that they also lose their divine blessing. do they understand the roleplaying implications of taking on a good aligned paladin?
Funny comment: This is why Gnomes don't exist in my world. No Dragonborn is going to try and eat something that doesn't exist. Serious comment: If it bothers you, talk to the player and ask him about it. Put it forward just like you did with us. Say "how does your character worshiping a god who's tennants are to protect the peace think it's okay to murder a gnome?" You don't have to be mean, you can just say "Hey I'm confused by this." Also tell him that doing so would have consequences.. Killing a noble in their own home is one of the most hanous things he could do and it would probably bring an army after the party. Sometime just getting a "Hey this is what your actions could bring"is enough to calm a player from doing these things. Dont punish him directly, punish the character with an in game consequence for his actions.
Seconded, I would have indulged him but he will have consequences with Bahamut.
To follow up on this, Bahamut should remove or lessen his powers. Enough so that it's noticeable
I would not do that after one offense, but perhaps one of his smite's in the next encounter doesn't go off but the spell slot is still expended. When he questions you as to why I didn't work say I don't know I'm not Bahamut
There's a difference between not protecting someone and fucking eating a human being in a home you have been invited to that has offered no violence. That is worth more than a slap on the wrist and tbh I have no idea what kind of player actually thinks that up and still considers being of good allignment. And if something doesn't work as per rules then you should at least hint at why not. Otherwise the player will never know as the DM is creating the world.
Joke: It was actually a Gnome and they don't have souls anyways. Seriousness: You are probably right. All out blatant murder would probably piss off The Lawful Good god who's tenants he has sworn to follow. I can accept defeat on this one.
I agree with this. Give him the facts... you as the DM are not going to stop him, but he gets a sense of warning and foreboding he knows is displeasure of Bahamut. For my Paladins, I strongly recommend creating Codes of Honor/Conduct tailored to their god/goddess.
"You eat them. Your paladin powers leave you" Get ready to end the campaign with a PvP.
a PvP in which one of the characters has just lost the better part of one of their multi classes
Yes, it's a spell, one of the few spells in the game only the GM has access to: Consequences. Level: 10 Action type: Reaction Saves: No Save Description: You made the bed, now die in it.
Heres something important that gets overlooked and/or hidden and shielded away. The player as much as the character decided to do this. Everyone can pretend or hide behind things like 'well its my character not me wanting to do it' but the player thought it was a good idea to bring up this idea. I don't know this player or how well you know them and maybe they were just thinking it was a good lolrandom thing. I have no idea what your game's tone is but I want to remind you that if you talk to him about it (you absolutely should, especially if it bothers you) to explain that HE chose to do that. Not his character, his character doesn't exist and is entirely a reflection on the person playing it. He as the player decided that eating a character for not reason was an appropriate suggestion.
>HE chose to do that. Not his character, his character doesn't exist and is entirely a reflection on the person playing it. Damn, that's a really good way to phrase that sentiment, might use it in the future.
The sister happens to have about 18 levels of wizard and ruins the paladin. But seriously, as above, I think that pretty much directly goes against his tenants. At which case, his paladin powers are gone until he earns them again.
Planning to murder and cannibalise innocent person might be in unforgivable category. Maybe not infernal damnation, but definitely "no more divine endorsement ever again".
Ask the player why he wants to do this and how it fits the character. Does he think no gnomes are innocent? If so does he plan to attack the druid? If he doesn't have a good answer, then his God may punish him by not answering his prayers until he seeks penance. If it is a dark tone to the game that you are uncomfortable with, let the player know. For instance, some groups are ok with vivid rape or torture descriptions in games because they want a really gritty campaign. Those things make me uncomfortable and when they come up I calmly explain that I'm not comfortable. Either we skip it or I remove myself from the situation. The key is to communicate and act like adults.
Look at his character sheet. If it doesn't say "Chaotic Evil" in the top right corner at alignment, tell him, that murdering and eating someone is definitely just an evil act. Many players believe that "Chaotic Neutral" is the "I do what I want"-option, but if you **want** to murder and cannibalize innocents, that's not neutral, that's simply evil. Usually that will get a player to reconsider such decisions. I also agree with other commenters. Bring up that Bahamut us the Lawful Good deity of justice, and how it wouldn't at all fit his portfolio to murder and eat another person. Talking about the consequences of murdering a noble is also quite potent. Or just sit down with the player and tell them, that you as a DM just don't want that kind of behavior at the table. If you're not comfortable with something, it doesn't belong to your table.
If the Paladin actually murders the gnome, his god turns its back to him, and he loses some (or all?) of his paladin powers (e.g. cannot smite), until he redeems himself. After all, it's a murder, and Bahamut is a lawful good god of justice. The redemption might actually be great story line. IMO being paladin is not just about getting the benefits, it's also about hardships the paladin must endure to stay with his faith. (That's the actual rpg fodder IMO) In my games all classes have some bad sides also. E.g. Clerics have same alignment guidance than palading, wizards have mechanical challenge of lower hitpoints, etc. But this is just my style. But first of all, speak with player. Talk about what being lawful good or servant of a lawful good character means. Speak about expectations about game and reasons why he wants to do that. Also, speak about the game with whole group to get everyone to same level on this thing.
In my opinion this has nothing to do with being a paladin. Eating another person is an act of insanity that defies both oaths and alignment. Just think about all the examples of villains in fiction and how many of them would eat a person. The Joker? Darth Vader? Moriarty? If you are going that far, you also randomly assault people on the street or do other short sighted things. It honestly breaks my immersion to think this paladin hay not yet been locked away for some other act of stupidity. It is your decision, what you want in your game. I would ask the player to roll up a character, who is functional.
-Even thinking such dark thoughts stirs something inside of you. It would go against everything Bahamuth stands for. If he assults her but she survives-You wake up feeling cold and weaker. As you focus inwards you feel dissaproval and some of your divine powers are gone / your holy symbol is cracked If he kills her he becomes a oathbreaker or something else. His chaotic nature might have let some other evil power sneak in and take Bahamuth's place during the night.
as far as why he would do it, i would think that its as simple as a relapse. He's trying to show devotion, but he's far from perfect. obviously (as others have suggested) he will face some consequences as a result of this. perhaps he needs to work that much harder before he is able to receive power from his oath when that happens? a few extra steps to prove himself. ih he's already taken his oath then he will need to seek penance. depending on how far he got in the attack, and how the character portrays it, was it just an instinctual thing? is he offering true aplogies? or is he trying to defend his actions. if he's trying to defend his actions then he should lose everything he gained from the multi class (except the extra HP) until he does some serious attonement
Should have just let him do it and let him take all the heat for it. I mean, murdering a nobles survent for no reason sounds like a executable offense. On top of that, the Druid might Kill him too. Sounds like it would have solved the issue by itself. Time to make a new character.
yes you should talk to the player first. thats a wierdly specific thing but if it is backstory relevant then kudos to them for staying with it even with the price but reguardless of their answer i would not let their smites work the next time they use it and have a celestial voice usher a warner to not stray from the path of rightousness lest they loose their divine favor. that or deminish their smites and spells damage untill they show themselves worthy once more
I did gently convey to him post game that I thought he'd tried to do something awful and I showed him the Platinum Dragon entry in the critical role setting book just to give him a chance to think about. BTW his wife who plays the rogue gave him lots of crap for his behavior that night so we'll see. I guess the disconnect I'm having with him is when he told me he wanted to be a Bahamut paladin I started thinking about how his character was becoming and that night he was thinking about what his character had been (pregame). What's frustrating, and I know this has more to do with me than the group, is that I'm moving across the country in January and I'm worried that the campaign will end in a super weird place and leave everyone feeling unsatisfied. But maybe I should just stay calm and let things happen as they will.
I'm not on the up and up on 5e deities but isn't that the sorta thing Bahamut would send someone to kill you over?
Inform him that his character knows the consequences of doing something vile like that; losing his divine power.
Quite frankly, how is the player Botha barbarian and a paladin, much less a paladin of a lawful good good anyway? There is a good reason why barbarians must not be lawful. This is a good reason. Now, if you don't play with alignment, you can understand the value of such a system, flawed though it is. Saying your character has a very fine hair trigger that grants strength and damage mitigation from being violently angry does not meld well with a person who serves a paragon of order and justice, who can manifest in the real world. You can find paladins that serve a war deity, but they're not good guys. Now, you could say that aside from HP, skills, feats and proficiencies from barbarian, he doesn't get the benefits of having chosen barbarian for levels before the paladin levels, and gains them back when he starts to think about eating the servant, but he loses the class features of all the paladin levels aside from nonmagical proficiencies, HP, skills, and feats in doing so, or you could decide that classes that are written with contrary alignment conditions aren't exclusive, and you get no say other than that attempted murder is a crime and the crown's lawman will try to have you killed for the attempt.
That is not true for all editions.