which job?
the one to have him falling so becoming a sub par fighter?
at least i hope a blackguard falls if his alignment becomes good, just as the other paladins falls if their alignment changes from good, but as i almost always play good i am not sure that it really happens.
Blackguards don't fall, but you can't import the Helm of Opposite Alignment to SoA, so it doesn't affect much. Although Blackguards have their own "Carsomyr", it's inferior. And after turning evil in Hell for Soul Reaver, good Paladins can still wield true Carsomyr if it's not removed from the quick slot. Turning evil itself doesn't fall Paladins, just the few scripts in Hell after evil paths, which you can avoid.
Funnily enough my favourite playthrough ever was actually with an undead hunter. You get some solid bonuses against undead and retain your ability to spellcast. Makes for a solid warrior with very little downsides (their only downside is they can't use Lay on Hands).
Blackguards don't fall, but you can't import the Helm of Opposite Alignment to SoA, so it doesn't affect much. Although Blackguards have their own "Carsomyr", it's inferior. And after turning evil in Hell for Soul Reaver, good Paladins can still wield true Carsomyr if it's not removed from the quick slot. Turning evil itself doesn't fall Paladins, just the few scripts in Hell after evil paths, which you can avoid.
From what I understand, Dorn can fall as a part of his questline though, so it seems weird that they included no mechanism for the player to fall as a blackguard.
From what I understand, Dorn can fall as a part of his questline though, so it seems weird that they included no mechanism for the player to fall as a blackguard.
maybe it is because at least in bg2 there is no way for an evil charname to change alignment.
still as the blackguard is tied to a certain alignment, like the good paladins are, the logic tells that if for whatever reason the alignment changes the class requirements are lost so a blackguard should fall.
and for bg, where is possible to change alignment trough the helm, if it is not implemented there is something wrong, at least if a good pally falls equipping the helm.
thing that RP wise could also not happen as the helm is a cursed item, but does not change permanently the alignment, if i am not wrong, once removed (curse and item) the natural alignment should come back.
From what I understand, Dorn can fall as a part of his questline though, so it seems weird that they included no mechanism for the player to fall as a blackguard.
maybe it is because at least in bg2 there is no way for an evil charname to change alignment.
still as the blackguard is tied to a certain alignment, like the good paladins are, the logic tells that if for whatever reason the alignment changes the class requirements are lost so a blackguard should fall.
and for bg, where is possible to change alignment trough the helm, if it is not implemented there is something wrong, at least if a good pally falls equipping the helm.
thing that RP wise could also not happen as the helm is a cursed item, but does not change permanently the alignment, if i am not wrong, once removed (curse and item) the natural alignment should come back.
Changing alignment isn't the only way for paladins to fall though. They also fall if they drop below a certain reputation.
If Good Paladins have to stay above 8 reputation, it makes sense that an evil paladin would have to stay below 12, or if that's too harsh some new stipulation should be put in place of that.
I don't think the helm causes any kind of paladin or ranger to fall, for what it's worth. Good or Bad.
FWIW, I think it's the cavalier, partly because that's how I envisioned paladins since I first played PnP in the early 80s. Given the overall paladin ethos, ranged weapons always seemed dodgy.
From what I understand, Dorn can fall as a part of his questline though, so it seems weird that they included no mechanism for the player to fall as a blackguard.
maybe it is because at least in bg2 there is no way for an evil charname to change alignment.
still as the blackguard is tied to a certain alignment, like the good paladins are, the logic tells that if for whatever reason the alignment changes the class requirements are lost so a blackguard should fall.
and for bg, where is possible to change alignment trough the helm, if it is not implemented there is something wrong, at least if a good pally falls equipping the helm.
thing that RP wise could also not happen as the helm is a cursed item, but does not change permanently the alignment, if i am not wrong, once removed (curse and item) the natural alignment should come back.
Changing alignment isn't the only way for paladins to fall though. They also fall if they drop below a certain reputation.
If Good Paladins have to stay above 8 reputation, it makes sense that an evil paladin would have to stay below 12, or if that's too harsh some new stipulation should be put in place of that.
I don't think the helm causes any kind of paladin or ranger to fall, for what it's worth. Good or Bad.
An evil character can do "good" things and still be evil if they have a long term goal of acquiring power or (in the case of a Blackguard) doing their masters wishes. 2nd edition however is extremely strict on what a paladin can do and any evil act is a big no-no.
(from revised PHB) " If a paladin should ever knowingly and willingly perform an evil act, he loses the status of paladinhood
immediately and irrevocably. All benefits are then lost and no deed or magic can restore the character to paladinhood: He is ever after a fighter. The character’s level remains unchanged when this occurs and experience points are adjusted accordingly. Thereafter the character is bound by the rules for fighters. He does not gain the benefits of weapon specialization (if this is used) since he did not select this for his character at the start.
If the paladin commits an evil act while enchanted or controlled by magic, he loses his paladin status until he can atone for the deed. This loss of status means the character loses all his special abilities and essentially functions as a fighter (without weapon specialization) of the same level. Regaining his status undoubtedly requires completion of some dangerous quest or important mission to once again prove his worth and assuage his own guilt. He gains no experience prior to or during the course of this mission, and regains his standing as a paladin only upon completing the quest."
There is no similar "you can't do any good act" brought up for anti-paladins.
Undead hunter! Although I agree with @tbone1 that ranged weapons don't fit the paladin honor... except in early BG when it would be suicidal to tank an ogre when you have only 14 HP (Tried that. Didn't end well. Then I reconsidered my honor).
I have been thinking. While undead hunter is certainly very useful in BG2 (that's why I picked it at first, also because I hate undead, and Hold and Level Drain are so annoying) and Inquisitor the strongest kit against all the mages (but there's always Keldorn for that), Cavalier is certainly what one would consider the typical, ideal paladin.
BUT: Philosophical question. Remove Fear is a very, very useful feat in combat. Innate, permanent Immunity to Fear is another matter. And it was this bit of Oots of all things that triggered my thoughts:
It's true. While we all know that fear leads to the Dark Side, and that many terrible decisions in history have been made out of fear, fear of strangers, of the unknown, of losing wealth or land or whatever, fear is also an important control mechanism.
Imagine a fighter with divine powers, the Charisma of 17 or 18 that BG requires for paladins, and Immunity to Fear. That could lead to some very dangerous and bad decisions and a tendency to become an overzealous but worshipped tyrant.
I think that a roleplayed Cavalier should have at least WIS 16 to compensate for that, if necessary even at the cost of sacrificing stat points in Strength or Dexterity.
@subtledoctor , sounds interesting. But in such a setting I would still prefer to be a paladin and try to change the system from within, make them see reason and change the laws. I wouldn't want to actively fight them unless they were Fallen.
I mean, even governing with an iron fist wouldn't mean they could imprison or execute innocents without falling.
But laws can be unjust, very strict and unforgiving, it's true. Interesting idea.
But I wouldn't buy a game where you *have* to kill paladins without an alternative solution, I think.
Never forget that paladins (mainly in 2ed) first good and just after lawful in allignement. They cannot fear in later editions but never become tryants because they have the needed wisdom to decide what is wrong and good and what is not.
I know of a few examples of very questionable paladins without getting into later editions, but as a trope it'd be pretty fresh. I think one issue in 3.x for example, any divine caster (other than maybe an Ur-priest, assuming one exists) must meet their deity's approval, so it might not be entirely doable in Faerun, but D&D has tons of settings.
I think if you were Paladin of a LN deity, it might be possible to do some unpleasant things before falling. They'd still have too keep the code, but iirc, its the deity (or cause, in some settings) that choses when you've crossed the line.
Edit: Also, iirc Paladins can do acts of neutrality, or else they be paralyzed into inaction, as most of daily life is neutral. I guess the question is how evil can you be and still be neutral? There used to be alignment 'tendency', as in something could be True Neutral, and have evil tendencies, meaning not quite evil, but solidly adjacent.
Comments
the one to have him falling so becoming a sub par fighter?
at least i hope a blackguard falls if his alignment becomes good, just as the other paladins falls if their alignment changes from good, but as i almost always play good i am not sure that it really happens.
Funnily enough my favourite playthrough ever was actually with an undead hunter. You get some solid bonuses against undead and retain your ability to spellcast. Makes for a solid warrior with very little downsides (their only downside is they can't use Lay on Hands).
IWDEE? Undead Hunter
BGEE? Cavalier
BG2EE? Inquisitor
From what I understand, Dorn can fall as a part of his questline though, so it seems weird that they included no mechanism for the player to fall as a blackguard.
BG2EE? Cavalier + Keldorn!
still as the blackguard is tied to a certain alignment, like the good paladins are, the logic tells that if for whatever reason the alignment changes the class requirements are lost so a blackguard should fall.
and for bg, where is possible to change alignment trough the helm, if it is not implemented there is something wrong, at least if a good pally falls equipping the helm.
thing that RP wise could also not happen as the helm is a cursed item, but does not change permanently the alignment, if i am not wrong, once removed (curse and item) the natural alignment should come back.
Changing alignment isn't the only way for paladins to fall though. They also fall if they drop below a certain reputation.
If Good Paladins have to stay above 8 reputation, it makes sense that an evil paladin would have to stay below 12, or if that's too harsh some new stipulation should be put in place of that.
I don't think the helm causes any kind of paladin or ranger to fall, for what it's worth. Good or Bad.
An evil character can do "good" things and still be evil if they have a long term goal of acquiring power or (in the case of a Blackguard) doing their masters wishes. 2nd edition however is extremely strict on what a paladin can do and any evil act is a big no-no.
(from revised PHB) " If a paladin should ever knowingly and willingly perform an evil act, he loses the status of paladinhood
immediately and irrevocably. All benefits are then lost and no deed or magic can restore the character to paladinhood: He is ever after a fighter. The character’s level remains unchanged when this occurs and experience points are adjusted accordingly. Thereafter the character is bound by the rules for fighters. He does not gain the benefits of weapon specialization (if this is used) since he did not select this for his character at the start.
If the paladin commits an evil act while enchanted or controlled by magic, he loses his paladin status until he can atone for the deed. This loss of status means the character loses all his special abilities and essentially functions as a fighter (without weapon specialization) of the same level. Regaining his status undoubtedly requires completion of some dangerous quest or important mission to once again prove his worth and assuage his own guilt. He gains no experience prior to or during the course of this mission, and regains his standing as a paladin only upon completing the quest."
There is no similar "you can't do any good act" brought up for anti-paladins.
BUT: Philosophical question. Remove Fear is a very, very useful feat in combat. Innate, permanent Immunity to Fear is another matter. And it was this bit of Oots of all things that triggered my thoughts:
It's true. While we all know that fear leads to the Dark Side, and that many terrible decisions in history have been made out of fear, fear of strangers, of the unknown, of losing wealth or land or whatever, fear is also an important control mechanism.
Imagine a fighter with divine powers, the Charisma of 17 or 18 that BG requires for paladins, and Immunity to Fear. That could lead to some very dangerous and bad decisions and a tendency to become an overzealous but worshipped tyrant.
I think that a roleplayed Cavalier should have at least WIS 16 to compensate for that, if necessary even at the cost of sacrificing stat points in Strength or Dexterity.
I mean, even governing with an iron fist wouldn't mean they could imprison or execute innocents without falling.
But laws can be unjust, very strict and unforgiving, it's true. Interesting idea.
But I wouldn't buy a game where you *have* to kill paladins without an alternative solution, I think.
I think if you were Paladin of a LN deity, it might be possible to do some unpleasant things before falling. They'd still have too keep the code, but iirc, its the deity (or cause, in some settings) that choses when you've crossed the line.
Edit: Also, iirc Paladins can do acts of neutrality, or else they be paralyzed into inaction, as most of daily life is neutral. I guess the question is how evil can you be and still be neutral? There used to be alignment 'tendency', as in something could be True Neutral, and have evil tendencies, meaning not quite evil, but solidly adjacent.