Be paladin, see this

>Be paladin, see this
>Wat do

Are (STANDARD LG!) paladins completely countered by hostages?

are cops completely countered by hostages?

>(STANDARD LG!

That still leaves a wide range of interpretations and options.

But, overall, most paladins have a decent enough charisma score to talk to the guy, either enough to convince him to let the hostage go in exchange for some sort of leniency, or long enough for the rogue to kill the guy.

Use your protective skills to increase her armor class.

>STANDARD LG!
Lawful Good does not mean Retarded Pacifist

>Lawful Good
>Not smiting his face from across the room

The righteous to not negotiate with terrorists.

Comply with kidnappers demands, as long as that doesn't mean threatening additional people, until hostage is released. Then shoot him.

OP here.

Charisma check are an option. What I have in mind is a Crime lord having a few kids on the side to use them as hostages if some good and smitey group comes along. What could a good party do if they are told to surrender or kids' throats get cut?

>What could a good party do if they are told to surrender or kids' throats get cut?
invent flashbangs

>A LG Paladin sees a hostage situation.
>Paladin decides a man with a knife isn't so dangerous
>Try to talk him down. Obviously this doesn't work.
>Don't really care if innocent people die, there's an afterlife and if they're not total shitbags they get to go to a good one.
>Shrug and charge in, killing the dude as quick as possible. He had his chance.
>Afterwards, pray to the gods that will listen, begging for leniency for the fallen souls. They gave their lives to help me punish evil, after all.

Fallen right there

Use Command spell tell him to "surrender"

Depends on the setting.

Is failing to stop a murderer an evil act? Please explain how you think this is a paladin falls situation.

Just BoP the hostage and HoJ the dude with a knife jeez what a shit paladin you are.

> "I swear to you: If you harm them, no force on earth can stop me from killing you."

Not really. Paladins can't fall from failing, in fact. They fall from deliberately going against their code.

Here, the fault is entirely the murderer's. A Paladin isn't in violation of his code because of the killer's actions, any more than the police are at fault when a criminal starts shooting hostages.

Smite, duh.

That's taking away the thief's free will. You fall.

>Man killing a woman

LG paladin here, this man is clearly doing God's work.

>LAWFUL good
>Giving a shit about free will

ok kiddo.

Oath of Ancients Pally so I don't give a fuck.

The woman is holding the man hostage. You need to intervene.

Wrong. He is at fault for CAUSING the death of innocents through his actions. Fallen, right there as said above by another user. The righteous paladin waits. Patience is a virtue, remember. I know you modern kids don't remember it, but it is. Eventually the criminal has to either kill them, which the paladin can't stop and therefore doesn't fall. Or the criminal has to let them go to try to run. The smart paladin maneuvers so that it appears that the criminal can let them go, perhaps into danger of them dying, and escape. Then the paladin saves the innocents, makes sure they are alright, and then hunts down the criminal.

Rinse and repeat as needed. Eventually the criminal will make a mistake and the paladin unleashes holy justice when that happens.

Better to wait and get it right, then rush in and fuck it up. Patience.

Flashbangs are dangerous in enclosed spaces, and can be lethal at close range. Plus, shit would catch fire inside. Unless the floors are bare and there's nothing flammable on the walls.

>Plus, shit would catch fire
good? A hostage taker will drop a hostage if the hostage is on fire. Or if he is on fire. Or if everything is on fire.

You just have to heal the victim and subdue the assailant at your leisure.

>Patience is a virtue
And sloth is a sin. The line between the two is very thin sometimes. Prolonged inactivity justified as "patience" may prevent one from moving on and getting more work done elsewhere.

To extend upon your example. In the vacuum of no other threats, waiting until the kidnapper loses patience is a reasonable choice.
But in a complex world full of events, taking days to solve one situation while there might be, say. band of bandits rampaging in the countryside or some vile beast terrorizing the next town, taking extra time and effort to save one life can mean dozens of other lives will be extinguished.

Evil does not rest or wait.
Not smiting the criminal where he stands means willingly granting victory to Evil. That would be unacceptable and deserving of a Fall.

Even if he gets his artery cut, it should take more than a few seconds for him to bleed out enough to die. Just smite the hostage taker, then lay on hands the hostage.

Coup de grace is an auto crit and 10+damage fort save.

Daggers do 1d4 x2 on a crit.

The damage isn't enough to kill her and she has a good chance of saving. Just shoot the guy in the head and heal the woman.

Besides, by raw you cannot hold a full round action, only standard actions, so if you attack and bull rush he can only do 1d4 damage, maybe 2d4 on 19-20 attack roll.

And here we have the wisdom of millennial. Look and laugh.

Remind him that there are two endings to this story: One where both he and the girl live, and one where both he and the girl die. Either way, he's coming with me.

Can he even Coup de Grace in this situation? IIRC it's only vs Helpless opponents.
Hostage in the picture appears to be Grappled, while that imposes a whole range of restrictions on her, it doesn't make her Helpless.

Even if you're playing the godawful bastard that is 3.P, doing "the peasant hostage has their throat cut" by RAW and not a fluff kill is retarded as all fuck.

RAWfags go back to /v/ where you belong.

>Wrong. He is at fault for CAUSING the death of innocents through his actions
Paladins won't fall if someone else tries to motivate the paladin via the threat of innocents.

A paladin wouldn't fall if an evil wizard messaged him from 500 miles away with the message "disembowl yourself now or I kill this kid" for kicks and then kills a random kid when the paladin wonders who's talking to him.

A paladin doesn't fall if an evil nation issues an edict that any paladin orders should disband or they will kill an innocent person.

A paladin doesn't fall if a hostage taker threatens to kill a hostage and then does so.

They are accountable for their actions, not others.

Waiting for an enemy to give you an opportunity is not sloth. Never will be. War, and all battles, are won by making the least number of mistakes and capitalizing on as many of the enemy's mistakes as possible.

As far as other problems, prioritize. If there are bandits killing many others, then the petty criminal with a hostage doesn't matter right now. Don't beat up your foe in a burning house. Fix the immediate problem and then return to other problems. A paladin is not a god and doesn't pretend to be. He does what he can, when he can.

Patience is a virtue.
Evil has no virtues.
In the fight against Evil, virtues are a luxury.
It's logic.

And ad hominem is a weak argument.

They are accountable for their actions, including the action that leads to others killing people, if he can stop it.

You forgot one piece of the puzzle and it makes you look stupid.

Not for a paladin.

Blatant lack of intelligence is a weaker argument.

Two can play at this game!

though what's funny is that in settings with ressurection hostages become fairly useless unless you have a weapon that cause people to die of old age

Depends on the paladin. Their oaths will determine what actions they can take and what actions, if any, would make them fall in this situation.

Especially for a paladin.

Projection is a weaker argument.

Except that resurrection costs a lot. Until that resurrection is gained and used, the paladin has no class abilities.

So there is that...

Ok, you are just too stupid for words. Therefore I will stop using them on you after this one last bit.

Virtues are what make a paladin better then others. To toss them aside, just makes him another thug with a weapon, nothing more.

I only have limited knowledge of D&D, but what about casting Hold Person DISCREETLY?

If I make a move, and the Bad Guy kills the hostage, I will kill the Bad Guy in retribution. But if I don't stop the Bad Guy, they could kill the hostage anyway.

Ergo, the hostage is already dead, and I should act accordingly.

I kill the Bad Guy.

Underrated answer.

It's has Range: Touch.
Also Paladin doesn't have that spell normally.

Ah, you're suggesting that a wizard solves the problem. Good thinking!

A thug with a weapon and divine backing.

Was it by any chance a ranged paladin spell in 2nd edition?

If you are a fighter, then sure. A neutral or evil fighter. A good, especially a lawful good, paladin does not think that way. That person is breathing until breath stops, is alive until life stops. No shortcuts, no self-serving lies to make it easier for you. You maneuver to try to get the bad guy to leave the hostage so that he can run. Since it is far easier to run without dragging someone along. As he is a self-serving bad guy, like yourself, he will abandon that which is an inconvience, the hostage, when he feels like he has a good chance to escape.

Give him that chance, to save a life. Then hunt his ass down and punish him when civilians are safe.

Honestly, how can so many morons actually inhabit one board. Migrate back to /b/ or something.

Bullshit. There's no real guarantee that the idiot trying to take hostages won't kill them regardless of what the paladin does. There's no guarantee that whatever he's demanding won't cause more harm than just killing the hostages. And the deaths of the hostages lie solely on HIS soul, not the paladins.

Should diplomacy fail, what are the chances of a paladin being able to quickly heal the hostage?

Failure to stop an evil act doesn't make a Paladin fall. WILLFULL INACTION probably can, but that's still debatable. Trying and failing DOESN'T. The Paladin falls when he performs an evil act of his own will and is fully accountable for it.

So no, standard LG paladins are not completely countered by hostages. Read less Veeky Forums memes and play more tabletop games.

There is a guarantee, the paladin is standing right there. One big fucking guarantee. You rush the bad guy, he kills hostage. You are at fault. Simple. You stay nearby, talking and maneuvering until the bad guy thinks he can get away by abandoning the hostage. The paladin stays nearby to secure the hostage if/when he abandons it. Then you hunt him down and punish him when he is away from civilians. How simple do I have to paint it to make you understand? Do I need to get out some 8-bit graphics?

Being a paladin is taking the tough road. It is not compromising your principles when faced with tough decisions. Play a rogue or a fighter if you want to not worry about morality. Or better yet a wizard. We all know they have no sense of right a wrong and obviously neither do you. Perfect match.

>Evil has no virtues
>In the fight against Evil, virtues are a luxury

Then what the fuck are we fighting? So we needa be evil to stop evil, and then later on someone else need to be evil to stop us? Naw, man. Be good. Be the most good. Have the most virtues. Don't let some hostage-taking fucker bring you down to his level. Do not let him take also your own morality hostage. Fuck. What are they teaching kids these days?

>ad hominem is a weak argument

... Isn't it just not an argument at all? Technically. Because it does nothing to address the points of discussion, only attack one of the members of the discussion.

What I'm saying is you're wrong. All the time.

No, I'm calling the Bad Guy's bluff. He's banking on me wanting to save the hostage. The moment he realises that's not going to work, he will release the hostage so he can defend himself properly.

Good is not Nice.

The hostage situation is intrinsically flawed. Yes, you should do everything you can do to preserve the life of the hostage, but at a certain point the hostage taker becomes beholden to you. After all, if they kill the hostage, their leverage is gone. If they harm the hostage, then their attention is not currently on you, giving you a range of options of dealing with them. Why hasn't the wizard already used some save-or-die spell to resolve the situation instead of wasting my time with this bullshit?

So, appeal to him. Talk him down. He can escape if he lets the hostages go. Preserving life is more important than capturing him. He doesn't have to do this and there are ways of him getting out of this situation without anyone getting hurt. Bu if it becomes obvious that he was never intending on letting the hostage go in the first place, I charge the fucker. Maybe I make it, maybe I don't. But I sure as hell don't give him the opportunity to take a second hostage. Also, why do anything just because someone took a hostage? How is the hostage my responsibility? It's not on me if Fucko the Clown kills someone. It's on him. He is a free-willed being with the ability to make his own choices. He has the power to not kill the hostage whenever he wants and I entirely refuse to be held responsible for someone else's decisions.

Attempting to save an individual and the villain kill the individual in the process does not a fall make.

If it were, then every paladin would be trapped by inaction at the merest hint of there being a fatality in any situation.

ITT: Paladins fall, no matter what they do.

>Then you hunt him down and punish him when he is away from civilians.
If you catch him. If he doesn't take another hostage. If he doesn't go out and slaughter a village full of innocents. Yes, maybe he can be talked out of it. Maybe no-one will get hurt. But letting him just walk away is the worst thing you could do.

Yes, and rushing the bad guy, when you know he will kill the hostage, as he has said so, and to the best of your knowledge appears able to do so, is an evil act. You are getting the hostage killed because of your inability to have patience.

Play less tabletop games and read more historical fiction. You might learn something.

>Yes, and rushing the bad guy, when you know he will kill the hostage, as he has said so, and to the best of your knowledge appears able to do so, is an evil act.

No it isn't, you're just retarded.

And if he is not bluffing, you fall. Simple as that.

No you don't, simple as that. What the bad guy does is not your responsibility. Stopping him is.

turn around 360° and walk away

not a thing in standard paladin codes, notably

>360°

Agree.

Talk them down if you can, but if they won't listen then kill them and hope the hostage survives.

What else are you going to do? Walk away and let the hostage taker go free?

It will if you choose to risk an innocent life for no reason other then your lack of patience and intelligence. And trying to equate to any other situation is a logical fallacy. Try again user. Hostage situations are unique. They specifically are there to try to force one party to let the other have it's way. In most situations, it's to let the bad guy escape. Though sometimes it can be used just to buy time.

If it, as the OP suggests above, is used to escape, then let the bastard escape is the only real option for a paladin. He can just exercise patience and save the hostage, or he can be a thug and try to force the situation. A thug with no divine sanction, as he is going to fall if that hostage dies do to his choice.

Not if my paladin's ethical code states that he did not commit an Evil act, which is entirely plausible.

Jesus whoever made the original paladin stuff was either the stupidest man to write for RPGs or the most devious bastard on the planet to do so, because these conversations are the most hilarious things this place produces, seeing people trying so hard to justify these retarded views while ignoring most kinds of logic.

ITT: Edgelord neckbeards argue that paladins can never succeed.

>Hostage situations are unique. They specifically are there to try to force one party to let the other have it's way. In most situations, it's to let the bad guy escape. Though sometimes it can be used just to buy time.

So you call the bad guy's bluff and remove their leverage.

Not to a paladin. Saving that one life is just as important as anything else. And if you fail to catch him before he takes another hostage, then you repeat it again. And if you fail to catch him before he slaughters a village of innocents, that is your failure to stop him in time. You were not good enough to stop him, assuming you tried. You are not a god, just a man trying to do the right thing. The first hostage does not need to die just so you can pat yourself on the back and lie to yourself that you did the right thing.

The paladin's road is not easy. There is a reason people look up to them.

If the bad guy killing the hostage is enough of a reason for the paladin to fall, then so is letting him get away and possibly kill another innocent when the paladin isn't there to stop it. So either it's a catch-22 "You fall because I say so" situation and you're a That GM, you're being inconsistent with your own rules, or the paladin doesn't fall.

I move up towards him. If he tried to hurt the hostage I use Guardian's Counter. It interposes me as the target instead of the hostage, moves the hostage to where I was and gives me a free attack after it happens.

Now he has no hostage and I'm in melee range of him. Time for smiting.

I'm a Defender. I'd be pretty bad at my job if I couldn't defend people.

Who said anything about them never succeeding? You let the hostage taker go then and there, then track them down afterwards. Maybe the party Rogue is already sneaking around to cover the exits and shadow the perpetrator back to their lair. No-one can succeed at everything, all the time, on their own. If you blunder into a situation with no-one to help, of course you're going to wind up failing more often than not.

And then he kiils someone and you fall because it's your fault.

Nope. Paladins fall if they willfully abandon their code. Failing to save a life because your hands were tied by your code doesn't make you fall.

In which case you don't fall for the hostage dying, either.

You must be a horrible GM.

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, mocking the people calling for falls in this thread.

>Not to a paladin. Saving that one life is just as important as anything else.

Not to all paladins.

My paladin worships Thelkmor, who holds the punishment of the guilty as being more important than rescuing the innocent. So in this scenario, bumrushing the hostage-taker is entirely in-keeping with my god's worldview, and if the hostage dies, I get to keep all my god-given powers.

Well that's what this threads about anyway.

It boggles my mind how people misinterpret the falling mechanic. It's just a minor tidbit that says basically "Paladin loses his powers if he betrays his alignment". Similar stipulations exist for monks and barbarians too, who lose their powers if they become chaotic/lawful. But nobody has ever asked "how do I make barbarian fall? force him to do bureaucracy?" while Paladin players are made to play endless guessing games of whether his next action is going to make him fall or not. But RAW, nothing short of the Paladin willfully killing an innocent person for no reason, thus performing a Chaotic Evil act and shifting himself to the southeast of the alignment grid, should make him fall, and failing to prevent a murder definitely shouldn't. Falling paladins shouldn't come up nearly as often as people on Veeky Forums believe they should, period.

It is your responsibility, AS LONG AS YOU CAN STOP IT.

You rush, you choose to let the innocent die so that you can have it easy and catch the bastard now. Evil act. You fall.

You let the bastard go, but he kills the innocent anyway. HE chose to be evil at that moment and you can't stop it. You are fine and ready to smite evil ass. Fight commences.

You let the bastard go, the right way, where he can't get away without abandoning the hostage. He gets away, you get the innocent saved. You start the hunt to hopefully get him before he can do more evil. You are fine and ready to smite, even if he kills more while you save that one. As you are only human, no god can expect you to stop all evil, only that which you have a choice and the power to do so.

That is the key, the power and choice. You chose to rush the bad guy, you are choosing to let the innocent die. Simple. Not worthy of a paladin.

>Force Barbarian bad cop/guard to write reports to the guard captain.
>He falls.
>All according to plan.

See
You're being inconsistent and your morality isn't worth crap.

>You rush, you choose to let the innocent die so that you can have it easy and catch the bastard now. Evil act. You fall.

You're assuming a lot about my motivations.

I don't rush because I want an easy way out. I rush because I cannot trust that the bad-guy will keep his word, and have to operate on the assumption that the hostage could die no matter what I do.

Ergo, the hostage is already dead, and I might as well move to kill the hostage-taker immediately

Then you are playing some edgelord mary sue god of paladins rather then the original. I can't comment on it as it is far too edgy for me. I stick to historical codes of chivalry and virtues. You know, those things that all paladins are based on.

I'm a paladin... not a white-knight. Probably help the guy out as I guarantee you if I cast detect evil right now all the negative energy is coming directly from the coochie.

At worst, it's just a man at the end of his rope and is breaking a law, oooh I'm TOTALLY going to side with the neutral to lawful evil cunt over a chaotic good bro. Sure thing kiddo...

You're either trolling or retarded and either way you should kill yourself.

Detect and see that he is evil.
Identity myself truthfully.
Tell him there's a risk of a an archer taking a shot at him while we talk and I don't want anyone to die.
Roll a helm of opposite alignment to him

>You rush, you choose to let the innocent die so that you can have it easy and catch the bastard now. Evil act. You fall.

Alternatively: You rush because you are trying to blitz him faster than he can kill her. After all, there is no garentee that he'll let the hostage go and this is genuinely the most reasonable way to keep them alive if you are unsure.

Note: You can't Ready a Coup De Grace (It's a full round, you can only ready a standard or quicker) and you also can't Coup De Grace someone who's fighting back. The odds of her dying before the paladin can beat the ever loving piss out of the kidnapper are pretty damn low unless this guy is a very powerful foe.

>You let the bastard go, but he kills the innocent anyway.

That sounds like a fall. We've established that the Paladin is responsible for the things his enemies do, so by letting that guy get away in the first place he's responsible for that innocents death.

Failing to prevent a murder, that he can stop, is a evil act. Failing to prevent a murder that he can't stop, is a neutral act. It really is that simple. Commiting an evil act, is against the code. Commiting a neutral act, is not.

All that is needed for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing.

It can't be explained better.

You keep assuming they'll abandon the hostage and let the paladin rush and murder them immediately afterwards. You do realize that people in these situations tend to take a hostage with them when they flee right? Because as you keep pointing out it is obviously the only thing that is keeping them from being attacked. Your entire argument falls apart if they just keep a hostage with them which is, you know, the entire point of using a hostage.

But he COULD prevent that murder. He just has to stop the bad guy from getting away.

It's become a shitty joke at this point, no sane gm that wants to keep his players would actually do any of this. It's just idiots here who think they are hilarious or just want attention so they make threads like these to pretend they are having a conversation to simulate social interaction and think they are clever "tricking" people into talking about inane shit.