Paladin Class Preview

Monday, May 7, 2018

All it takes is a cursory browse of the Paizo forums to see that paladins are not just the most contentious class in Pathfinder, they are the most contentious conversation topic. Weeks before we previewed the class, multiple threads with thousands of posts arose in advance, filled with passionate fans with many different opinions and plenty of good ideas. Turns out, the Paizo office isn't too different.

The Quest for the Holy Grail

Early last year, I went on a sacred quest through the office and surveyed all the different opinions out there about paladins. Turns out, almost everyone had slightly different thoughts. But there was one element in common: whether they wanted paladins of all alignments, paladins of the four extreme alignments, lawful good paladins and chaotic evil antipaladins, lawful evil tyrant antipaladins, or even just lawful good paladins alone, everyone was interested in robust support for the idea that paladins should be champions of their deity and alignment. That is to say, whatever alignments paladins have, they should have an array of abilities deeply tied into that alignment.

Since that was the aspect of the paladin that everyone agreed upon, that's what we wanted to make sure we got right in the playtest. But given the limited space for the playtest, we chose to focus on getting that aspect fine-tuned for one alignment, and so in this book we're presenting only lawful good paladins. That doesn't mean antipaladins and tyrants are gone (there's even an antipaladin foe in one of the adventures!) or that the door is closed to other sorts of paladins down the road. We'll have a playtest survey on the matter, we're open to more opinions, and even among the four designers we have different ideas. But we want to focus the playtest on getting lawful good paladins right, first and foremost. If or when we do make more paladins and antipaladins, having constructed a solid foundation for how an alignment-driven champion functions will be a crucial step to making all of them engaging and different in play.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

The Code

Tell me if you've heard this one before: My paladin was brought to a court where she was forced to testify under oath to tell the whole truth, by a legitimate authority, about the whereabouts of certain innocent witnesses, but she knows that if she answers the questions, a villain is going to use that information to track down and harm the innocents. It's the "Inquiring Murderer" quandary from moral philosophy set in a way that manages to pin you between not just two but three different restrictions in the old paladin code. Sure, I can beg and plead with the judge that the information, if released, would harm innocents, but ultimately if the judge persists, I'm in trouble. These sorts of situations are some of the most common paladin threads on the forums, and they're never easy.

With the playtest presenting the opportunity, I wanted to analyze the paladin's code down to basic principles and keep all the important roleplaying aspects that make paladins the trustworthy champions of law and good we've come to expect while drastically reducing, and hopefully eliminating, the no-win situations. Here's what it looks like at the moment.

Code of Conduct

Paladins are divine champions of a deity. You must be lawful good and worship a deity that allows lawful good clerics. Actions fundamentally opposed to your deity's alignment or ideals are anathema to your faith. A few examples of acts that would be considered anathema appear in each deity's entry. You and your GM will determine whether other acts count as anathema.

In addition, you must follow the paladin's code below. Deities often add additional strictures for their own paladins (for instance, Shelyn's paladins never attack first except to protect an innocent, and they choose and perfect an art).

If you stray from lawful good, perform acts anathema to your deity, or violate your code of conduct, you lose your Spell Point pool and righteous ally class feature (which we talk more about below) until you demonstrate your repentance by conducting an atone ritual, but you keep any other paladin abilities that don't require those class features.

The Paladin's Code

The following is the fundamental code all paladins follow. The tenets are listed in order of importance, starting with the most important. If a situation places two tenets in conflict, you aren't in a no-win situation; instead, follow the most important tenet. For instance, if an evil king asked you if innocent lawbreakers were hiding in your church so he could execute them, you could lie to him, since the tenet forbidding you to lie is less important than the tenet prohibiting the harm of an innocent. An attempt to subvert the paladin code by engineering a situation allowing you to use a higher tenet to ignore a lower tenet (telling someone that you won't respect lawful authorities so that the tenet of not lying supersedes the tenet of respecting lawful authorities, for example) is a violation of the paladin code.

  • You must never willingly commit an evil act, such as murder, torture, or casting an evil spell.
  • You must not take actions that you know will harm an innocent, or through inaction cause an innocent to come to immediate harm when you knew your action could reasonably prevent it. This tenet doesn't force you to take action against possible harm to innocents or to sacrifice your life and future potential in an attempt to protect an innocent.
  • You must act with honor, never cheating, lying, or taking advantage of others.
  • You must respect the lawful authority of the legitimate ruler or leadership in whichever land you may be, following their laws unless they violate a higher tenet.

So let's break down what's the same and what's different. We still have all the basic tenets of the paladin from Pathfinder First Edition, with one exception: we've removed poison from the tenet of acting with honor. While there are certainly dishonorable ways to use poison, poisoning a weapon and using it in an honorable combat that allows enhanced weaponry doesn't seem much different than lighting the weapon on fire. However, by ordering the tenets and allowing the paladin to prioritize the most important tenets in the event of a conflict, we've cut down on the no-win situations. And of course, this opens a design space to play around with the tenets themselves, something we've done by incorporating one of the most popular non-core aspects for paladins...

Oaths

Oaths allow you to play around with the tenets of your code while also gaining mechanical advantages. For instance, the Fiendsbane Oath allows you to dish out near-constant retribution against fiends and eventually block their dimensional travel with an Anchoring Aura. Unlike in Pathfinder First Edition, oaths are feats, and you don't need an archetype to gain one.

Paladin Features

As many of you guessed when Jason mentioned it, paladin was the mystery class that gains the highest heavy armor proficiency, eventually reaching legendary proficiency in armor and master proficiency in weapons, as opposed to fighters, who gain the reverse. At 1st level, you also gain the Retributive Strike reaction, allowing you to counterattack and enfeeble any foe that hits one of your allies (Shelyn save those who strike your storm druid ally). You also get lay on hands, a single-action healing spell that not only heals the target but also raises their AC for a round to help prevent future damage. Combine that effect used on yourself with a raised shield, and you can make it pretty hard for a foe to hit you, and it helps recovering allies avoid another beating.

Lay on hands is the first of a paladin's champion powers, which include a whole bunch of elective options via feats. One of my favorites, gained automatically at 19th level, is hero's defiance, which makes a paladin incredibly difficult to take down. It lets you keep standing when you fall to 0 HP, gives you a big boost of Hit Points, and doesn't even use up your reaction! Leading up to that, you gain a bunch of fun smite-related boosts, including the righteous ally class feature that you saw mentioned in the code. This is a 3rd-level ability that lets you house a holy spirit in a weapon or a steed, much like before, but also in a shield, like the fan-favorite sacred shield archetype!

Paladin Feats

In addition to the oath feats I mentioned when talking about the code, paladins have feats customized to work with the various righteous ally options, like Second Ally, a level 8 feat that lets you gain a second righteous ally. There are also a variety of auras that you can gain to improve yourself and your allies, from the humble 4th-level Aura of Courage, which reduces the frightened condition for you when you gain it and at the end of your turn for you and your allies, to the mighty 14th-level Aura of Righteousness, which gives you and your allies resistance to evil damage. Feats that improve or alter your lay on hands include mercy feats, which allow you to remove harmful conditions and afflictions with lay on hands, up to and including death itself with Ultimate Mercy. And we can't forget potent additional reactions like Divine Grace, granting you a saving throw boost at 2nd level, and Attack of Opportunity at 6th level.

To close out, I'll tell you about one more popular non-core paladin ability we brought in, a special type of power called...

Litanies

Following their mold from Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat, litanies are single-action Verbal Casting spells that last 1 round and create various effects. For instance, litany of righteousness makes an enemy weak to your allies' attacks, and litany against sloth slows down an enemy, costing it reactions and potentially actions as well. One of the coolest story features of the litanies against sins is that they now explicitly work better against creatures strongly aligned with their sin, so a dretch (a.k.a. a sloth demon) or a sloth sinspawn treats its saving throw outcome for litany against sloth as one degree worse!

Just as a reminder to everyone, please be respectful to each other. Many of us have strong opinions about the paladin, and that's OK, even if we each have different feelings.

Mark Seifter
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Paladins Pathfinder Playtest Seelah Wayne Reynolds
1,501 to 1,550 of 1,735 << first < prev | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Being forced to worship a deity does seem to anger some, but it's coming from a Golarian angle. You can easily houserule a god to be an ideal or philosophy or what-have-you.
The thing about that is that's never been true in Golarion previously. It was true of Clerics, and was true of Paladins in PFS, but was not actually a Golarion world rule for Paladins.

There was a big thread a while back where James Jacobs chimed in saying it was fully intended for paladins to have to worship a deity in Golarion.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Elorebaen wrote:


It did happen. It just wasn’t the direction that your “feedback” suggested. Simple as that.

Well, we don't know what happened with feedback in this issue, in one sense or the other, because, as Mark said, the decision to playtest LG Paladin only was made even before the playtest forum existed.

It certainly looks like they move toward the LG only solution more than the other way around, but if it happens, it's not because of whatever feedback we have done in the last week or two.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I find lawful difficult at times(it's not usually a problem lately) because I find there's more variation on gm interpretations of lawful and I find gms are more likely to force their views on what lawful means on the lawful alignments than they are on chaotic.


wraithstrike wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Being forced to worship a deity does seem to anger some, but it's coming from a Golarian angle. You can easily houserule a god to be an ideal or philosophy or what-have-you.
The thing about that is that's never been true in Golarion previously. It was true of Clerics, and was true of Paladins in PFS, but was not actually a Golarion world rule for Paladins.
There was a big thread a while back where James Jacobs chimed in saying it was fully intended for paladins to have to worship a deity in Golarion.

That's strange because he's said the exact opposite before, but I've heard he doesn't like his quotes being used in arguments anyway.


HWalsh wrote:
Goku from DB/Z/S is lawful. He is dedicated, determined, and above all tends to follow the rules.

Dedicated and determined can be traits of Chaos as well. But Goku does tend to follow the rules people tell him about, he just doesn't know most of them.

I'd call him Chaotic because he puts himself and his own interests above everyone else most of the time. He'd fit fine as a Chaotic Good worshipper of Gorum in a Pathfinder sense. He wants a good fight, a true challenge, and will do very stupid or dangerous things to get that. It often gets other people in trouble that he isn't disciplined enough to take the expedient path or finish enemies while he can.

His lack of planning and forethought, willingness to fight by instinct and improvisation, and general thoughts putting his own desires ahead of others point him to Chaotic.

I think I agree with the rest of the examples. Might Guy is a fantastic example of a fun and 'silly' Lawful character. Who is also the most awesome character from that series.

Silver Crusade Contributor

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Wei Ji: There's a quote - something about fighting monsters and gazing into the Abyss - that paladins (at least, those of good alignment) would be wise to remember. ^_^


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corwin Icewolf wrote:
I find lawful difficult at times(it's not usually a problem lately) because I find there's more variation on gm interpretations of lawful and I find gms are more likely to force their views on what lawful means on the lawful alignments than they are on chaotic.

Distinguishing lawful vs chaotic is pretty tough unless they are a caricature.

I can tell if a character is good or evil pretty easily, but I have to look at their character sheet to know if they are supposed to be lawful or chaotic.

Silver Crusade Contributor

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, I should probably give my thoughts on the PF2 paladin at some point.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Also, I should probably give my thoughts on the PF2 paladin at some point.

In this thread? Are you sure it's the place for it? :p

I'd put goku at neutral good honestly. He doesn't seem all that fussed about anything related to order or chaos. Just wants to fight, and protect his loved ones, but mostly fight. But he's too good natured to not be some kind of good.

And yeah, I find it difficult to distinguish lawful from chaotic myself because most actions and views are easy to defend as lawful or chaotic depending on interpretation and situation.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:


There are so many ways to play Lawful...

Hercules (Kevin Sorbo) was lawful.

Pretty sure Herc went from town to town convincing people not to listen to their leaders traditional, backward, and terrible ways. I mean I was there.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Its true, I was also there.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Being forced to worship a deity does seem to anger some, but it's coming from a Golarian angle. You can easily houserule a god to be an ideal or philosophy or what-have-you.
The thing about that is that's never been true in Golarion previously. It was true of Clerics, and was true of Paladins in PFS, but was not actually a Golarion world rule for Paladins.
There was a big thread a while back where James Jacobs chimed in saying it was fully intended for paladins to have to worship a deity in Golarion.

Link? Because, as others note, I've literally seen him say the exact opposite of this.

Now, that was some years ago and opinions change, but I'm still gonna want to see proof. Especially since I've seen James Jacobs get misquoted a lot on these forums before. People have a tendency to misinterpret his statements and then spread those misinterpretations widely.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Goku from DB/Z/S is chaotic. He is dedicated, determined, but tends to do what he feels is 'right'.

Captain America is chaotic, from how he entered the Armed Forces to his tactics in the military afterwards AND while in the service of SHIELD and the Avengers.

Carol Danvers is chaotic. She was very much the female version of 'Maverick' from Top Gun, and didn't 'buckle down' a lot along the way.

Spider-Man is chaotic. He's a costumed vigilante who constantly flouts the law and endangers the public with his antics.

Superman and the Flash are all generally chaotic. They do crazy things with their powers that often require them using said powers AGAIN to bail folks out of the line of fire.

Luke Skywalker was chaotic. He was a member of the Rebel Alliance to 'Restore the Republic' as well as a member of an outlawed philosophy path.

Mr. Miyagi from the Karate Kid was neutral. He did not want to get involved but felt obligated to mentor a wayward child, while using said child as cheap unpaid labor at his home, in violation of child labor laws.

We could keep dancing around that, but it's not going to help.

Moving forwards:

Are OTHER classes ALSO going to get 'nifty wings' as part of their advancement path?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Moving forwards:

Are OTHER classes ALSO going to get 'nifty wings' as part of their advancement path?

This is important. Paladins getting angel wings is boss. Its far cooler than anything else that has ever been mentioned in any blog since the beginning of time.

Will any other class have anything nearly that cool?

(It actually does fuel my 'Open the Paladin alignment!' feelings even more. Because its so cool. So extremely, extremely cool. And people missing out makes me feel bad.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

James Jacobs saying Clerics are the only class (at the time of posting) that require deity worship to function in Golarion:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l631&page=3?Which-Gods-have-Paladins#127


Xerres wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Goku from DB/Z/S is lawful. He is dedicated, determined, and above all tends to follow the rules.
Dedicated and determined can be traits of Chaos as well. But Goku does tend to follow the rules people tell him about, he just doesn't know most of them.

He's ignorant (low Wisdom and low Int) but when he knows something is a rule he follows it to the letter. Even so much as to do so in life or death situations. He's so stupidly honorable he will heal an enemy simply to have a fair fight.

Quote:
I'd call him Chaotic because he puts himself and his own interests above everyone else most of the time.

Not really. He doesn't put his own interests above others, he's just kinda stupid at times... I blame that on the head injury he suffered as a child.

Quote:
He'd fit fine as a Chaotic Good worshipper of Gorum in a Pathfinder sense. He wants a good fight, a true challenge, and will do very stupid or dangerous things to get that. It often gets other people in trouble that he isn't disciplined enough to take the expedient path or finish enemies while he can.

Wanting a good challenge isn't Chaotic as a trait. He just has a very low wisdom and doesn't think about the consequences. It is the whole thing with Gohan, he sent him in after Cell assuming that Gohan would do what he did. When it was pointed out to him that Gohan might not, he started freaking out. Not taking the expedient path is part of his honor, Goku does things the right and honorable way, or he doesn't do them at all. That is a massive Lawful trait.

Quote:
His lack of planning and forethought, willingness to fight by instinct and improvisation, and general thoughts putting his own desires ahead of others point him to Chaotic.

Again, that isn't chaotic. That is him having poor Int and Wis scores. Instinct and improvisation isn't Lawful or Chaotic. If anything instinct is Neutral.

Quote:
I think I agree with the rest of the examples. Might Guy is a fantastic example of a fun and 'silly' Lawful character. Who is also the most awesome character from that series.

I was just saying, it strikes me as weird when I see though that people won't try the Paladin because they can't play lawful only because there is such a massive and wide way to play lawful and I have never met anyone who had at least one character that they didn't like who could easily be classified as lawful.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Xerres wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Moving forwards:

Are OTHER classes ALSO going to get 'nifty wings' as part of their advancement path?

This is important. Paladins getting angel wings is boss. Its far cooler than anything else that has ever been mentioned in any blog since the beginning of time.

Will any other class have anything nearly that cool?

(It actually does fuel my 'Open the Paladin alignment!' feelings even more. Because its so cool. So extremely, extremely cool. And people missing out makes me feel bad.)

Being able to sprout wings is already a Barbarian thing through Dragon Totem. I imagine several of the martial classes will get some sort of flying solution because flight is one of the really big sticking points in the C/M disparity (though it won't and shouldn't be outright Flight for everyone, the Fighter's solution could be "you're Legendary in Acrobatics, jump into the air and suplex the m$~@~@$**+&$").

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Neo2151 wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
So here Is why I think the paladin is generally lawful. It is because of the code. Its been very traditional that anyone with a code in D&D and PF is lawful. Monks for example usually (and more so in the past) had a code or some rules they would follow so they would be lawful. Now i"m not opposed to CG paladins however chaotic would imply your getting rid of the code so it would be a substantial change to the fluff and even the mechanics since the code is built in to the mechanics.

So to the idea that Chaotic or Neutral alignments can't follow a code...

Rush, probably... wrote:

If your code is to have no code,

you still follow a code!
Ponder to the tune of Freewill. ;)

well

neutral can follow a code though would be willing to bend or break it if it conflicts with personal ethics or needs

but anyone chaotic enough to have it as a alignment is not orderly or an oathkeeper by definition,
they might play at having a code but it would be by nature a fickle thing.

though cg is of course focused on being benevolent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:


Being able to sprout wings is already a Barbarian thing through Dragon Totem. I imagine several of the martial classes will get some sort of flying solution because flight is one of the really big sticking points in the C/M disparity (though it won't and shouldn't be outright Flight for everyone, the Fighter's solution could be "you're Legendary in Acrobatics, jump into the air and suplex the m$!!#@+++$*&").

But would they be able to stay in the air indefinitely like the paladin apparently will be able to?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Ok I had to think about it and I now realize you are trying to answer my question just in a flowery way.

So your saying the neutral paladin would have to be extremely neutral to the point where he was willing to help allies and enemies at the same time.

Its a start but not as cut and dry as lawful follows lawful codes and evil sacrifices to evil entities.

not necessarily but it would be tricky

being neutral "which most humans are"
is just being primarily self centered
you and those you care for come 1st
you dont care overly about disciplen, law now are you overly against those things,
a N paladin would I think would need to be defined by there belief system
but would lack the focus to be strongly committed to strict codes of conduct
but they would have no need to be focused on balancing good or evil, Neutral people are allowed a preference there just put personal considerations 1st.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Xerres wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Moving forwards:

Are OTHER classes ALSO going to get 'nifty wings' as part of their advancement path?

This is important. Paladins getting angel wings is boss. Its far cooler than anything else that has ever been mentioned in any blog since the beginning of time.

Will any other class have anything nearly that cool?

(It actually does fuel my 'Open the Paladin alignment!' feelings even more. Because its so cool. So extremely, extremely cool. And people missing out makes me feel bad.)

Being able to sprout wings is already a Barbarian thing through Dragon Totem. I imagine several of the martial classes will get some sort of flying solution because flight is one of the really big sticking points in the C/M disparity (though it won't and shouldn't be outright Flight for everyone, the Fighter's solution could be "you're Legendary in Acrobatics, jump into the air and suplex the m#+$*$@#%*!+").

In distant times past when my group cared far less about the rules (Because we were too stupid to understand them) we had a Werewolf Barbarian fight a flying demon by kicking over pillars and throwing them.

I demand this be a Barbarian power. The "They're flying? Throw a house at them." power.

They can still sprout wings if they want. But 'House Thrower' would be a good power.


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:


Being able to sprout wings is already a Barbarian thing through Dragon Totem. I imagine several of the martial classes will get some sort of flying solution because flight is one of the really big sticking points in the C/M disparity (though it won't and shouldn't be outright Flight for everyone, the Fighter's solution could be "you're Legendary in Acrobatics, jump into the air and suplex the m$!!#@+++$*&").
But would they be able to stay in the air indefinitely like the paladin apparently will be able to?

Hard to guess.

It is easier to believe different classes will have different key feats that do awesome things, than that they all have a check list to fill with the same exact powers.

Even a wizard might not have a feat that grants unlimited flight + light + special visions.

In turn it could have some untimate form that it channels arcane magic in its body and start to shoot beams or something. Who knows.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Xerres wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Xerres wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Moving forwards:

Are OTHER classes ALSO going to get 'nifty wings' as part of their advancement path?

This is important. Paladins getting angel wings is boss. Its far cooler than anything else that has ever been mentioned in any blog since the beginning of time.

Will any other class have anything nearly that cool?

(It actually does fuel my 'Open the Paladin alignment!' feelings even more. Because its so cool. So extremely, extremely cool. And people missing out makes me feel bad.)

Being able to sprout wings is already a Barbarian thing through Dragon Totem. I imagine several of the martial classes will get some sort of flying solution because flight is one of the really big sticking points in the C/M disparity (though it won't and shouldn't be outright Flight for everyone, the Fighter's solution could be "you're Legendary in Acrobatics, jump into the air and suplex the m#+$*$@#%*!+").

In distant times past when my group cared far less about the rules (Because we were too stupid to understand them) we had a Werewolf Barbarian fight a flying demon by kicking over pillars and throwing them.

I demand this be a Barbarian power. The "They're flying? Throw a house at them." power.

They can still sprout wings if they want. But 'House Thrower' would be a good power.

I, for, one, am most concerned with Barbarians getting the ability to beat a m@$%@++~!!$* with another m&~$+*!@+@$*.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Would it be an evil thing to hope that paladins (if they remain tied to Heaven as their endgoal), get whisked away at L15 with their nifty angel wings to fight for Good?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
]His lack of planning and forethought, willingness to fight by instinct and improvisation, and general thoughts putting his own desires ahead of others point him to Chaotic.
Again, that isn't chaotic. That is him having poor Int and Wis scores. Instinct and improvisation isn't Lawful or Chaotic. If anything instinct is Neutral.

If Improvisation/Instinct isn't Chaotic, Determination/Discipline are hardly Lawful. I'll concede that Goku's sense of honor is a trait that would support him being Lawful. Refusing to let Kami or Tien fight Piccolo, because then he'd lose the match. But that's as much because of Goku's pride as it is about specific rules. He wants to win because he's better, not because he took advantage of weakness or numbers.

HWalsh wrote:
I was just saying, it strikes me as weird when I see though that people won't try the Paladin because they can't play lawful only because there is such a massive and wide way to play lawful and I have never met anyone who had at least one character that they didn't like who could easily be classified as lawful.

In all honesty, not to sound mean, it seems like you give Chaotic a much smaller number of traits than you do Lawful. While I tend to agree with you that Lawful is a very flexible and broad alignment, I bump up against your interpretation of Chaotic often.

Maybe I should make a different thread, but I'd like to know what people think the positive aspects of Chaos are. It comes across to me that Pro-Lawful Paladinners do not attribute very many positive traits to Chaotic characters. I'd certainly prefer to be mistaken on that part, but it contributes to me thinking that Chaos is getting intentionally short changed. But there's definitely the personal bias that I think I noticed it, so now I look for it.

Just a straight comparison "These are the positives of Lawful, these are the positives of Chaotic." might straighten me out, or reveal other unintentional biases.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
johnlocke90 wrote:
Corwin Icewolf wrote:
I find lawful difficult at times(it's not usually a problem lately) because I find there's more variation on gm interpretations of lawful and I find gms are more likely to force their views on what lawful means on the lawful alignments than they are on chaotic.

Distinguishing lawful vs chaotic is pretty tough unless they are a caricature.

I can tell if a character is good or evil pretty easily, but I have to look at their character sheet to know if they are supposed to be lawful or chaotic.

I find the easy way to do so is to see if they stick to a code of beliefs and actions, or if they do what's right in the moment. I don't have an alignment written on a character sheet, and yet it'd be very easy to describe myself as lawful.

It's also helpful to remember that alignment is something of an overarching pattern - there are times where a lawful character might take actions that fall outside their code of beliefs, but they should be few and far between. (Paladins, as befitting a super-Lawful class, don't get that ability.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nox Aeterna wrote:
In turn it could have some untimate form that it channels arcane magic in its body and start to shoot beams or something. Who knows.

I for one look forward to unlocking my wizard's final form and becoming the disco ball of doom I've always dreamed.


Xerres wrote:
Quote:
HWalsh wrote:
]His lack of planning and forethought, willingness to fight by instinct and improvisation, and general thoughts putting his own desires ahead of others point him to Chaotic.
Again, that isn't chaotic. That is him having poor Int and Wis scores. Instinct and improvisation isn't Lawful or Chaotic. If anything instinct is Neutral.

If Improvisation/Instinct isn't Chaotic, Determination/Discipline are hardly Lawful. I'll concede that Goku's sense of honor is a trait that would support him being Lawful. Refusing to let Kami or Tien fight Piccolo, because then he'd lose the match. But that's as much because of Goku's pride as it is about specific rules. He wants to win because he's better, not because he took advantage of weakness or numbers.

HWalsh wrote:
I was just saying, it strikes me as weird when I see though that people won't try the Paladin because they can't play lawful only because there is such a massive and wide way to play lawful and I have never met anyone who had at least one character that they didn't like who could easily be classified as lawful.

In all honesty, not to sound mean, it seems like you give Chaotic a much smaller number of traits than you do Lawful. While I tend to agree with you that Lawful is a very flexible and broad alignment, I bump up against your interpretation of Chaotic often.

Maybe I should make a different thread, but I'd like to know what people think the positive aspects of Chaos are. It comes across to me that Pro-Lawful Paladinners do not attribute very many positive traits to Chaotic characters. I'd certainly prefer to be mistaken on that part, but it contributes to me thinking that Chaos is getting intentionally short changed. But there's definitely the personal bias that I think I noticed it, so now I look for it.

Just a straight comparison "These are the positives of Lawful, these are the positives of Chaotic." might straighten me out, or reveal other unintentional biases.

There are tons of great Chaotic characters.

Chaotic to me is a dislike of rules. Unlike Neutral who is more likely to follow rules, until they get in the way, a Chaotic character doesn't like the concept of rules at all. There are tons of great characters who are Chaotic.

A great example of a Lawful character vs a Chaotic character is Namor vs Aquaman from the Marvel/DC Amalgam Crossover. In a one on one fight they fight straight up, with Namor getting the upper hand. At the moment of Namor's victory, he says something about how Aquaman fought an honorable fight...

When a large shadow appears over him and a full sized whale lands on him. Aquaman responds with, "The difference between you and I? I'm willing to cheat."

That is one of the hallmarks of the Chaotic character, the Chaotic character wants to win at any cost. They don't generally care if something is fair, the only rule is that there are no rules. Sure they might have a personal code of honor, but it is a code that they came up with, IE they were fine with it because they set their own rules.

From Anime Naruto fits this trope perfectly. He does it his own way. He finds out there is a forbidden technique? He's going for it. He doesn't care if it is forbidden or not.

From Comics of course you have your Deadpool or your Wolverine. Though the latter is more honorable in general, he's also more prone to cheating.

From Movies I'd say Han Solo is chaotic.

(I should note, someone earlier commented that fighting against an evil Empire was chaotic. It isn't, they were an evil organization that was in power though illegitimate means and were horrifyingly oppressive. That doesn't make fighting them chaotic.

Also... Carol Danvers as Chaotic? Ms. I-Follow-SHIELD-Even-If-I-Fully-Disagree-With-This-Because-I'm-A-Soldier-An d-It-Is-My-Duty? No.)

Chaotic doesn't mean that you just oppose a government or an organizational structure. It goes beyond that. You disagree with the base concept of structures.

Chaotic Characters are like Yusuke (From Yu Yu Hakusho) in that they have their own methods. They reject authority as a concept. They aren't a leader because they don't believe in leading.

Whereas Hercules from the Sorbo days was Lawful, Iolas was Chaotic. Iolas rejected the idea that you need to be big and strong (as he was kind of small and not very) and instead left to travel to the east to find a better way, snubbing conventional wisdom.

Chaotic characters are those people who reject the status quo on principle. They need to be free, they need to explore, they need to be able to view things from a different angle. They think outside of the box because the box is a concept that traps people.

That is one of the reasons why "Chaotic" and a Paladin code just wouldn't work. It is strapping yourself into a box that clearly, clearly, can put you at a disadvantage. It is not only a box that puts you at a disadvantage, it is a box that others can use to manipulate you. It is allowing an artificial construct, that they didn't have any say in the creation of, to control them.

It goes against the essence of Chaotic.

Which is why Chaotic Good Paladins just don't make sense unless you radically change what a Paladin is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
Nox Aeterna wrote:
In turn it could have some untimate form that it channels arcane magic in its body and start to shoot beams or something. Who knows.
I for one look forward to unlocking my wizard's final form and becoming the disco ball of doom I've always dreamed.

Now that would be something to see.

Can even cast some spells for sound effects.


HWalsh wrote:

Chaotic characters are those people who reject the status quo on principle. They need to be free, they need to explore, they need to be able to view things from a different angle. They think outside of the box because the box is a concept that traps people.

That is one of the reasons why "Chaotic" and a Paladin code just wouldn't work. It is strapping yourself into a box that clearly, clearly, can put you at a disadvantage. It is not only a box that puts you at a disadvantage, it is a box that others can use to manipulate you. It is allowing an artificial construct, that they didn't have any say in the creation of, to control them.

It goes against the essence of Chaotic.

Which is why Chaotic Good Paladins just don't make sense unless you radically change what a Paladin is.

Though I disagree with certain parts of this post (Chaotic people can totally be leaders, they just lead in a very different style from Lawful people), this is really a great summary of the situation.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Goku doesn't heal his enemies because he wants to do it 'in the right way' or because he thinks it would be wrong to take advantage of them. He does it because his primary interest is in *challenging* himself, that *he* gets no benefit from fighting an impaired opponent, rather than one at their best. A Chaotic Neutral cleric of Gorum could *very* easily have the same hangup.

Silver Crusade

There is nothing more Honorable than victory.

Someone mentioned Captain Amerca as not being Lawful Good... ummm.. he always acts for the greater good. He went and saved a large group of pow in defiance of what he knew would be his orders as he could no let other be hurt by his inaction. Then he submitted himself for discipline.

He did not believe registration would help so he could not sign it in good conscience. But when the resistance fight grew to such a stature that innocents were getting caught up in it, he surrendered to stop the harm no matter his own views.

Paladins are not perfect, but they do live by their code.

I too am worried that magical abilities do not become too unlimited, there needs to be some quite heavy rules set for what magic can and can't do. This would help with not allowing non-magic types to be overshadowed. There should not be a spell that imitates everything other classes can do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Thoughtful Responding Post

Ok, thank you for explaining your view point, honestly appreciate it. It changes my nagging sensation that you don't really give Chaotic much credit, but I do think your interpretation of a Chaotic character is more... rare? It seems harder to be Chaotic than Lawful under those guidelines, to me. But I find its much easier to play Lawful, so I that might skew my viewpoint. Your interpretation of Chaotic may be closer to the mark, but I'm leaning to hard away from it. Not willing to make a judgement call on that.

But alignments are very open to interpretations. I think someone else said they're much more useful as guidelines than straitjackets. So I don't mean to push some view of 'Correct' to what you said, just wanted to understand the view better.

Anyone have a different take? Do people consider planning to be a Lawful thing? I really like to have characters that plan things out in advance. My Samurai had a rivalry with a Barbarian in the party, they really enjoyed fighting each other, but that Barbarian kept getting Natural 20s to beat me every time. In-character, had my Samurai formulate a new training regimen to counter the Barbarian's superb luck, and the next time they dueled, he rolled a Nat 20 on the first attack (AGAIN!), but my Samurai put his plan into action and negated the attack (Readied action to move before he hit me.) and went on to win the fight.

I considered that planning to defeat Luck and the dice themselves to be a very Lawful trait. I would put Improvisation as the Chaotic opposite of a positive trait. But if there's to be any Chaotic equivalent to a Paladin, would need to compile the alignment's positive traits to express.

(For the record, I'm still fine with just saying Any Good on Paladin, but I just like the idea of unique Chaotic Good class more.)


5 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

Chaotic to me is a dislike of rules. Unlike Neutral who is more likely to follow rules, until they get in the way, a Chaotic character doesn't like the concept of rules at all. There are tons of great characters who are Chaotic.

A great example of a Lawful character vs a Chaotic character is Namor vs Aquaman from the Marvel/DC Amalgam Crossover. In a one on one fight they fight straight up, with Namor getting the upper hand. At the moment of Namor's victory, he says something about how Aquaman fought an honorable fight...

When a large shadow appears over him and a full sized whale lands on him. Aquaman responds with, "The difference between you and I? I'm willing to cheat."

You're welcome to this opinion but it's definitely counter to the way Paizo uses the alignment system. The god who most loves cheating and succeeding through any means necessary is Norgorber, who sits at Neutral Evil. Gorum, probably the most quintessentially chaotic neutral character in the pantheon, hates Norgorber where he's mostly indifferent to every other god because the King of Thieves' use of poison and subterfuge brings dishonor to the glory of combat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tharasiph wrote:


There is nothing more Honorable than victory.

Someone mentioned Captain Amerca as not being Lawful Good... ummm.. he always acts for the greater good. He went and saved a large group of pow in defiance of what he knew would be his orders as he could no let other be hurt by his inaction. Then he submitted himself for discipline.

He did not believe registration would help so he could not sign it in good conscience. But when the resistance fight grew to such a stature that innocents were getting caught up in it, he surrendered to stop the harm no matter his own views.

Paladins are not perfect, but they do live by their code.

I too am worried that magical abilities do not become too unlimited, there needs to be some quite heavy rules set for what magic can and can't do. This would help with not allowing non-magic types to be overshadowed. There should not be a spell that imitates everything other classes can do.

Yeah, Steve Rogers is the epitome of Lawful Good (the Comic version anyway).

The comic version didn't try to sneak into the military. He was rejected, but it had nothing to do with him lying or any such. He just was weak and frail.

He's pretty much the perfect Paladin.

Take Civil War, in the comics he was already registered. He simply refused to go hunt people down, telling Maria Hill that he'd rather talk to people and saying that he disagreed with the rules they were writing. He said he planned to speak against the Registration act.

Maria Hill decided, then and there, to attack him with SHIELD Agents unlawfully. That was what created Civil War in the comics. He was following the rules, and then the "legitimate authority" unlawfully tried to take him down via force without authorization. At that point he realized that innocents were going to suffer.

Or to use the Paladin code Paizo has put forth... He was 100% following the code. You can 100% oppose a government as a Paladin if that government's actions are hurting innocent people. This, actually, would be interesting in a PF2 story as well.

If you had a government that had Paladins (they are still supposed to be rare in PF2... We'd need someone to confirm that) and someone evil was going to try to perform a coup, one of the first things they would do would be to try to get rid of the Paladins.

I can see a situation where Paladins and Hellknights don't generally get along because I see the Lawful Neutral Hellknights as a great foil for Paladins. They are about the law, good or bad, they don't care. So they can be the perfect tool for a good ruler, or an evil ruler.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xerres wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Thoughtful Responding Post

Ok, thank you for explaining your view point, honestly appreciate it. It changes my nagging sensation that you don't really give Chaotic much credit, but I do think your interpretation of a Chaotic character is more... rare? It seems harder to be Chaotic than Lawful under those guidelines, to me. But I find its much easier to play Lawful, so I that might skew my viewpoint. Your interpretation of Chaotic may be closer to the mark, but I'm leaning to hard away from it. Not willing to make a judgement call on that.

But alignments are very open to interpretations. I think someone else said they're much more useful as guidelines than straitjackets. So I don't mean to push some view of 'Correct' to what you said, just wanted to understand the view better.

Anyone have a different take? Do people consider planning to be a Lawful thing? I really like to have characters that plan things out in advance. My Samurai had a rivalry with a Barbarian in the party, they really enjoyed fighting each other, but that Barbarian kept getting Natural 20s to beat me every time. In-character, had my Samurai formulate a new training regimen to counter the Barbarian's superb luck, and the next time they dueled, he rolled a Nat 20 on the first attack (AGAIN!), but my Samurai put his plan into action and negated the attack (Readied action to move before he hit me.) and went on to win the fight.

I considered that planning to defeat Luck and the dice themselves to be a very Lawful trait. I would put Improvisation as the Chaotic opposite of a positive trait. But if there's to be any Chaotic equivalent to a Paladin, would need to compile the alignment's positive traits to express.

(For the record, I'm still fine with just saying Any Good on Paladin, but I just like the idea of unique Chaotic Good class more.)

I am finding it very easy to put together powers for an Elite Chaos class, or whatever the name should be. That says to me, it deserves its own thing and <3!


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Chaotic doesn't seem to mean a lack of planning to me, but rather a personal emphasis on freedom for all.

As a former member of the armed forces, this chord resonates with me a great deal more than 'Lawful'.

Side-tangent:
We had a term for that in the Navy: 'Berthing-lawyers' or 'Barracks lawyers'

Chaotic folks cherish the freedom of the individual, so when they see those freedoms being swallowed up, they step up and take action, something Lawful folks tend not to do -- because the Law is There for a Reason.

Adaptability can be Lawful or Chaotic or even Neutral.

I once read that some of the world's 'democracies' could actually be, by PF1 CORE rules, termed 'Chaotic Evil'. And also 'Chaotic Neutral', despite said nations being nations of laws and rules.

When folks try to defend 'Lawful Good', the discussion typically goes back to 'tradition' and 'goodness' and 'order' and it REALLY terrifies me as a person who volunteered their time to preserve the Freedom of the citizens of their nation-state.

Is Order important?

Yes.

Is Freedom equally important?

Yes.

Apologies if this went off-course somewhere.


Tharasiph wrote:


Someone mentioned Captain Amerca as not being Lawful Good... ummm.. he always acts for the greater good. He went and saved a large group of pow in defiance of what he knew would be his orders as he could no let other be hurt by his inaction. Then he submitted himself for discipline.

He did not believe registration would help so he could not sign it in good conscience. But when the resistance fight grew to such a stature that innocents were getting caught up in it, he surrendered to stop the harm no matter his own views.

That was quite possibly me. I mentioned it recently in A thread anyways.

Capt was moral, yes. He's the epitome of good, But he certainly did not respect authority. Ever. For any reason. He sometimes followed orders (if he agreed with them), but only the ones that let him do what he wanted to do anyways. Like join the army in the first place. Or fight evil as he perceives it. If he had a neutral stance on the orders, it was always clear that he was uncomfortable doing it. Something about following instructions he did not write himself seems to annoy him. Granted, in MCU, he has extremely good reason to distrust any and all authorities, even the ones on his side. Especially the ones on his side.

Edit: I should make it clear I mean MCU Captain America. The only comic versions I've read were the Civil war storyline HWalsh mentioned, and it's been over a decade. We're genuinely talking about two different Captain Amaericas.

I don't really see why people think Chaotic characters always break their word. You can keep your word and remain chaotic. It's not about crossing lines of behavior so much as where your lines come from. If you decide for yourself what is and is not acceptable, you're likely chaotic. If you follow instead the laws of the land, or your church, or your boss, even when you don't understand why the rule exists or remain unconvinced it's the best path but you'll do it anyways because orders, you're probably lawful.

And I don't mean just "kill babies on my command." I mean "We are allied with the fire nation now. Yes they were just attacking us. We've made peace. Be peaceful" as well. A chaotic evil person probably wouldn't comply, and even a CN or CG person would have issues. Their L- buddies might question it, but they'd do it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to submit to have the word "honor" removed from the paladin's code. The rest of the line can stay, but honor does not always indicate the whole bit about lying, cheating, or not taking advantage of others.

That is a fantasy romanticized idea of what an honorable person might not do, not the reality of what often happened. Especially if the individual were of higher status than someone else.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Honor, Murder are both problematic words in the Code.

Humility is missing.


MuddyVolcano wrote:
Xerres wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Thoughtful Responding Post

Ok, thank you for explaining your view point, honestly appreciate it. It changes my nagging sensation that you don't really give Chaotic much credit, but I do think your interpretation of a Chaotic character is more... rare? It seems harder to be Chaotic than Lawful under those guidelines, to me. But I find its much easier to play Lawful, so I that might skew my viewpoint. Your interpretation of Chaotic may be closer to the mark, but I'm leaning to hard away from it. Not willing to make a judgement call on that.

But alignments are very open to interpretations. I think someone else said they're much more useful as guidelines than straitjackets. So I don't mean to push some view of 'Correct' to what you said, just wanted to understand the view better.

Anyone have a different take? Do people consider planning to be a Lawful thing? I really like to have characters that plan things out in advance. My Samurai had a rivalry with a Barbarian in the party, they really enjoyed fighting each other, but that Barbarian kept getting Natural 20s to beat me every time. In-character, had my Samurai formulate a new training regimen to counter the Barbarian's superb luck, and the next time they dueled, he rolled a Nat 20 on the first attack (AGAIN!), but my Samurai put his plan into action and negated the attack (Readied action to move before he hit me.) and went on to win the fight.

I considered that planning to defeat Luck and the dice themselves to be a very Lawful trait. I would put Improvisation as the Chaotic opposite of a positive trait. But if there's to be any Chaotic equivalent to a Paladin, would need to compile the alignment's positive traits to express.

(For the record, I'm still fine with just saying Any Good on Paladin, but I just like the idea of unique Chaotic Good class more.)

I am finding it very easy to put together powers for an Elite Chaos class, or...

Well, when I think of Paladin... Paladin is the Knight in Shining Armor character. He is that ideal. That shining beacon of goodness and justice. As Paizo has pointed out here, he's wearing heavy armor, he's a knight.

That is the Paladin. Though he IS a beacon of good, he's not really the "Paragon of Good" as you can be a "Paragon of Good" and be Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, or Lawful Good (In fact, personal opinion, a Paragon of good would more likely be Neutral Good) the Paladin is a Paragon, specifically, of the core concept of justice. Fairness, goodness, order, and righteousness.

This doesn't mean justice as the legal terminology.

If there is going to be "Elite Champions" later, there should be one for Good, there should be one for Evil. The Paladin is the Paladin. It is different.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Unless you use that, and take the good with the bad and understand that paladins too can do messed up stuff and still keep their banner in check, so it won't matter if the class remains lawful good.


AnimatedPaper wrote:
Tharasiph wrote:


Someone mentioned Captain Amerca as not being Lawful Good... ummm.. he always acts for the greater good. He went and saved a large group of pow in defiance of what he knew would be his orders as he could no let other be hurt by his inaction. Then he submitted himself for discipline.

He did not believe registration would help so he could not sign it in good conscience. But when the resistance fight grew to such a stature that innocents were getting caught up in it, he surrendered to stop the harm no matter his own views.

That was quite possibly me. I mentioned it recently in A thread anyways.

Capt was moral, yes. He's the epitome of good, But he certainly did not respect authority. Ever. For any reason. He sometimes followed orders (if he agreed with them), but only the ones that let him do what he wanted to do anyways. Like join the army in the first place. Or fight evil as he perceives it. If he had a neutral stance on the orders, it was always clear that he was uncomfortable doing it. Something about following instructions he did not write himself seems to annoy him. Granted, in MCU, he has extremely good reason to distrust any and all authorities, even the ones on his side. Especially the ones on his side.

Edit: I should make it clear I mean MCU Captain America. The only comic versions I've read were the Civil war storyline HWalsh mentioned, and it's been over a decade. We're genuinely talking about two different Captain Amaericas.

I don't really see why people think Chaotic characters always break their word. You can keep your word and remain chaotic. It's not about crossing lines of behavior so much as where your lines come from. If you decide for yourself what is and is not acceptable, you're likely chaotic. If you follow instead the laws of the land, or your church, or your boss, even when you don't understand why the rule exists or remain unconvinced it's the best path but you'll do it anyways because orders, you're probably lawful.

And I don't mean just...

You are also only using the MCU - I was using the Comic Version. The MCU version isn't Captain America.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The comics version also worked for Hydra...


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

My perception of 'Knights in Shining Armor' is rather... shadowed by what they've been like historically, and what has been done to give them good retroactive 'spin' in the last milennia or so.

To tie to that could provoke other references, along with other historical figures that attempted to tie THEIR enforcement arms to such history, usually with problematic results.

As a result, the more that the trope is force-fed, the more my gut and heart fight because it Just doesn't seem Just.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tharasiph wrote:


There is nothing more Honorable than victory.

Someone mentioned Captain Amerca as not being Lawful Good... ummm.. he always acts for the greater good. He went and saved a large group of pow in defiance of what he knew would be his orders as he could no let other be hurt by his inaction. Then he submitted himself for discipline.

He did not believe registration would help so he could not sign it in good conscience. But when the resistance fight grew to such a stature that innocents were getting caught up in it, he surrendered to stop the harm no matter his own views.

Paladins are not perfect, but they do live by their code.

I don't necessarily disagree; along with Michael Carpenter, Captain America would certainly be one of my default examples in defining a Paladin by reference. But...

Captain America wrote:

“Doesn't matter what the press says. Doesn't matter what the politicians or the mobs say. Doesn't matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right.

This nation was founded on one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences. When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world -- "No, YOU move.”

It's been identified as a very Paladin-y thing to say, for obvious reasons, but when you think about it, isn't it a fundamentally Chaotic sentiment? It identifies morality as a deeply individualistic thing, rejecting authority and collective opinion. It says if you need to break the rules to do the right thing, *you break those rules*, because doing what you feel is right is the more important by far.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Unless you use that, and take the good with the bad and understand that paladins too can do messed up stuff and still keep their banner in check, so it won't matter if the class remains lawful good.

Its... Twitchy...

Paladins can't really do messed up stuff and keep their banner in check. Its actually hard to do so. I agonized for hours and hours trying to find a loophole in the current Paladin code and I couldn't find one.

The closest that you come to with, "Messed up stuff" is that if they are in a (very rare) situation where the only way to save someone is to do something evil they are likely to let the person die. The problem is, as one of the devs pointed out, the scenario put forth made no sense and is all but impossible to set up.

I mean, sure...

If the Paladin caught a street urchin stealing food, and the place he was in had strict laws, and the person he stole from was demanding that the child be arrested, the Paladin would arrest the child.

However that isn't likely to be the case.

More likely is the Paladin offering to pay for whatever the child stole, or asking the shop owner for leniency in pressing charges. If the shop owner outright refused, then, yes I see a Paladin turning the kid in. Though that is about as messed up as it gets.

So... Under the current code as laid out in this blog... What messed up stuff do you think they can get away with?


master_marshmallow wrote:
The comics version also worked for Hydra...

Sort of and not really.

Read the comics. He was specifically under the effect of a full reality alteration by a cosmic cube. We can't really blame him for his actions there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I wouldn't call Captain America a paladin.

I'd call him a soldier.

Soldiers have to make tough calls and do things that the average civilian would NEVER dream of doing, on a daily basis.

...and that sometimes means doing really BAD things to people, whether or not they are BAD people, because that's what one has been told to do.


Revan wrote:
Tharasiph wrote:


There is nothing more Honorable than victory.

Someone mentioned Captain Amerca as not being Lawful Good... ummm.. he always acts for the greater good. He went and saved a large group of pow in defiance of what he knew would be his orders as he could no let other be hurt by his inaction. Then he submitted himself for discipline.

He did not believe registration would help so he could not sign it in good conscience. But when the resistance fight grew to such a stature that innocents were getting caught up in it, he surrendered to stop the harm no matter his own views.

Paladins are not perfect, but they do live by their code.

I don't necessarily disagree; along with Michael Carpenter, Captain America would certainly be one of my default examples in defining a Paladin by reference. But...

Captain America wrote:

“Doesn't matter what the press says. Doesn't matter what the politicians or the mobs say. Doesn't matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right.

This nation was founded on one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences. When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world -- "No, YOU move.”

It's been identified as a very Paladin-y thing to say, for obvious reasons, but when you think about it, isn't it a fundamentally Chaotic sentiment? It identifies morality as a deeply individualistic thing, rejecting authority and collective opinion. It says if you need to break the rules to do the right thing, *you break those rules*, because doing what you feel is right is the more important by far.

That isn't chaotic. Though that is the reason why a Paladin *can* ignore the local laws if innocents are going to be hurt by them.

1,501 to 1,550 of 1,735 << first < prev | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Paladin Class Preview All Messageboards