Look up thread, I explained it there. I am not going over it yet again. At this point you can agree or disagree it really does not matter unless we play at the same table.
Your example never showed how it was evil. You only said it was evil and bolded things that also never showed how it was evil. You are assuming that spreading the teachings of an evil god are evil. I specifically pointed out that the paladin in question would only teach people about the good parts. How teaching the good side of something evil. Pointing to the same rules that are being used against you, are not going to make your point.
We understand that James did not intend for pallys to be able to worship evil deities, but he has accepted it as a rule. There is nothing explicily saying a paladin can't worship an evil deity. I think you need to explain in more detail or accept that the rule is there, and DM under Society rulings can't go against the book. They have to go by the book, from what I understand, and since the Asmodeus worshipping pally is supported the player would be correct.PS: I will admit a paladin worshipping an evil deity is beyond what I would allow, but the other good ones should be ok.
stuffs
Please note the different forms of worship and the meaning and context behind them.
Worship varies based on several parts:
1. Reason for veneration/adoration.
2. Means of worship
3. Purpose of the worship.
You might worship a god to ask for something, or to prevent something in addition to simply worshiping to adore (or admire -- this could also include simple thanks for what has been provided that came from his domain *alcohol in the example of Cayden) said god (this would be the purpose of your worship) Just because you have offered pray doesn't make that god your god though -- as I mention in an earlier post it could simply be due respect that a paladin must offer a god since the god is in a place of legitimate authority over the concerned thing. Your reason for doing so could be again as simple as obligation (a paladin's code requires respecting legitimate authority so he might feel obligated to say a pray to Cayden before drinking any alcohol as Cayden is in charge of alcohol per his portfolio), admiration and a desire to emmulate the god (in the case of a paladin worshiping Imodae or Shelyn), a desire to avoid the god's domain (a pray to a god of weather so he doesn't send a storm to wreck the ship you are on) to ask for something from a god (possibly asking calistra for help winning a lady's heart). The method of worship is so varied I'm not even going to attempt to cover them.
Also (again as I pointed out before) the worship might not be othrodox worship. It could be the paladin only focuses on the things he thinks is "right" about the god, and only follows certain passages. We see this every day with religion in the real world -- people claiming that they have the right of it and everyone else is wrong, or others following some parts of a holy book while completely ignoring others, or even completely bending the writings to say something that the worshipper wants it to say. One should never ignore the ability of others to ignore what they don't want to see.
Consider the following definition as well:
source
"wor·ship   /ˈwɜrʃɪp/ Show Spelled [wur-ship] Show IPA noun, verb, -shiped, -ship·ing or ( especially British ) -shipped, -ship·ping.
–noun
1. reverent honor and homage paid to god or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
2. formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage: They attended worship this morning.
3. adoring reverence or regard: excessive worship of business success.
4. the object of adoring reverence or regard.
5. ( initial capital letter ) British . a title of honor used in addressing or mentioning certain magistrates and others of high rank or station (usually prec. by Your, His, or Her ). "
To honor or pay homage. One may honor something without making it central to their lives. One might honor and pay homage to a god not because their heart is in it but as a token of respect to the culture they were raised in.
Finally I would point out that laypersons don't nessecarily know the gods the same way that clergy would. Beyond simple deception there is also selective worship of specific aspects of a deity. A paladin might very much value the idea of freedom -- the right for a person to choose how to live within the laws of the land -- as such he might offer prayers to Cayden to help him preserve freedom and not become too draconian in his laws as to avoid falling into evil through tyranny.
These are points I raised in my earlier posts on this thread -- I'm simply elaborating more now.
People are confusing the abject subjugation of self to another for the term worship -- these things are not the same.
One should never ignore the ability of others to ignore what they don't want to see.
Every religious person I know has parts they give special attention to.
I dated a lady that would not eat pork. I don't think she followed to many other rules closely at all though.
WS, maybe I'll feel like debating this later, but I have pretty much done that all day. If you do not feel it violates the code, cool knock yourself out. For me it is a clear violation and I would call it such. That is really all there is to say about it to be honest.
WS, maybe I'll feel like debating this later, but I have pretty much done that all day. If you do not feel it violates the code, cool knock yourself out. For me it is a clear violation and I would call it such. That is really all there is to say about it to be honest.
I noticed. You can just tell the great and powerful WS he is right. :)
No, darn. I guess it can't be that easy. See ya later.
nah I have been up 36 hours on 4 hours sleep and just do not feel like typing it all out just to go though 2 pages of
" Thats wrong"
"nO, IT'S NOT"
"yES IT IS"
"No it's not"
Maybe after I have had some sleep I'll feel like debating it, but really as my stance will not change and yours will not change all it would be is interesting debate. We may not agree but it normally is food for thought if nothing else.
So maybe later
Allowing LE paladins is not good for the game, in my opinion. Allowing LG paladins to worship a LE deity is only slightly less not good.I do not, ya can't be LG and spread the word of evil and worship evil and stay lawful good. A good person does not spread or worship evil.
And I think James meant he was ok with no one bringing that article up, as he said he would have killed it if he had seen it. If I am wrong he will correct me at some point most likely.
Hey if Blood Elves can be paladins and bring balance to a game then LE Paladins of Asmodeus should totally be able to bring balance to Pathfinder.
>.><.<
*Ducks and runs*
|
At my table you cannot play as a LE Paladin or a LG Paladin with an Evil deity.
Find a table where you can, go have fun. Good luck with that. Really... good luck in finding a group of people who want to play with evil characters in their group.
I doubt you will find those tables at Pathfidner events.
Play through an actual RP event where you are LG person who reveres an Evil God.
The evil church of god "blah" is making sacrifices of innocents in front of you.
What are you going to betray? Your alignment or your deity?
James put it the best. LE Paladins and the whole concept of Evil with Paladins is not good for the game.
I read all these posts and feel dumber for it. How can characters like that be fun? You aren't going to get along with most parties.
Hell, LG characters are annoying enough to get along with.
At my table you cannot play as a LE Paladin or a LG Paladin with an Evil deity.
Find a table where you can, go have fun. Good luck with that. Really... good luck in finding a group of people who want to play with evil characters in their group.
I doubt you will find those tables at Pathfidner events.
Play through an actual RP event where you are LG person who reveres an Evil God.
The evil church of god "blah" is making sacrifices of innocents in front of you.
What are you going to betray? Your alignment or your deity?
James put it the best. LE Paladins and the whole concept of Evil with Paladins is not good for the game.
I read all these posts and feel dumber for it. How can characters like that be fun? You aren't going to get along with most parties.
Hell, LG characters are annoying enough to get along with.
Simply put because some people are capable of role playing complex concepts and not stick to simple overly trite archtypes?
|
Simply put because some people are capable of role playing complex concepts and not stick to simple overly trite archtypes?At my table you cannot play as a LE Paladin or a LG Paladin with an Evil deity.
Find a table where you can, go have fun. Good luck with that. Really... good luck in finding a group of people who want to play with evil characters in their group.
I doubt you will find those tables at Pathfidner events.
Play through an actual RP event where you are LG person who reveres an Evil God.
The evil church of god "blah" is making sacrifices of innocents in front of you.
What are you going to betray? Your alignment or your deity?
James put it the best. LE Paladins and the whole concept of Evil with Paladins is not good for the game.
I read all these posts and feel dumber for it. How can characters like that be fun? You aren't going to get along with most parties.
Hell, LG characters are annoying enough to get along with.
Neither a lawful evil paladin, nor a lawful good paladin who somehow fails to realize his gods dogma is evil or who is so hyperbole that he believes, his actions will change the ways of his god are necessarily complex concepts. They can be, but so can a lawful good paladin who follows a god of chivalry and honor. Complexity more often is found in the details of the character then in obviously paradox choices.
|
|
However, those paradox choices can often allow for a greater dramatic range than basic character concepts. Additionally, for experienced gamers they can be a welcome breath of fresh air to explore a new and previously unvisited part of character landscape :p
It's a game, and each table plays it a bit differently because each table has a different construction of unique personalities contributing to the story.
There's no saying that it's right or wrong to play a character a certain way. It's not absolute. The morality of the game, much like that of society, is a composite of the people participating. I've played evil games where the players agreed not to pass a certain point against other players, and the players involved were suited to play and enjoy that scenario. I've also gamed with folks who could have never enjoyed that scenario, so the table ran a different one.
Frankly, everyone just wants acknowledgement that their point of view is a valid one even though it might not be shared by everyone. Within subjective discussions, everyone has a valid point of view. Except that one guy. You know who you are.
:D
At my table you cannot play as a LE Paladin or a LG Paladin with an Evil deity.
Find a table where you can, go have fun. Good luck with that. Really... good luck in finding a group of people who want to play with evil characters in their group.
I doubt you will find those tables at Pathfidner events.
Play through an actual RP event where you are LG person who reveres an Evil God.
The evil church of god "blah" is making sacrifices of innocents in front of you.
What are you going to betray? Your alignment or your deity?
James put it the best. LE Paladins and the whole concept of Evil with Paladins is not good for the game.
I read all these posts and feel dumber for it. How can characters like that be fun? You aren't going to get along with most parties.
Hell, LG characters are annoying enough to get along with.
Thats easy. You stop the sacrifice because that is what is morally right. You prove you have more power than the church, and therefore your will is the right one, thus following Asmodeous teachings. You then give worship and prayer to him in a way that is not morally objectionable.
And that is spreading evil and helping evil to harm folks which breaks the code. But as always your free to rule it otherwise
Most of the time a devil's evil works in the background so a paladin of Asmodeus would not be out slaughtering villages(insert other evil act as needed). He would be out promoting Asmodeus "good name".
He's not ruling anything otherwise, you are. He's playing by the written word of the game.
|
I think the main problem of the paladin worshiping Asmodeus is: since he worship the god, he should estimate that the authority of the god and his clergy are legitimate (or, he wouldn't be a worshiper). Since it's a legitimate authority, he must obey, or fall. And since the god and the clergy are Evil, he will probably be asked to do Evil stuff, and fall.
It's probably possible, but as I see it, the paladin will eventually fall one day or another; or change faith.
It's probably more easy to worship a chaotic deity (be it Good or Evil), because by their nature, those deities don't ask you very much. Cayden Cailean or Desna don't demand their followers to always challenge authority or to follow the orders of their clergy, but only to be kind, to help people if you can, to promote freedom, and so on: a paladin can do that without contradicting his code. He can have some difficulties if he travels in an anarchist land under the patronage of those divinities, and sees how his ideal and the ideal of his deity diverge, but he's far from condemned to fall.
Acutally since asmodeus isn't intelligence 5 and since he can have lawful neutral people worship him as clerics, he actually has churches and ministries that get this, encourage the rule of law and don't partake in slaughter or ritual sacrifice. Promoting order and enforcing contracts so that a just and lawful society can flourish under a strong leader as according to the will of Asmodeus, who doesn't actually think its necessary that all his worshipers be baby eating a!!~#%&s. Under one of his lawful neutral churches a paladin could work and while he'll have temptation and probably need to seek the occasional redemption when he feels that one law or the others enforcement causes some harm, but it's justifiable because of what goes wrong when society turns away from the rule of law (fighting the greater evil as he sees it). In fact having said paladin in their ranks makes the LN church stronger, and can in fact take dominance over the LE churches (which he can't outright fight because they have legitimate authority) in a lawful manner. At which point since they've proven their strength they can force the LE churches to quash their more distastful practices, all while being both completely within the desires and promotions of Asmodeus who's happy to see the law twisted in such ways and admires the paladin for his strength. In fact the paladin could internally be hoping that through his example he leads the church and by extension possibly Asmodeus himself to become paragons of Law (in otherwords LN).
While Asmodeus truly knows that all he needs is three or four generations for the bureaucracy of the church to become corrupt and bloated, twisting itself back to LE while in the meantime his churchs ranks have swelled from three generations of people seeing him as the ultimate arbiter of law.
Is this really a debate on whether a paladin can worship an Evil or Chaotic God (Forgotten Realms had a lot of exceptions, I know)? "Official" does not equal "Right".
However, there are always exceptions to every rule and such exceptions should be worked out between said player(s) and GM. I may not personally allow a paladin to take an evil or chaotic Deity, but I wouldn't excuse myself from a game where a GM did so.
Acutally since asmodeus isn't intelligence 5 and since he can have lawful neutral people worship him as clerics, he actually has churches and ministries that get this, encourage the rule of law and don't partake in slaughter or ritual sacrifice. Promoting order and enforcing contracts so that a just and lawful society can flourish under a strong leader as according to the will of Asmodeus, who doesn't actually think its necessary that all his worshipers be baby eating a&&@%@%s. Under one of his lawful neutral churches a paladin could work and while he'll have temptation and probably need to seek the occasional redemption when he feels that one law or the others enforcement causes some harm, but it's justifiable because of what goes wrong when society turns away from the rule of law (fighting the greater evil as he sees it). In fact having said paladin in their ranks makes the LN church stronger, and can in fact take dominance...I think the main problem of the paladin worshiping Asmodeus is: since he worship the god, he should estimate that the authority of the god and his clergy are legitimate (or, he wouldn't be a worshiper). Since it's a legitimate authority, he must obey, or fall. And since the god and the clergy are Evil, he will probably be asked to do Evil stuff, and fall.
It's probably possible, but as I see it, the paladin will eventually fall one day or another; or change faith.
It's probably more easy to worship a chaotic deity (be it Good or Evil), because by their nature, those deities don't ask you very much. Cayden Cailean or Desna don't demand their followers to always challenge authority or to follow the orders of their clergy, but only to be kind, to help people if you can, to promote freedom, and so on: a paladin can do that without contradicting his code. He can have some difficulties if he travels in an anarchist land under the patronage of those divinities, and sees how his ideal and the ideal of his deity diverge, but he's far from condemned to fall.
I would even argue the Asmodeous would encourage infighting between his churches. Like the early Sith, before the rule of 2 was implemented, the infighting breeds strength. There is likely some mechanism for these conflicts, since it is a lawful group. In his churches, the legitemate authority is the one who has the most power. It is not against their beliefs to challenge those in power to try to put yourself ahead. As such, the Paladin is not breaking his oath by challenging them.
It's actually the reverse, the God should be within one step of the Paladin, since the Paladin doesn't have a choice on alignments. Or even more cogently, only certain dieties will sponsor paladins and the dieties in principle should be of an alignment that would not preclude the Paladin from associating with at least some of thier clerics.Should does not mean must however. A Neutral god can be amenable to a Lawful Good character. Now, the question is "does the word 'follow' mean 'must be the same alignment as' according to the rules?" I posit no, since clerics can follow a god while being one step different from it in alignment. Since there is no such step rule for paladins and gods, it is open to interpretation.This really should be a no brainer. A Paladin is not an ordinary worshiper, she represents a significant investment in divine energy and support. So a diety sponsoring a Paladin should be one that has an active interest in promoting not only Paladin-type activities, but a Paladin's mindset as well.
And no matter how you twist it, Asmodeus is not one of those type of gods. Whatever reason you might give for him sponsoring a Paladin, he could acheive those ends in other ways without contaminating his embodiment to domination, corruption of the good, and tyranny. It's one thing to be clever and subtle, it's another to be wilfully self-destructive, and he does not play that way.
Except as shown by the fact that the campaign setting states that there are non-god-worshipping paladins than god-worshipping paladins of many gods who could sponcer them, your assessment must be false. The Paladin who vernerates Asmodeous doesn't have to even be drawing his power from the god.
"Paladins worship many different deities. The most common
is Iomedae, the ascended goddess of valor and justice. Erastil
commands the obedience of a great many holy warriors,
particularly those who uphold justice for the common folk.
Paladins of Torag are highly sought as military commanders.
Adventuring paladins often spread the word of Sarenrae, the
goddess of the sun, honesty, healing, and redemption—for
paladins often seek adventure as a form of penance. Some
paladins serve Abadar, Irori, or Shelyn, but paladins who
serve no specific god are actually more common."
|
This really should be a no brainer. A Paladin is not an ordinary worshiper, she represents a significant investment in divine energy and support. So a diety sponsoring a Paladin should be one that has an active interest in promoting not only Paladin-type activities, but a Paladin's mindset as well.And no matter how you twist it, Asmodeus is not one of those type of gods. Whatever reason you might give for him sponsoring a Paladin, he could acheive those ends in other ways without contaminating his embodiment to domination, corruption of the good, and tyranny. It's one thing to be clever and subtle, it's another to be wilfully self-destructive, and he does not play that way.
Where did I mention Asmodeus in there? My argument is that a Neutral god would not be so far removed from a LG paladins views as to be incompatible. Other people are arguing for Asmodean paladins, I'm going off of James' "two steps on the same axis" point. Neutral is only one step on two axis, which makes a difference.
My argument is that a Neutral god would not be so far removed from a LG paladins views as to be incompatible. Other people are arguing for Asmodean paladins, I'm going off of James' "two steps on the same axis" point. Neutral is only one step on two axis, which makes a difference.
Two steps away does make a difference, even if it is going from LG to N rather than LG to LE or LG to CG. When you take that additional step away from the LG alignment, you are losing all semblence of common ground. When looking at compatibility between LN and LG, they share the common belief that a civil structure based on just laws and order is the best thing for everyone. When looking at LG and NG, they have in common the fight for good, typically characterized by opposition to evil in all forms. Lawful Good and True Neutral do not have any form of common ground between them that would support a relationship as strong as that of a diety and his/her champion.
Yes, but we are not talking about moderation here. We are talking about fanaticism. Zealot level adherence to the defense and advancement of ideals, not just a live and let live attitude.
Zealot level adherence to the defense and advancement of ideals, not just a live and let live attitude.
This does not describe a Paladin. If it did, Paladins would fall for performing any non-Good or non-Lawful act, rather than for performing Evil acts.
He's not ruling anything otherwise, you are. He's playing by the written word of the game.
And I am playing as written. I see a violation of the written code and ruled on it. If you do not see that violation then fine. You can rule however you like in games you run.
This does not describe a Paladin. If it did, Paladins would fall for performing any non-Good or non-Lawful act, rather than for performing Evil acts.
I respectfully disagree. A paladin is willing to kill and die in defense of the ideals of Law and Good with no ulterior motive. I know in this day and age words like fanatic and zealot usually have a negative connotation and perhaps I should have taken that into account in my other post.
I agree with markofbane here, Paladins absolutely do fall for doing non-good or non-lawful actions, it may not be immediate (depending on the action), but as soon as they slip from Law or Good, they are not LG, and as such they have fallen. So a paladin may never have done an evil thing in his life, but if he breaks flouts the ideas of law (of legitimate authority) he can still stop being a Paladin.
Nuetrality is not a true state its an inbetween state. Its a balance between law and chaos, and good and evil which are the the black and white of each axis, or true states. So a non-lawful action is Chaos, and a non-good again it Evil.
Paladins absolutely do fall for doing non-good or non-lawful actions
Incorrect. Hell, Paladins don't even fall for doing Chaotic actions.
Nuetrality [sic] is not a true state its an inbetween state.
Utterly false.
This does not describe a Paladin. If it did, Paladins would fall for performing any non-Good or non-Lawful act, rather than for performing Evil acts.
This depends on what you mean by a non-good act. If you mean something as mundane as falling for eating breakfast because it isn't inherently good, then that's a bit extreme. But if you mean failing to intervene when a monster attacks a family, yes. You are good, and you are lawful. You take sides. Neutrality generally allows that it is okay to not take sides without a particular motivation.
Incorrect. Hell, Paladins don't even fall for doing Chaotic actions.
The rules say "A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features." If by Chaotic actions you mean deliberately taking actions that undermine a lawful, legitamite government, then yes, they would fall by my interpretation. They are required by the code to be lawful good. If they cease to do so, they fall.
As a personal aside, I disagree with this. I think the paladin class would be better suited as Neutral Good, but this overall discussion is about RAW, not homebrew re-writes of classes.
Nevermind its an argument for another post.
This does not describe a Paladin. If it did, Paladins would fall for performing any non-Good or non-Lawful act, rather than for performing Evil acts.This depends on what you mean by a non-good act. If you mean something as mundane as falling for eating breakfast because it isn't inherently good, then that's a bit extreme. But if you mean failing to intervene when a monster attacks a family, yes. You are good, and you are lawful. You take sides. Neutrality generally allows that it is okay to not take sides without a particular motivation.
No, what I mean is that Paladins actually have choices to make. The way you present them, they don't. By your interpretation, playing a Paladin is the most boring thing ever, because they MUST take the Lawful Good route, period, or they fall.
That interpretation is, rightly, not backed up by the text. Paladins do have choices. They can choose to take the Neutral route and, for example, allow the evil Vizier to be devoured by his own too-powerful conjuration rather than step in and save him (which would be the Good route).
Incorrect. Hell, Paladins don't even fall for doing Chaotic actions.The rules say "A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features." If by Chaotic actions you mean deliberately taking actions that undermine a lawful, legitamite government, then yes, they would fall by my interpretation. They are required by the code to be lawful good. If they cease to do so, they fall.
I'm not sure how you got that out of what I wrote, but whatever. What I mean by a Chaotic act is ... a Chaotic act. Not plotting to overthrow a legitimate government (although, actually, that IS allowed, or Paladins would be utterly screwed in Curse of the Crimson Throne), but rather more mundane things like freeing slaves or breaking a law to save an innocent. Note that Paladins do not fall for "willfully committing a chaotic or evil act", only for "willfully committing an evil act". Occasional chaos is permitted. Occasional evil is strictly prohibited.
|
|
It's a shame to me to see so many GMs shutting down Paladins right away if they support a deity that is more than a step away from them. Frankly, I think the ability of a Paladin to support any deity is one of the things that makes the class so great.
First off, they aren't Clerics. They aren't really a member of the Clergy. Frankly, they don't even have to be a Champion of said god. They are, ultimately, a shining example of all that is Lawful and Good. Whatever god they choose to worship is up to them, and so long as they act lawful and good while doing it, the options are pretty open.
Let's cover some of the non-Evil gods first that happen to be more than one step away from LG.
Gorum - An LG paladin of Gorum is a force on the battlefield. He is at the fore-front of the action, slaying demons left and right, a whirling dervish of weapons. This is one of the easiest ones for me to see, especially in a location like the Worldwound. A place where there is constant battle, constant struggle, what Paladin wouldn't want the support of the God of Battle himself against these vile demons? So what if the priest-hood of Gorum is a chaotic mess, this Paladin will bring some order to the chaos. As for Gorum, Gorum just loves battle, why wouldn't he support the Paladin?
Cayden Cailean - This one is even easier than Gorum. A wandering adventurer, set to make matters right and uphold justice, all while loving the ladies and having a swig of beer. How hard is that? Lawful does not have to mean 'Stuck up and no fun', you can very well make a Lawful character who still can go for a roll in the hay and enjoy a drink. He might be more liken to the monogomous relationship or staying around with one woman instead of nightly flings, but it's by no means impossible.
Gozreh - "Blake", you say, "this is ridiculous. Gozreh is basically the god/goddess of Druids, and nature needs a neutral stance. How in the world can a Paladin be a patron of nature?" In my opinion, the same reason a Druid can be LN or NG. The Paladin isn't a Druid, and might even lean towards a Neutral outlook on both of these while still being Lawful and Good. The elvish warrior that hides in the trees, benevolenting protecting his woods from those who would harm it. He respects and loves the plants, and though he is a bit uncomfortable by the chaos that nature can bring, he tries to keep order within it. He builds dams to guide the river away from his home, a house to keep him dry in the torrents, but ultimately he is there to protect nature.
Those are just three, and there are *plenty* more I can see Paladins of. As for the Evil gods, while I definitely could not see a Paladin of Rovagug, I can see Paladins of Asmodeus easily. Pretty much for the reasons in the article. Asmodeus IS the deceiver, he is the KING of devils and cunning. For him *not* to have a few paladins that support him would be harder for me to believe then a Paladin of Asmodeus at all. I think of the same reason Paladins exist in the Hellknights. They are Good individuals, of course, but Champions of Law. They hold people honor bound to their contracts, keep order amongst the clergy, and are not afraid to draw swords if someone tries to break the law. Why wouldn't Asmodeus like this? And surely there are some Paladins who, while being LG, can see the merits in supporting Asmodeus. As others have said, maybe he has a bad rap, and these Priests that do blood baths are not what his clergy should have. Maybe they wish to change things for the better?
In the end, the Paladin doesn't know what alignment his deity is. For all we know, Paladins of Asmodeus could think he is LN, with most of the clergy having been on the Evil side of things. Maybe thanks to the House of Thrune? Who knows?
To all of you who would instantly shoot down a Paladin of Asmodeus, of Gorum, of any god that is more then one step away, I say: give your players a chance. Let them explain their background, see how they roleplay in game. If, in the end, they still manage to be LG while supporting a deity so far away from their own alignment, I say applaud them! You have some fine players at your table.
Lastly, to those who would shoot down someone like this but in a Society game? I think that running a 4 hour game for people you might not even know means you should be even *more* open to strange concepts then usual. I would hate to see someone turn a Paladin of Gorum away from their table at a convention just because Gorum is CN, without having seen the player play. That just sounds absolutely horrid to me.
I think I've said enough for now. :) That is all!
It's a shame to me that it seems many on here want to play Non-LG paladins , while still claiming they are lawful good. KK, I would not allow any of the paladins you listed just there as each and every one would not be LG.
If you guys wish to make paladins any AL like a cleric go ahead. But do not be surprised when a GM outright says no as your trying to twist the rules and bypass the LG restriction.
You really can not be devote and faithful to a god so removed from your moral and ethical ideas that you have nothing in common with that god.
CC is a classic example, you never fall, congrats you made a CG paladin as your god does not care if you brake most of your code, hell he doesn't care if you have a code. He would not care how you done the good deed, just that you got it done for the most part.
Same with the big A, he is evil..stay kinda lawful and ignore any part of the code you want, as he does not care as long as you serve him and you never fall. Why would he ever strip you of your power as long as you serve him? An ex=paladin is no good to him, he has your soul anyhow so he would never allow you to fall. Yay, you made a LE paladin or a LN paladin.
Very simply , if a god is to far from LG, he really would not punish you for breaking a code he would never think of following himself.
Just because a paladin is required to behave in a Lawful Good manner doesn't mean they don't have any choices. Still, it is a challenging class to play for just that reason. I like the example you provide of the evil vizier. I wouldn't consider it a neutral act to let the summoned evil to devour the vizier. By their code, paladins must help those in need provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents. The vizier is on his own, but the paladin would do his best to make sure the conjured beastie didn't harm any innocents.
A single Chaotic act would probably not cause a fall, but a single Evil act would. If the character is regularly Chaotic, then the DM should rule that they are not actually lawful good, but neutral good or chaotic good. If they cease to be lawful good, bye bye paladinhood.
The emphasis in the mechanics of the paladin class have always implied that they are really champions of good, period. That is why I said in an early post I really think the class should be required to be good, but not have a limitation on the lawful-chaotic axis. They have Detect Evil, not Detect Evil/Chaos. They have Smite Evil, not Smite Evil/Chaos. I am only arguing the Law/Chaos element because that is currently how the class is designed. I can't help but wonder if there is anything coming in the APG that may alleviate this.
And I am not familiar with the CotCT AP; I have not read it or played it yet. However, I know not all APs are suited for all classes; in the Second Darkness campaign I just started, we were warned that a paladin would be nearly impossible to get through some situations in the AP with paladinhood intact.
Round and round we smurf, where we smurf, nobody smurfs.
|
|
Again, I am not supporting a Paladin that acts CG while claiming to be something else. I *am* supporting Paladins that can be Lawful and Good while still supporting or worshiping a different kind of God. You seem to keep thinking that Paladins need to give as much support as Clerics do. They do not. It never is said that they do. They are, at their core, exemplars of Law and Good, and also happen to give homage to a god. They don't have to like everything about them or even preach all of it, that's the cleric's job. The Paladin might only like one or two aspects of a god really.
And in the end, *it doesn't hurt anyone*. If the player can still act Lawful and Good, and that is the BIGGEST thing here, then what does it matter who he claims to worship? Just pretend he's getting his powers from a more supportive LG god if you really want, what does it matter? The Paladin may think he's supporting Cayden Cailean and giving thanks to the God of Heroes when it's really just Iomedae helping him out.
Frankly, I'd just be happy with a player that could actually be an LG hero without falling to the common LG tropes (Lawful Stupid, etc.). Saying flat out that a character can not be LG while supporting a CG or CN god is just wrong. A priest? Sure. A paladin? They aren't the same. If a Fighter can be LG and support Gorum, I see no reason why a Paladin cannot.
The book defines Paladins as LG. They cannot be anything but.
The book defines all the major deities as per their indicated alignment.
The book is mostly unbiased and true neutral (lol).
Ergo, paladins and gods are sized up with the exact same methods.
A paladin follows his god's views completely. RAW, a paladin is always LG. Ergo, he would never stray from his god's view, as he is lawful to his god; a paladin will always be good and helpful to his god. Ergo, he is LG to his god.
BUT TO THE BOOK, that paladin will ALWAYS match his god's alignment
The book is the final judge when it comes to alignment. It is the true god, and it judges everyone and gives everyone an alignment. And to the book, anyone worshiping a god entirely shares the god's alignment.
And by that same argument, therefore, since a Paladin must be LG, it cannot follow any god but an LG god. If it is anything else, it is no longer a Paladin.
|
|
A paladin follows his god's views completely.
This is what I take issue with. Where, oh where, does it say this?
The thing to keep in mind is, Paladins are *not* clerics. They are not necessarily even members of the main Faith. They champion Law, they champion Good, and they fight evil. That is what the Paladin is.
Paizo opened up the Paladin more by re-defining their Code, it's not nearly as restrictive as it used to be. When I see people trying to put the shackles back on, it hurts.
And by that same argument, therefore, since a Paladin must be LG, it cannot follow any god but an LG god. If it is anything else, it is no longer a Paladin.
I would disagree with that, as clerics can be at lest one step and remain LG and a cleric of their god, paladins would have at lest the same amount of leeway.
A paladin follows his god's views completely.This is what I take issue with. Where, oh where, does it say this?
I agree they would not always follow all the gods views, however they would need to see eye to eye on alot of it or they would not have enough common with that god to deem them worthy of devotion.
I mean Paladins can respect a CG god, but while they see some good things in that god they would not agree with most of how that god operates or understand his view point. As his view point is just to far removed from their own.
|
|
A paladin follows his god's views completely.This is what I take issue with. Where, oh where, does it say this?I agree they would not always follow all the gods views, however they would need to see eye to eye on alot of it or they would not have enough common with that god to deem them worthy of devotion.
I mean Paladins can respect a CG god, but while they see some good things in that god they would not agree with most of how that god operates or understand his view point. As his view point is just to far removed from their own.
So what? Who says the Paladin *knows* the God that intimately? Sure the Paladin knows what the priests and clergy tend to portray him as, maybe the Paladin thinks that's incorrect. Maybe this LG warrior of Cayden thinks the clergy has become too chaotic and dreams of a different church, a more orderly group, that would celebrate his heroicness without being lost in a drunken revelry. A Paladin of CC does not have to get smashed all the time, he could enjoy the art of beer like a wine-taster does, and still have the drive to go on heroic adventures and quash evil. That seems perfectly CC to me.
Possibilities!
It says in the Pathfinder Wiki, which I believe is drawn from Paizo sourcebooks, that Gorum “concerns himself with few matters outside of battle, and this attitude extends to include his relations with other deities. He sees little value in matters of diplomacy and politics, considering the pursuits of his divine peers as frivolous a best. The Lord in Iron is considered brash and impulsive; he takes what he wants, by force if necessary, and answers any direct opposition to his will with violence.”
So, yeah, there is a BIG problem with a Lawful Good paladin supporting this kind of world view.
And where does it say that if you are Lawful Good that you are monogamous or prohibited from drinking? A paladin of Erastil or Shelyn may be monogamous, and a paladin of Irori may not drink, but most paladins, why not?
I disagree, you could now brake you code with zero ill effect , congrats on your non-LG paladin. As if CC is giving you your power he could give a rats ass about a Lawful good code. Do things he agrees with and to hell with that restrictive code as he would not approve of or follow it.
The gods world view simply does not match LG and is why you do not see LG folks worshiping CC. His views are just to far removed from what a LG person finds "right", they may respect him and give him lip service but just do not agree with how he views things.
And where does it say that if you are Lawful Good that you are monogamous or prohibited from drinking? A paladin of Erastil or Shelyn may be monogamous, and a paladin of Irori may not drink, but most paladins, why not?
I agree here. I can make 5 LG paladins, all of the same god and non of them act the same. That is like saying all clerics must act just alike or all CG rangers must be the same.
|
|
It says in the Pathfinder Wiki, which I believe is drawn from Paizo sourcebooks, that Gorum “concerns himself with few matters outside of battle, and this attitude extends to include his relations with other deities. He sees little value in matters of diplomacy and politics, considering the pursuits of his divine peers as frivolous a best. The Lord in Iron is considered brash and impulsive; he takes what he wants, by force if necessary, and answers any direct opposition to his will with violence.”
So, yeah, there is a BIG problem with a Lawful Good paladin supporting this kind of world view.
And again, like I have been saying, there is *nothing* that says a Paladin needs to fully support the deity in every way, shape, or form. He is not a priest! Clerics have the alignment restriction for a reason, but Paladins != clerics. Frankly, if I were a Paladin constantly fighting the demon scourge in the World wound, I would see great merits in asking the Lord of BATTLE for aid. I fully believe that you can play a believable Lawful and Good character while still worshiping Gorum.
Let's take a young man that grows up watching the mercenaries and knights fighting demons. To him, Gorum is just a god that supports those strong in battle. This kid grows up to be full of honor, goodness, and all the stuff that makes a Paladin. He also worships Gorum, wanting his blessing in the endless combat against these Demons.
Remember, citizens of Golarion don't get to read the wiki!
And where does it say that if you are Lawful Good that you are monogamous or prohibited from drinking? A paladin of Erastil or Shelyn may be monogamous, and a paladin of Irori may not drink, but most paladins, why not?
It doesn't. I only included those because saying that a Paladin 'slept around, drank all the time, etc.' may have caused more people to cry foul then not. I can see either.
Here's a final question. Can you see an LG Fighter or Rogue supporting/worshiping Gorum? If so, why not a Paladin? If not... well, no point in me arguing anymore then, there's just no way to see eye to eye.
Here's a final question. Can you see an LG Fighter or Rogue supporting/worshiping Gorum? If...
Great question. I would answer it No. The idea of taking what you want, by force if necessary, is a chaotic neutral tenant, and no lawful good individual would stand for it. And I dare say, stand in the way if they tried.
It is one thing to not see eye to eye on everything and not be a big booster of this or that, it is another entirely for it to be something you are vehemently opposed to.