How close does a paladin's alignment have to be to his god's?
I was looking at ol' Cayden Cailean and thinking that his "brave adventurer" schtick would be a good hook for a paladin until you factor in that whole "chaotic" business.
Assuming I could come up with a way to roleplay a lawful character following a chaotic god, would this fly mechanically? Are paladins held by any sort of "one-step" rule for alignment?
Well by the rules it must be one step..however FR there was one exception to this,That being paladins of Sune the Goddess of love who was CG, she did however have them.
Now I am not so sure on cyden. As well he is good...but also a drunkard and he goes to excess often and alot. that really does not jive with paladins who have a strict code.
Now I have no issues with a paladin of bravery but I myself just would not allow it. Of all the CG and CN gods I can see Desna being the exception to the rules and having a small sect of paladins far more then I ever could Cyden
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Not as far as I am aware. I don't think there have ever been any kind of 'one-step" restrictions on a Paladin.
I myself played a Paladin/Rogue of Desna for a while. He upheld the law valiantly, but yearned for travel and because of his rural village background he could be accomodating as to how the law was interpreted.
I think as long as you can find a way to uphold the tenets of Paladinhood and reconcile them with an aspect of your chosen Deity then by all means go for it.
The only Deific Alignments I would forbid a Paladin from worshipping are Chaotic Neutral, Chaotic Evil, Neutral Evil and to a lesser extent Lawful Evil.
Lawful Good and Lawful Neutral Deities would obviously be the preferred choices, but I could just as easily see Neutral Good (especially for someone like Sarenrae)and also wouldn't have a problem with Chaotic Good or Neutral.
Get Green Ronin's "The Book of the Righteous" and adapt it to the Pathfinder rules. They are called Holy Warriors instead of Paladins and it is an awesome book.
-- david
Papa.DRB
well as I said above yeah it is one step meaning LG,LN or NG. By the rules CG gods are out however like Sune exceptions do happen. It really comes down to 1. Will my GM allow this and 2. Does this fit with the god? will this god work with LG paladin order?
The one to me that would work to me seems to be Desna.
|
Well by the rules it must be one step.Seeker can you point out where in the rules it says this? I just read through the Beta Rules on Paladins and I can find no such rule for this in there? I may have missed it though in my haste.
I suspect it's generalised from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. That says they have to be within one step and specifically call Sune out as an exception.
Given the rules for Clerics and the above, I think most people just assume it applies to Paladins, too. It certainly makes sense if it does. If you're going to worship a God and draw power from them, you have to be fairly compatible. If you worship bravery as a philosophy you have more leeway, but we've had contradictory hints on whether that's allowed in Golarion.
Well it is not In the beta. It is in 3.5 and may have been cut out or just left out.
However paladins come in 2 versions. Those that drawl power from force of belief and those that do so from gods. Now as a cleric who get his power from a god must be one step It was thought that a paladin who gets his power from gods must also be one step.
Now this may be gone, but If a god grants you your power why would they hold you to any less a requirement then they do their own clergy?
edit: ninjaed
If you worship bravery as a philosophy you have more leeway, but we've had contradictory hints on whether that's allowed in Golarion.Well paladins seem to be allowed that leeway , clerics do not seemed to be given it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Well it is not in the Beta. It is in 3.5 and may have been cut out or just left out.
I'm sorry to disagree with you and Paul, but I just went back and re-read the 3.5 entry as well and it doesn't say it in there either. The closest I can find to this simply states that most Paladins who choose a particular religion follow Heironeous (LG) but some follow Pelor (NG). Nowhere does it implicitly state that they must be within "one-step" of their Deity's Alignment.
As I said, I may have missed it in my haste, so if you can point out exactly where it says this in the 3.5 Rulebook it would be appreciated. :)
No I could be wrong and prob am really, I think Paul had the right of it and it is from the FRCS. but if clerics must be one step away then godly paladins would also fallow this rule..one would think.
Edit. Paladins do not have to fallow a god, and much like godless clerics would not have to worry with one step. However if a god is granting the ability then I think you would have to fallow this one step. I mean really why would a god give a paladin more leeway then any other cleric?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
If a god is granting you spells and ability as part of his clergy why would he allow you to be more steps away then his other clergy?
I can see your point and even agree with you to a degree, but I also see a Paladin standing outside the Orthadox Clergy and as such they can follow a Deity of their choosing, as long as they can reconcile the Paladin Code with some aspect of the God's teachings. A Cleric is direct conduit of his Deity's Divine Power and as such must have the corresponding alignment, Paladins follow their own code which they then use to justify their place within a Deity's service.
So while it does make sense in theory, both from a rules perspective and from a semi-logical perspective they could possibly Worship another Aligned Deity. I would therefore quite readily allow a Paladin of Cayden, providing that his reasoning for following that particular Deity was, for instance, because of the Bravery aspect.
|
|
If a god is granting you spells and ability as part of his clergy why would he allow you to be more steps away then his other clergy?I can see your point and even agree with you to a degree, but I also see a Paladin standing outside the Orthadox Clergy and as such they can follow a Deity of their choosing, as long as they can reconcile the Paladin Code with some aspect of the God's teachings. A Cleric is direct conduit of his Deity's Divine Power and as such must have the corresponding alignment, Paladins follow their own code which they then use to justify their place within a Deity's service.
So while it does make sense in theory, both from a rules perspective and from a semi-logical perspective they could possibly Worship another Aligned Deity. I would therefore quite readily allow a Paladin of Cayden, providing that his reasoning for following that particular Deity was, for instance, because of the Bravery aspect.
That explains why he worships Cayden. Why does Cayden grant him powers when he's directly opposed to the deity's province of freedom?
Ok have found the rule and yeah it was indeed the FRCS. The only ones we have from the PHB are LG and NG which kinda rules out LN.
So no hard and fast rules officially more like guide lines. But a paladin does not have to have a god. If they do I myself will hold them to the same rules. They took that route.
So yeah to me the one step would be needed. However their are some gods who like Sune and I would say Desna would take a LG order. See even among the more chaotic orders sometimes order does fit.
I really can not see Cyden he just clashes to much I think but I will agree Desna would be an interesting fit. So really what I am getting at is for me one step is a hard rule, however there are always exceptions if it fits.
That explains why he worships Cayden. Why does Cayden grant him powers when he's directly opposed to the deity's province of freedom?
This. He clashes to much with the god. He matches one part but not the greater ones.
Probably the confusion on what gods a paladin can follow comes from the cleric alignment restriction where they must be within one step of their deity ...
Which harkens back to the notion that paladins do get their spells from their deity, but that's a personal preference, not a RAW :)
I have a player playing a Paladin of Cayden Cailean in my CotCT campaign. The character is great - while he definitely upholds law and good, he also enjoys being brave/foolhardy and of course, alcohol. I wouldn't say that all CG dieties are appropriate for Paladins, but I think Cayden Cailean is. For example, you say that his "freedom" aspect is incompatible with the paladin's code. I disagree (as long as the paladin is not Lawful Stupid). This character in my campaign wants everyone to have freedom, but that doesn't include being evil and such - I hardly think Cayden Cailean is proposing freedom to be evil either. Paladins don't have to be so pig-headed that they expect everyone else to follow their moral code. See the Roy/Miko conversation for further explanation.
To summarize: I'd allow paladins of certain CG dieties. It would be on a case-by-case basis. I'd also check the player's motivations as well. If he wants to play a CG paladin and use a CG diety as an excuse, I wouldn't allow that.
Nobody remembers the paladin of freedom?
What about slaughter and tyranny?
They were all "introduced" (I'm pretty sure there are 2nd ed. examples of all these) in Unearthed Arcana, IIRC.
Not really paladins so we don't count em :)
He was asking about LG paladin having a CG god. It really comes down to the GM
The listed gods of the setting are
The most common
Iomedae=LG
Erastil=LG
Torag=LG
Sarenrae=NG
Abadar=LN
Irori=LN
Shelyn=NG
Or lists no god. So that would seem to use the one step. But as always exceptions happen
Another thing how often does someone worship a god they do not have the same AL with? when was the last time a CN NPC worshiped a LG god? or a LG fallowing a CN or NE one?
People tend to fallow gods they have morals and an outlook matching.
Not really paladins so we don't count em :)
Pshaw!
Paladin
noun
2. A strong supporter or defender of a cause: “the paladin of plain speaking” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.).
He was asking about LG paladin having a CG god.
Was he? I figured he was just unfamiliar with variant paladins who would serve such a god.
Another thing how often does someone worship a god they do not have the same AL with? when was the last time a CN NPC worshiped a LG god? or a LG fallowing a CN or NE one?
All the time! Following a god you agree with on everything is boring. I like to either have an ideal that I have to struggle towards/against or a conflict between my warm heart and pragmatic mind. ;)
I'd usually resort to the Divine Champion PrC from FR, based on the fluff that it's justified that Paladins, being required to be LG (the hardest alignment to play right), be more powerful than holy warriors of less restrictive alignments.
However, given PF's objetive of linear class equality, then I see no point in holding on to alignment restrictions, kill the sacred cow.
Yep, I was asking about LG paladins. It's an idea I had for a Pathfinder Society character but wasn't sure it was rules-legal.
Roleplaying-wise, the lawful side of the alignment is most often described as a personal code of honor rather than a tyrannical obsession with ruling others. Modeling off of the Three Musketeers, fer instance, I can easily see how a person could be LG and still believe in what Cayden has to say.
In fact, his Second Darkness write-up describes how strongly he fights against injustice. That's a very paladin-friendly concept.
I guess I could wait the couple months until the Pathfinder book is released. If it doesn't specifically limit a paladin's alignment, then I'm golden.
If nothing else, I'm looking forward to using his lay on hands ability and describing how it burns like a good bourbon.
Well rules legal maybe setting legal? Not really. The setting gives you a list of godly paladins and gives you the option to not be godly based. All listed are indeed one step so you may have people that will not except a paladin of a CG god as he is not on the list.
If this was a home game it would not be an issue however being a PFS game you could be rule illegal setting wise as the books DO NOT sport you choice. Even the 3.5 PHB did not give you an option of a CG god.
It never came out and said no but I am not the only one who read it as one step. So if ya go that route you might be found invalid I don't know if the GM can do that but the listed setting books makes no allowances for a CG god
However, given PF's objetive of linear class equality, then I see no point in holding on to alignment restrictions, kill the sacred cow.
I could not disagree more, Paladin is LG nothing else.
...but the listed setting books makes no allowances for a CG god
Sounds to me like the more important point is if the books don't forbid it.
Mind you, I'm sans setting book. Does it actually say "choose a god from this list" or is it more "examples of paladin deities are..."? I'm all for supporting setting flavor, especially in Organized Play, but I think the idea of a Cayden paladin supports the flavor. I'm only policing for anything that forbids it.
...but the listed setting books makes no allowances for a CG godSounds to me like the more important point is if the books don't forbid it.
Mind you, I'm sans setting book. Does it actually say "choose a god from this list" or is it more "examples of paladin deities are..."? I'm all for supporting setting flavor, especially in Organized Play, but I think the idea of a Cayden paladin supports the flavor. I'm only policing for anything that forbids it.
PFCS.47
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.
RotRL PG p.8
To protect their faithful and spread their teachings among the faithless, several religions have sent their champions to Varisia. The
churches of Abadar and Erastil hold particular interest in the land. Abadar’s champions travel between the communities of the land,
acting as wandering judges and lawbringers in their goal of forging a unified, lawabiding society from this land of savages and thieves. Those who follow Erastil know the dangers and hardships faced by those alone on the fringes of civilization, and they go where they are needed, aiding in what ways they can. Although the militaristic arms of these churches appear most active, the faithful of all the deities of
Golarion can be found at work throughout the land.
CotCT PG p.10
Korvosa is an extremely lawful city, but one that isn’t as interested, as a general rule, in the purpose of the law as much as its application. If anything, the city Government’s often impartial stance
on matters regarding the law skew the general feel toward evil. As a result, most paladins find Korvosa too stif ling a place for them, and they often grow frustrated with the city’s overwhelming bureaucracy and willingness to accept things like the Hellknight Order of the Nail or the church of Asmodeus in the city. Most of Korvosa’s paladins ally with the church of Abadar and the Korvosan Guard, figuring that to be
where they can do the most good
LoF PG p.5
To combat the decadence of a country steeped in vices, the holy warriors of numerous faiths maintain dutiful vigil over their deities’ interests in Katapesh. As the patron of cities and trade, Abadar sends gold-armored soldiers to Katapesh to guard his temple-banks, encourage
commerce, and weed out corruption. Sarenrae supports an especially active knighthood in the region, though her warriors are more altruistic, seeking to aid those who settle in dangerous lands and keeping the roads safe from ravening beasts. Of special note are the crusaders of Solku’s Dawn Vigil, who serve their goddess in fighting
back bands of gnolls and other deadly creatures on Katapesh’s western frontiers. Perhaps most famous are Iomedae’s paladins, who in recent years turned back the gnoll siege of Solku at the Battle of Red Hail, and remain heroes throughout the realm.
As you see every godly paladin printed or even talked about in anything I can find ALWAYS are one step. And all of of the gods listed in the PFCS are either LG,LN or NG so far there are no exceptions anywhere in print.So they give you an option of no god or 1 step
What I am saying man is the book makes it clear that paladins need to be in one step if they server a god. Does it say it word for word no, however the book gives you a rundown of gods who have paladins, but it seems your looking for a loop hole and don't be surprised if a GM rules it invalid and he has that right to do so.
If you know of one please post it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
That explains why he worships Cayden. Why does Cayden grant him powers when he's directly opposed to the deity's province of freedom?
Sorry it took so long for me to reply, I went to bed not long after I posted last... :)
I see it as this: A Cleric takes 2 Domains as his "Portfolio". He make be a Cleric of Cayden for instance and be interested in the Bravery and Freedom aspects of the God, but not his love of Wine. I can quite easlily see this happening. He could be a Cleric (Mystic/Fortune Teller) of Desna who hates to Travel, but loves the Dreams and Stars purview.
The Paladin I see as the same. He respects Cayden's affinity for Bravery. He needn't necesarily condone his carousing, wine soaked party aspect.
Also, I think a Paladin respects Freedom, just a different aspect of Freedom than Cayden espouses. If a Paladin saw a slave, he would be honour bound to free said slave from captivity and give them their freedom. I think they are just about a more rigid view of freedom than might necesarily be accepted.
Wouldn't the more militant of Cayden Cailean's somewhat freewheeling faith be Chevaliers rather than Paladins?
Similar makeup, somewhat similar abilities. None of the moral controversy of playing a Paladin more than two steps from their deity.
Not as stuffy or restrictive as a fullfledged
knighthood, in their hearts chevaliers are just
good people who want to celebrate the good things in life
and fight evil wherever it dares to tread.
This. He clashes to much with the god. He matches one part but not the greater ones.
That explains why he worships Cayden. Why does Cayden grant him powers when he's directly opposed to the deity's province of freedom?
Who ever said that a Paladin has to match their God's beliefs in every aspect? If that were so, only LG gods could have Paladins.
Gods are unknowable to mortals. How do you know that the Bravery aspect of Cayden's portfolio is less important to him than the Freedom aspect? After all, he's only a god because he was brave enough to submit to the test of the Starstone -- freedom had absolutely nothing to do with it.
This. He clashes to much with the god. He matches one part but not the greater ones.
That explains why he worships Cayden. Why does Cayden grant him powers when he's directly opposed to the deity's province of freedom?
Who ever said that a Paladin has to match their God's beliefs in every aspect? If that were so, only LG gods could have Paladins.
Gods are unknowable to mortals. How do you know that the Bravery aspect of Cayden's portfolio is less important to him than the Freedom aspect? After all, he's only a god because he was brave enough to submit to the test of the Starstone -- freedom had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Nope he is a god because he was drunk enough to submit the the test. I would have to say no to him having paladin. As a whole reather anyone likes it or not godly paladins do gain power from thier god. So I can't see most CG gods having paladins which is why every single one in the PFCS is one step away.
LG vs CG is not just a few small things we do not see eye to eye one. They have vast different ideals morals and a way of thinking.
As a whole reather anyone likes it or not godly paladins do gain power from thier god. So I can't see most CG gods having paladins which is why every single one in the PFCS is one step away.
Please cite me the list of allowable deities for Paladins in the PFCS? I'm looking at the Paladin entry and there is no such list. There is a list of the most common deities for Paladins, but there's nothing that says those are the ONLY deities that have Paladins.
LG vs CG is not just a few small things we do not see eye to eye one. They have vast different ideals morals and a way of thinking.
I hate to break it to you, but there's exactly as much difference between LG vs CG as there is between LG vs NG or LG vs LN, especially when you're talking about beings that embody those alignments, such as deities, exemplars ... and Paladins. You're treating alignments as if they were a 1-100 scale. They aren't. They're entirely separate and only tangentially related philosophies.
So the whole one step is silly I am so glad LE and LG have so much in common as you said they see things close enough as they are both LAWFUL same with CG and CE they are close after all.
As a whole yes the one step does make sense LG and LN are close in ideal NG and LG are also close just not as much But LG and CG have massive diffidence in how they see the world huge ones.
Also I noted a list of every single book I had where it talked of paladins in every one they used the same list from the PFCS, every time.
They give you a way out if you do not wish to use the one step..have no god.Now if I have over looked a non lawful good paladin let me know.
Also I always seem to be drawn into this type of debate. Gods got to love the paladin :)
So the whole one step is silly I am so glad LE and LG have so much in common as you said they see things close enough as they are both LAWFUL same with CG and CE they are close after all.
Actually, I'm in favor of Paladins of LE deities that only act on the Lawful aspects of that deity's domains. IMO, D&D traditionally has done a seriously horrible job of depicting religions. Look at real life for an example of what I mean -- ask a Roman Catholic priest, a Jewish rabbi, and a Muslim imam a religious question and you'll get three entirely different answers, despite the fact that they all ostensibly serve the same God. Hell, for that matter, ask a Jehova's Witness, a Mormon, and a Southern Baptist, and you'll still get totally different answers, and they're all Christian!
If you don't like the modern examples, go back to Ancient Greece, which had a similar pantheonic approach to religion. Even back then, if you asked a Spartan and an Athenian what Athena's tenets were, you'd get much different responses.
In the same way, Gods in D&D should be able to serve more than one mind-set of people, and so should Paladins as the hands of the Gods.
As a whole yes the one step does make sense LG and LN are close in ideal NG and LG are also close just not as much But LG and CG have massive diffidence in how they see the world huge ones.
No. Or rather, no to the first two and yes to the third. LG and LN has vast differences in how they see the world, too. To a LN deity, the law is everything, and good or evil is irrelevant. Does that sound like a Paladin to you? Similarly, NG deities don't care about how lawful something is, as long as it's being done for good. Again, totally opposed to a Paladin's code of conduct -- to them, both the Law and the Good are to be strictly enforced.
Also I noted a list of every single book I had where it talked of paladins in every one they used the same list from the PFCS, every time.
Once more ... no. The ONLY deity mentioned in every single one of your quotes is Abadar. Plainly those lists are NOT all-inclusive, and only a truly foolish person would claim the lists were all the same.
Well glad I am foolish, but every thing from the books I have is based off that list..One step. But you can go godless they do make room for that
You don't have to agree with me but the books seem to. Prove me wrong find one just one paladin in any pathfinder book that has a god not on that list and not one step from LG
--a bunch of great research--
Thanks for looking those up for me. I completely see your point, but can’t agree that a lack of examples means it doesn’t exist. To use a cartoonishly exaggerated example, I’ve yet to see an NPC fighter who specializes in unarmed fighting in Pathfinder, but that doesn’t mean they’re all monks instead.
I guess what I’m getting at is the old “absence of proof is not proof of absence.”
Actually, I'm in favor of Paladins of LE deities that only act on the Lawful aspects of that deity's domains.
That's something I'd have to see in play and would probably depend on the god in question. Could you play a paladin focusing only on the lawful aspect of Achaekek? What part of murder and assassination are you supporting by being good? The stone giant god Minderhal, meanwhile, has justice and strength listed in his Areas of Concern. You could probably come up with a good argument of how a lawful good figure could still promote his interests without actually giving in to evil.
Asmodeus, meanwhile, doesn’t seem to have any redeeming pro-paladin qualities until you factor in how he (more or less) brought peace to Cheliax. I could see a LG paladin supporting Asmodeus and promoting the lawfulness and stability he brought to the country.
The tricky slope, though, is that the crunch of the paladin class specifically says committing an evil act will cost your paladin his special powers. Paladins of LE gods will probably have some hard choices to make as they go about doing their god’s work. The rules as written are a bit more lenient towards chaotic acts, though, simply saying that you lose your abilities if you *become* non-lawful. There’s some room in there for a paladin of Desna to light out of town unexpectedly or for a paladin of Cayden to booze it up. Now, if the paladin of Desna abandoned his wife and kids to hit the road…yeah, chaotic.
Again, I’m going to reference the Three Musketeers. Above all, they’re loyal to each other and the king, even as the regime of France shifts and tries to take their loyalty. Even at the risk of being outcasts, they still fight for what they believe is right and ultimately good for the country. The fact that they get drunk, sleep around, duel amongst themselves, and are the most boastful SOBs since Sherlock Holmes* doesn’t change their alignment any. Not in my eyes, at least. Come to think of it, the Great Detective himself could easily be classified as Lawful Good despite a drug problem and insistence on working apart from the established law.
* Yeah I know the Musketeers were published before Holmes, but work with me here…
I'll agree it does not mean you could not include them. However your not doing a homegame So I just wanted to be clear that you most likely will run into folks like me who will hold up the book as proof and you can't point to one thing in the setting that says they are wrong.
I am not picking on you just ya know trying to let ya see all the evidence for one step and you have zero for CG none. So bring a back up pc :)
As for the musketeers well they were not all LG nor where they paladins. They had oaths but they were more an order that took many "classes" and such. A kings guard would have fighters, paladins maybe even rangers and rouges
It'll take some tweaking to account for the change in the class, but the Unearthed Arcana
Paladin of Freedom might help.
No it's a PFS game so that's not allowed
|
No it's a PFS game so that's not allowedIt'll take some tweaking to account for the change in the class, but the Unearthed Arcana
Paladin of Freedom might help.
I don't understand why everyone is so against paladins of different alignments? Or even going so far to say that they are not paladins. It seems to me that if you don't like them, which is a valid option, that you don't use them. But why try to enforce that opinion on others as if it is an existing rule that can never be broken or the entire game/genre falls apart? I'm just saying. I'm not really for or against the variant pladins.
Didn't Paizo do the first official variant Paladins way back in the early 3.5 days?
|
|
No it's a PFS game so that's not allowedIt'll take some tweaking to account for the change in the class, but the Unearthed Arcana
Paladin of Freedom might help.I don't understand why everyone is so against paladins of different alignments? Or even going so far to say that they are not paladins. It seems to me that if you don't like them, which is a valid option, that you don't use them. But why try to enforce that opinion on others as if it is an existing rule that can never be broken or the entire game/genre falls apart? I'm just saying. I'm not really for or against the variant pladins.
Didn't Paizo do the first official variant Paladins way back in the early 3.5 days?
Becket,
It's a PFS game. That means core 3.5 only. Under that, there is no such thing as a Paladin of Freedom.Also, I just checked the Cayden article in PF 14. No mention of paladins, but they do mention his chosen champions the Chevalier. That seems a good reason to not have paladins of Cayden (although not valid in PFS either).
|
|
Okay. I don't have a problem with that.
I just went threw and scanned a lot of the above posts and didn't see any mention of "we are talking about PathFinder Society only" and also why is Forgotten Realms (not Core) mentioned as an arguement then?
All I'm saying is that it seems wrong to me to that it seems everyone is trying to force this one point of view as the one and true way.
Ironically, it was the Chevalier that inspired the idea of a Cayden paladin. I've recently been re-reading Second Darkness and I got a real kick out of the article on Cayden himself. As I was thinking about ideas for a cleric, I saw the chevalier and was inspired by ideas of what a paladin of an inebriated god of bravery would be like.
To be honest, I've seen enough cookie-cutter paladins over my years of gaming (and played several of them myself), that the thought of playing an against-type character like this really appeals to me. I'm still several months off from being able to play my first PFS game (the Philippines says 'hi'), so I'm willing to wait for any clarification from the PFRPG book coming out in August. In a pinch, though, I'll just play a god-free paladin who just happens to like a lot of what Cayden stands for (and wonders if maybe that rascal isn't empowering him from behind the scenes). Easy peasy.
As an aside, though, I just re-read the PF Companion to Second Darkness and was bummed to see that it specifically mentions that the church of Cayden in Riddleport has no paladins. If I really wanted to twist it, I could read that as implying that other churches of Cayden have paladins, but that seems kind of desperate. That same page, though, then goes on to list the common paladins like those mentioned above and ends with reference to "paladins of other faiths" allowing that maybe there are paladins of gods other than Iomedae, Abadar, Erastil, and such.
It's a puzzler.
|
|
Not really paladins so we don't count em :)Pshaw!
Paladin
noun
2. A strong supporter or defender of a cause: “the paladin of plain speaking” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.).
I posted two pally definitions earlier, and I can't see why people asume Paladins of Freedom aren't actually paladins.
A paladin-be he Lawful or Chaotic-is still a PALADIN!!!
|
|
Okay. I don't have a problem with that.
I just went threw and scanned a lot of the above posts and didn't see any mention of "we are talking about PathFinder Society only" and also why is Forgotten Realms (not Core) mentioned as an arguement then?
All I'm saying is that it seems wrong to me to that it seems everyone is trying to force this one point of view as the one and true way.
Because at that point we weren't. It was later clarified that this was a PFS character.
If you want to rehash the umpteen billion posts on why the Paladin should/shouldn't be LG from the playtest, the paladin preview, the last 30 years, be my guest but I'm not getting involved in that again and it really is tangential to playing a Lawful Good Paladin of a Chaotic Good god.
...but the listed setting books makes no allowances for a CG godSounds to me like the more important point is if the books don't forbid it.
WORD.
Does it say it word for word no
Hey, ho; there ya go!
I'd suggest you make the character YOU want to make. And make up a backup character that you're more sure isn't going to ruffle feathers. Then if your DM is stuffy and/or insists on mis-defining Paladin based on his prejudice, you'll still be good to go on game day.
So the whole one step is silly I am so glad LE and LG have so much in common as you said they see things close enough as they are both LAWFUL same with CG and CE they are close after all.
Yep! They absolutely are. Those alignments have nearly identical methodologies, the only difference being their goals.
Curiosity over the whole "cookie-cutter" paladin deal
It's a mystery. When paladins were first introduced they went with that whole alignment thing to give the "good guys" a special treat. A class you simply couldn't have if you didn't toe the line. Sadly, as with many of their big ideas back in the day, it was narrow-minded and goofily lifted from fairy-tales. So now you've got a few generations of people who've got no idea how paladin is actually defined, but go on about what they've learned in their games.
It's a pet peeve. So before anyone goes on about "this is a paladin" or "this isn't" let me show you the definition. I put part of this up in a different thread, but here you go:
1. A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion.
2. A strong supporter or defender of a cause: “the paladin of plain speaking” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.).
3. Any of the 12 peers of Charlemagne's court.
[French, from Italian paladino, from Late Latin palātīnus, palatine. See palatine1.]
Neither paragon of chivalry nor heroic champion indicate someone who is always lawful and good. On the contrary, heroes are typically flawed and chivalric heroes were notorious for failing to live up to the ideal.
#2 is fairly self-explanatory.
The third bit, well it's pretty damning; isn't it? If you're not one of the twelve dudes who worked for Charlie, you're not a paladin. Pick a different class, smarty.
Just to take this a bit further, I included the root word; and here's the definition:
Palatine
1. A soldier of the palace guard of the Roman emperors, formed in the time of Diocletian.
2. A soldier of a major division of the Roman army formed in the time of Constantine I.
2. Used as a title for various administrative officials of the late Roman and Byzantine empires.
3. A feudal lord exercising sovereign power over his lands. Also called palsgrave.
adj.
1. Belonging to or fit for a palace.
2. Of or relating to a palatine or palatinate.
So in the real world, no; a paladin is most certainly not limited in alignment. In the game world, paladins have long been subject to an arbitrary and bizarre restriction that was completely unnecessary given their lack of power. The new paladin might actually be worth playing, but that doesn't mean there's any reason to continue with the mistakes of the past, suggesting that there is a particular class that only "good guys" (or god forbid "lawful guys") get to use.
As for whether one alignment can serve a deity of a different alignment: YES. Yes you absolutely can, even if other people don't understand why you would. Why would a lawful good paladin be in the service of a chaotic good deity? Probably any of a thousand reasons. I'd suggest that it likely has something to do with choosing to serve a worthwhile cause while maintaining a stricter code than your patron requires. It's probably the kind of question that if you have to ask, you'll never know the answer to.
And you can't win an argument over it by asking someone to prove a rule doesn't exist with circumstantial evidence. That's the same sort of thing people do when actually arguing religion. "I can't prove this is true, but you can't prove it's false; so I win!" Hah! If you're trying to restrict someone else's options on the basis that he can't prove you DON'T have the right to do so; your entire argument is a joke. If Paizo says "this is how it is" then fine. If they don't, no amount of conjecture is going to make you right. The first assumption of the game is that if something sounds cool, do it.
It's not that I don't appreciate that people are often resolved to play this shining beacon of order and holiness, it's just that they make the false assumption that their way is the only way. Play paladins that are LG and only follow deities within one step of their alignment. There's nothing wrong with it. But when someone else wants to do something different, recognize that they are just as correct and fight on their side to make sure that people don't shout them down. Don't just add your voice to the chorus.
Where is this Chevalier class from? Also, which issue of Second Darkness is the article on Cayden Cailean in? I have several worshippers in my campaign, so this article would be helpful.