Is it possible for a Paladin to worship a LN god and remain LG?
Is it possible for a Paladin to worship a LN god and remain LG?
Do not think they made it official but like a cleric 1 step is the accepted limit. So LG,LN and NG
Is it possible for a Paladin to worship a LN god and remain LG?
Offhand I don't know if anything of this sort is even mentioned in the Core Rules. That said, the Pathfinder Chronicles CS does include paladins of Sarenrae (NG), Abadar (LN), Irori (LN), and Shelyn (NG). Ultimately, it depends on what a GM allows.
|
Yes, it's also possible to worship a CE god and remain Lawful Good. Clerics have an alignment restriction on their god, paladins do not.
I think my problem is that the description of paladin lost the ability to be secular. Nope Paizo says that paladins have to worship a diety. And it's all well and good to say change it for your games, but unfortunately when I'm trying to play a paladin, it's the DM not me, who says "hey you have to have a god because the book says so." Even more annoying because a cleric has an explanation saying they don't have to worship a diety, but the paladin gets no such benefit. Heck even the divine bond ability says "their bond with their god strengthens."
Yes, it's also possible to worship a CE god and remain Lawful Good. Clerics have an alignment restriction on their god, paladins do not.
I disagree, you just broke your code, and your god does not care, good for you. Now go kill some puppy's.
Evil gods are out, it may not say that but come on common sences, True neutral god just do not care, balance over good, law or your code, they do not care if you brake half of it.
I wish they had placed the One step in there as it would stop all the silly "But it does not say I can't play a paladin of the god of murder lies and death!"
If paladins have a god and that god grants them the ability then they have 1 step just like a cleric. I really can not see a LG person worshiping and carrying on the will of a god they do not share at lest a partial aliment with
The PRD says "paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve" So while it does not say 1 step you strive to embrace your god's ideals and teachings just like a cleric
|
|
Yes, it's also possible to worship a CE god and remain Lawful Good. Clerics have an alignment restriction on their god, paladins do not.
I disagree, you just broke your code, and your god does not care, good for you. Now go kill some puppy's.
Evil gods are out, it may not say that but come on common sences, True neutral god just do not care, balance over good, law or your code, they do not care if you brake half of it.
I wish they had placed the One step in there as it would stop all the silly "But it does not say I can't play a paladin of the god of murder lies and death!"
If paladins have a god and that god grants them the ability then they have 1 step just like a cleric. I really can not see a LG person worshiping and carrying on the will of a god they do not share at lest a partial aliment with
Actually I was thinking more along the lines of different interpretations of a gods dogma. You know since not all campaign settings have greek like gods who walk around on the mortal sphere, in fact even in golarion the gods take a passive role in events, not walking the world and telling everyone exactly how their role is to be interpreted.
Granted most of the time a paladin player worshiping an evil god is silly. But not all chaotic and evil gods are gods of specifically murder, lies, and death. and if a player came to my table with an interesting alternate interpretation of a gods portfolio and a way to reconcile it with a lawful good alignment I wouldn't automatically say no, which you seem to think is an automatic forgone conclusion. But I guess I'm just lacking in common sense as you so aptly put it and thank you setting my sensless mind straight.
For example a CE god of Death, Secrets, and Manipulation. I can see a paladin who believes in death as part of the cycle of life and believes that mankind has to be protected from itself to prevent it's darker nature from leading it to total annihalation and as such worshiping this god. Now it's a fine line to walk and one that could easily tip over into the fallen category. but not impossible.
Hell in the same way christians can bomb abortion clinics and burn witches and satanists can donate to charity, I can see a paladin with good reasons worshiping a CE diety.
But when that god's worshipers and priests are often the very monsters in which he stops, sorry no. He will either loose faith in his god or fall. The christian bombers are fanatics and if they once where paladins they have become so warped and twisted they would no longer be. Then look at it from a gods point a CE god does no give a rats ass about your code. Brake it, as often as you like they really do not care.
If I were to allow this why not CE clerics of a LG god? Or LG clerics of a CE god. Same thing. The very same thing.
Anyhow back to the OP most people will use one step, book rule or not it is the most common accepted rule. You should be safe for that. If you bring a paladin with a god beyond 1 step be prepared to not get to use him
As in all things as your GM
|
|
But when that god's worshipers and priests are often the very monsters in which he stops, sorry no. He will either loose faith in his god or fall.
Oh you mean how Martin Luther completely lost all faith in Christianity because Catholics all oposed him and he was the only "Protestant", he never you know created his own church worshiping the same god in a different way. Nope he lost all faith.
The christian bombers are fanatics and if they once where paladins they have become so warped and twisted they would no longer be.
Oh completely agree there, the funny thing is, I never said that those people were paladins. I was merely using them as a representation of how people can worship a god of a certain alignment while at the same time being the exact opposite alignment. Never once did I say they were paladins, but I guess that's just that lack of common sense again. Thanks by the way for pointing that one out to me. Here I thought I had some, but nope.
If I were to allow this why not CE clerics of a LG god? Or LG clerics of a CE god. Same thing. The very same thing.
Well, for one the rules specifically say that clerics have to be within one step of their diety. So that's why, but if you're asking why that rule couldn't be houseruled out, well gee I don't know, I thought I had years ago, but it must be that lack of common sense again.
Oh I agree you can house rule it out. And if that is your wish more power to you. But in genre l not just one world, They could not stay within the order of such a church and not fall.
For example a CE god of Death, Secrets, and Manipulation. I can see a paladin who believes in death as part of the cycle of life and believes that mankind has to be protected from itself to prevent it's darker nature from leading it to total annihalation and as such worshiping this god. Now it's a fine line to walk and one that could easily tip over into the fallen category. but not impossible.
I would say such an example would be an impossibility. I could see such an individual being lawful in alignment, but a direct servant of such a deity could hardly be considered good; a paladin is a champion of his or her deity, and in all honesty I wouldn't allow such a character to fly in the face of primary aspects of a deity's teachings and still be granted a paladin's divine abilities.
I have seen paladins of Kelemvor before, he is a LN god of death. They are very effective undead hunters.
|
|
For example a CE god of Death, Secrets, and Manipulation. I can see a paladin who believes in death as part of the cycle of life and believes that mankind has to be protected from itself to prevent it's darker nature from leading it to total annihalation and as such worshiping this god. Now it's a fine line to walk and one that could easily tip over into the fallen category. but not impossible.I would say such an example would be an impossibility. I could see such an individual being lawful in alignment, but a direct servant of such a deity could hardly be considered good; a paladin is a champion of his or her deity, and in all honesty I wouldn't allow such a character to fly in the face of primary aspects of a deity's teachings and still be granted a paladin's divine abilities.
What are the diety's teachings prey tell. It's a god of death, secrets, and manipulation, tell me exactly how a paladin that goes out and kills evil creatures, keeps secrets, and manipulates people into doing good deeds is in any way flying in the face of primary aspects of that deity's teachings.
I have seen paladins of Kelemvor before, he is a LN god of death. They are very effective undead hunters.
Wasn't Kelemvor a paladin himself, before attaining divinity?
I actually played such a paladin before. Had to keep the fact that his wife had arisen as a ghost from his order. A lot of fun, that game.
What are the diety's teachings prey tell. It's a god of death, secrets, and manipulation, tell me exactly how a paladin that goes out and kills evil creatures, keeps secrets, and manipulates people into doing good deeds is in any way flying in the face of primary aspects of that deity's teachings.
You're talking about a chaotic evil deity of death, secrets, and manipulation. If such a divine power didn't emphasize the destructive aspects of those traits, such a being would be neutral or even good aligned.
A character could stay away from the negative aspects of those traits, but then he would hardly be following the deity's teachings, either.
|
|
Oh I agree you can house rule it out. And if that is your wish more power to you. But in genre l not just one world, They could not stay within the order of such a church and not fall.
Says what rule, that's clerics your talking about. I'm talking about paladins. If anything you're the one talking about one world, yours. I'm talking about the rules of the game. and in the rules of the game a paladin isn't restricted to his gods alignment in any way. Certain DMs may feel they should be. But that's certain DMs and not the rules.
Getting rid of secular paladins is a good thing, IMHO, because it postulated some ineffable benchmark of "Goodness" that was not a god but still allowed paladins to "detect evil" and also had paladins fall who were not true to "it" whatever "it" was, even though it was not a god.
Paladins work a lot better when wrapped up with church dogma.
Funny, sounds to me like he flew in the face of his diety's teachings.
Not really. Kelemvor's all about the destruction of evil and self-actualized undead. He's wasn't depicted as having issues with nonevil and spontaneously-generated undead.
That said, the other paladins in my character's order did; paladins of Kelemvor have a well-earned reputation of being fanatical about destroying things that are moving around when they're supposed to be rotting.
|
|
What are the diety's teachings prey tell. It's a god of death, secrets, and manipulation, tell me exactly how a paladin that goes out and kills evil creatures, keeps secrets, and manipulates people into doing good deeds is in any way flying in the face of primary aspects of that deity's teachings.You're talking about a chaotic evil deity of death, secrets, and manipulation. If such a divine power didn't emphasize the destructive aspects of those traits, such a being would be neutral or even good aligned.
A character could stay away from the negative aspects of those traits, but then he would hardly be following the deity's teachings, either.
Or you know he could be evil because in the campaign world belief shapes the gods and most people view those as negative things, but if enough people believed the opposite the god would change to represent those beliefs.
Or it could be a god that was an evil prick before gaining divinity, but who's teachings and portfolio represent his outlook after attaining divinity through those means, and he doesn't care what you do so long as you are using those means.
Or a dozen other things that vary from campaign to campaign. And in some it may be impossible for someone to worship said god and be a paladin and in that setting I won't allow the paladin to do so.
But that's neither here nor there. Yes it's possible for a paladin to worship a lawful nuetral god and still be lawful good. Yes it's possible for a paladin to worship a Chaotic evil god and still be lawful good. By the rules.
Now you want to talk about YOUR specific game that YOU dm that's fine and well and good, but that doesn't change the fact that thats YOUR specific games and YOU DMing.
|
|
Funny, sounds to me like he flew in the face of his diety's teachings.Not really. Kelemvor's all about the destruction of evil and self-actualized undead. He's wasn't depicted as having issues with nonevil and spontaneously-generated undead.
That said, the other paladins in my character's order did; paladins of Kelemvor have a well-earned reputation of being fanatical about destroying things that are moving around when they're supposed to be rotting.
Thank you for making my point :) baited you right into that one.
Oh I agree you can house rule it out. And if that is your wish more power to you. But in genre l not just one world, They could not stay within the order of such a church and not fall.Says what rule, that's clerics your talking about. I'm talking about paladins. If anything you're the one talking about one world, yours. I'm talking about the rules of the game. and in the rules of the game a paladin isn't restricted to his gods alignment in any way. Certain DMs may feel they should be. But that's certain DMs and not the rules.
Not talking just about mine, most will look and go..oh yeah one step like a cleric..it is best to talk to your GM ahead of time and ask
|
What are the diety's teachings prey tell. It's a god of death, secrets, and manipulation, tell me exactly how a paladin that goes out and kills evil creatures, keeps secrets, and manipulates people into doing good deeds is in any way flying in the face of primary aspects of that deity's teachings.You're talking about a chaotic evil deity of death, secrets, and manipulation. If such a divine power didn't emphasize the destructive aspects of those traits, such a being would be neutral or even good aligned.
A character could stay away from the negative aspects of those traits, but then he would hardly be following the deity's teachings, either.
Or you know he could be evil because in the campaign world belief shapes the gods and most people view those as negative things, but if enough people believed the opposite the god would change to represent those beliefs.
Or it could be a god that was an evil prick before gaining divinity, but who's teachings and portfolio represent his outlook after attaining divinity through those means, and he doesn't care what you do so long as you are using those means.
Or a dozen other things that vary from campaign to campaign. And in some it may be impossible for someone to worship said god and be a paladin and in that setting I won't allow the paladin to do so.
But that's neither here nor there. Yes it's possible for a paladin to worship a lawful nuetral god and still be lawful good. Yes it's possible for a paladin to worship a Chaotic evil god and still be lawful good. By the rules.
Now you want to talk about YOUR specific game that YOU dm that's fine and well and good, but that doesn't change the fact that thats YOUR specific games and YOU DMing.
Ok. So you've given reasons why the paladin could serve an evil god. Now, why would an evil god want a paladin serving him? Why would he remove the paladin's powers for doing things that he wants every other one of his followers to get up to, i.e. evil acts?
|
|
most will look and goOh I agree you can house rule it out. And if that is your wish more power to you. But in genre l not just one world, They could not stay within the order of such a church and not fall.Says what rule, that's clerics your talking about. I'm talking about paladins. If anything you're the one talking about one world, yours. I'm talking about the rules of the game. and in the rules of the game a paladin isn't restricted to his gods alignment in any way. Certain DMs may feel they should be. But that's certain DMs and not the rules.
Except that that's complete conjecture on your part.
it is best to talk to your GM ahead of time and ask
Of this we are in 1000% agreement. Of course, I say that about just about every aspect of the game.
|
|
Ok. So you've given reasons why the paladin could serve an evil god. Now, why would an evil god want a paladin serving him? Why would he remove the paladin's powers for doing things that he wants every other one of his followers to get up to, i.e. evil acts?
Paladins loose their powers for violating their code, not for doing things their god doesn't like. You can ask why the god would give powers to someone like that, maybe because all he cares about is the increase in power he gets from having more followers. He is a god of manipulation after all. The more people who follow him the more power he has, the more power he has the more he can influence and manipulate, as long as the paladin is increasing his flock and using his methods. Why does he care if the paladin is a self righteous prick. He's a god and his motives are inconcievable to silly mortals.
I'm not saying that in every campaign and every circumstance it's okay. I'm saying that if a player came to me with an interesting take that I could reconcile with my world, I would allow it, and so do the rules.
By the rules A paladin could do things that his god would hate. If his god hates water and the paladin spends the better part of every day pouring water out of a decanter of endless water, he's not going to fall by the rules. Which is why I always have players talk to me when creating a paladin because I'm gonna customize their code to fit the world they are in and the beliefs they hold instead of just using the generic code, which using actually allows the player to get away with even more sillyness with gods and things then customizing it does.
I think the business of paladin's getting their powers from their god makes more sense than them getting them from some generic power of goodness, because the second option means that they can then get then ascribe these powers to their own pet delusions, either worshipping some aspect of a god that a god doesn't have ("Lamashtu means Love!") or worshipping some god they dreamed up after eating funky mushrooms ("I worship Blargela the Good! Her symbol is the Pink Paisley Bat!")
Also, if you really want to have secular paladins in the world, it's possible for the various gods to pass out their powers to paladins and not reveal themselves.
|
Description form the SRD:
Through a select, worthy few shines the power of the divine. Called paladins, these noble souls dedicate their swords and lives to the battle against evil. Knights, crusaders, and law-bringers, paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve. In pursuit of their lofty goals, they adhere to ironclad laws of morality and discipline. As reward for their righteousness, these holy champions are blessed with boons to aid them in their quests: powers to banish evil, heal the innocent, and inspire the faithful. Although their convictions might lead them into conflict with the very souls they would save, paladins weather endless challenges of faith and dark temptations, risking their lives to do right and fighting to bring about a brighter future.
Role: Paladins serve as beacons for their allies within the chaos of battle. While deadly opponents of evil, they can also empower goodly souls to aid in their crusades. Their magic and martial skills also make them well suited to defending others and blessing the fallen with the strength to continue fighting.
There's nothing virtuous about a CE deity of manipulation...yes, Jason screwed up by not stating WHAT alignment of deity they must follow...but come on! This argument is a purely meta-game argument.
emphasis mine
Thank you for making my point :) baited you right into that one.
Care to elaborate? I think you're logic's getting too convoluted to follow here; you're not making sense.
|
|
Does it say specifically that a paladin receives his powers from his or her deity. I created a Paladin of Arazni for Pathfinder Society, so I hope that's allowable... It's quite possibly the coolest thing I've come up with in a very long time.
He has a deity, she just isn't.... well, available. And like other Knights of the Phoenix, they want her back! Okay.... rant over.
Not to flame here but to me trying to play more then one step always come off as I want to play a non lawful good paladin and I just found my loophole
Does it say specifically that a paladin receives his powers from his or her deity. I created a Paladin of Arazni for Pathfinder Society, so I hope that's allowable... It's quite possibly the coolest thing I've come up with in a very long time.
He has a deity, she just isn't.... well, available. And like other Knights of the Phoenix, they want her back! Okay.... rant over.
Does it say You must have a god. In them words no what it does say is "Called paladins, these noble souls dedicate their swords and lives to the battle against evil. Knights, crusaders, and law-bringers, paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve."
|
|
Does it say You must have a god. In them words no what it does say is "Called paladins, these noble souls dedicate their swords and lives to the battle against evil. Knights, crusaders, and law-bringers, paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve."Does it say specifically that a paladin receives his powers from his or her deity. I created a Paladin of Arazni for Pathfinder Society, so I hope that's allowable... It's quite possibly the coolest thing I've come up with in a very long time.
He has a deity, she just isn't.... well, available. And like other Knights of the Phoenix, they want her back! Okay.... rant over.
Cool, so a paladin could serve the interests of a deity (even a dead one), and still be a paladin?
Cool, so a paladin could serve the interests of a deity (even a dead one), and still be a paladin?
Based on that yes, they could. However, the traditional theme of the paladin isn't one of an individual making a decision to take the class on his own; traditionally, they were called to serve, and as such there had to be a god that would actually do the calling. A dead, or in this case undead, deity couldn't perform such an act, and you might run into some stiff opposition to the idea despite the newer concept; with the shift to heavily Charisma-based paladins one can argue their abilities are granted through sheer personality, but they remain divine champions and that usually indicates that their power would be granted by a divine source.
|
|
Cool, so a paladin could serve the interests of a deity (even a dead one), and still be a paladin?Based on that yes, they could. However, the traditional theme of the paladin isn't one of an individual making a decision to take the class on his own; traditionally, they were called to serve, and as such there had to be a god that would actually do the calling. A dead, or in this case undead, deity couldn't perform such an act, and you might run into some stiff opposition to the idea despite the newer concept; with the shift to heavily Charisma-based paladins one can argue their abilities are granted through sheer personality, but they remain divine champions and that usually indicates that their power would be granted by a divine source.
Yeah, I know.
I heard all the arguments against it when I first suggested it for a PBP game. Didn't make it in, but I thought it was one of the coolest ideas I'd come up with, I decided to hold onto it.... "Eventually, we'll find a way to get her back!"
I heard all the arguments against it when I first suggested it for a PBP game ...
Hehe, I know. I'm glad to hear you're running with the concept anyway; it's a good one.
|
|
Thank you for making my point :) baited you right into that one.Care to elaborate? I think you're logic's getting too convoluted to follow here; you're not making sense.
Absolutely, you specifically said that your paladin had a different interpretation of his gods dogma then that established by members of his order. One that would actually put you in direct opposition with the members of your order should they find out. But you had a justifiable interpretation based off of your own perspective.
Again, I'm not saying don't seriously question why a paladin player would want to do this. I sure as hell would put a player who came to my table with a paladin worshiping a non good, or non lawful god through the wringer. But if the player can justify it, and maintain their behavior within the code of conduct I work out with them (one that would require lawful good behavior) I wouldn't dissallow it just because of an alignment tag on the diety. Especially dependant on the campaign setting and the gods behavior.
For example I couldn't see this happening in the Forgotten Realms where the gods are very greek like, and take a very personal role on the happenings of the plane. But what about a setting like the discworld where gods change and adapt shaped by the beliefs of their followers, where if the paladin was able to develop a following he actually could change the gods allignment? Or a setting where magic does exist, but alignment isn't so straightforward. I don't think this is just a case of ommision, I think it was a deliberate choice that only clerics are restricted by choice of god.
|
For example a CE god of Death, Secrets, and Manipulation. I can see a paladin who believes in death as part of the cycle of life and believes that mankind has to be protected from itself to prevent it's darker nature from leading it to total annihalation and as such worshiping this god. Now it's a fine line to walk and one that could easily tip over into the fallen category. but not impossible.I would say such an example would be an impossibility. I could see such an individual being lawful in alignment, but a direct servant of such a deity could hardly be considered good; a paladin is a champion of his or her deity, and in all honesty I wouldn't allow such a character to fly in the face of primary aspects of a deity's teachings and still be granted a paladin's divine abilities.
What is being forgaotten is really important, the paladin is actually keeping his god alive by keeping the world from destruction. If all the races are dead, no one can worship him/her, and the god will die.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Does it say specifically that a paladin receives his powers from his or her deity. I created a Paladin of Arazni for Pathfinder Society, so I hope that's allowable... It's quite possibly the coolest thing I've come up with in a very long time.
The bond between a paladin and her deity is explicit and central to the character, according to the description in the Pathfinder RPG Rulebook.
Divine Bond (Sp): Upon reaching 5th level, a paladin
forms a divine bond with her god. This bond can take one of
two forms. Once the form is chosen, it cannot be changed.Holy Champion (Su): At 20th level, a paladin becomes a
conduit for the power of her god.
This is a change from D&D 3.5, where paladins simply served the cause of good. The one-step rule for clerics is applied to paladins in Golarion (It's not necessarily part of Jason's rules, but it is one of the laws of the setting.) James Jacobs has discussed this on a few messageboard threads before. It seems reasonable to me that if Shelyn allows Lawful Good clerics to serve her will, then she ought not have a problem with a glaive-wielding paladin acting to further her causes, either.
I don't know, I think the less you have divine classes beholden to a given hierarchy, the more you have some problems come up. Paladins don't have the same problem that clerics have ("I'm CN and I worship the power of how awesome I am, and that lets me bring you back from the dead"), but at the same time, I think that a "loner" paladin that just believes in the power of justice and good is a problem.
The paladin needs atonement cast? Who does he actually see as worthy to cast the spell for him? Does he have to find a cleric that has almost the same non-deity philosophy that he has? If he doesn't, why would a spell cast by a priest of Erastil or Shelyn or Abadar have any effect on him? None of them really represent "ultimate justice and benevolence beyond the diluted concerns of deities."
I don't have a problem with established philosophies that have their own pre set standards and rules, such as the Green Faith or Diabolism, but just making one up on the fly . . . that creates all sorts of headaches for a GM trying to run his own campaign, and it leaves a lot open for the player to be less restricted than a player that takes a god.
"You just pretty much changed your alignment from LG to CN . . . shouldn't you have to atone or something?"
"Nope, the power of awesome just requires that I believe I'm awesome."
It puts a limit on role-playing IMO.and a terrible one IMO
This is a change from D&D 3.5, where paladins simply served the cause of good.
I am the other way. It give you more. Sure it has limits but so does a cleric, a sorcerer,an a druid. All have limts but none limit Roleplay at all.
You know going in a paladin is LG if you can not handle that limitation then play something else. Limiting his god to a one step god is not a limit. It give him great leeway. He can worship and be a paladin of any god within one step.
If you want to buck the norm play one of a one step god that has very few or people doe not think of as having paladins.
Now as for knights comments as I do not feel like making 2 posts.
I always found it silly paladins had no one to give them power. They had no higher power watching them seeing if they fall. If your fanatic enough to your cause you won't see many things as braking your code when in fact they do. If only your belief fuels your power then very few paladins will ever fall. "The child would have destroyed the world , I saved his souls by killing him." "The people of that village were all evil they stood by and allowed it to happen"
I found it silly that they could fall, "It was best I killed him from behind..It was only a small lie..." and so on. They would have to believe in there hearts they had fallen...most kill em all crusaders that fall that far do not see that.
Also I guess it is that I came into the game though FR and other worlds that had paladin tied to gods. I just can not understand how they would not have one. How can you fall from grace when you will never admit even in your heart of hearts that you have?
People you do realize that no where in the discription of the paladin does it say you must worship a god.
The only point a god is mentioned is in the divine bond and holy champion class abilities It is not in the code, it is not listed in the reasons a paladin loses his class features or anywhere else.
In fact the closest it comes to saying anything about deities in code is "respect legitimate authority" Since every god has "legitimate authority" I guess a Paladin must "respect" them all!
Beyond that Galorian specifically has non-worshiping paladins (campaign setting cannon) so I'm not worried about it at all.
Any DM that wants to push the point... I know how to push back, and you won't like what I do when it happens (I am my own god, if Iomedae can do so can I).
Nothing by the book says it's a god that takes your powers away either
Humanist believe humans are just a step away from becoming gods themselves so a Humanist paladin could literally worship humanity.
****************************
If you need a god to threaten you into obedience you never really had the true heart to begin with.
If you have to have a god to give you your faith you don't really have that much faith to begin with.
If you can't stand true on your own, then no god can make you do it either.
Beyond that Galorian specifically has non-worshiping paladins (campaign setting cannon) so I'm not worried about it at all.
Any DM that wants to push the point... I know how to push back, and you won't like what I do when it happens.
Nothing by the book says it's a god that takes your powers away either
As a PFS GM, if someone comes to the table with a "non deity" paladin, I'm fine with it, because its mentioned in the campaign setting book.
On the other hand, if someone comes to my game, and I explain that in my campaign you need to select a deity, and a player "pushes back," then that player isn't long for my game.
If someone wants to work with me because they have a concept that doesn't match my campaign ideas, fine, but "pushing back," no . . . that's not going to happen.
Heck working together comes first, and it comes down to campaign first (for example it is established cannon in FR that paladins must have a god, and they allow for so many choices that it isn't a huge deal there).
However the thought that a general requirement is somehow placed on the paladin by a slight mention in two different class features that doesn't come up anywhere else, and when justifications can be had readily and easily it smacks of "gamism" or "dm character driving" too much for my tastes.
It's kind of like completely ignoring the operative work "if" in the dragon disciple PrC and stating only sorcerers can be Dragon Disciples, that bards can't do it at all.
If someone wants to work with me because they have a concept that doesn't match my campaign ideas, fine, but "pushing back," no . . . that's not going to happen.
I agree here. If A DM tell me that in his game paladins must have only LG gods, or that paladins do not have gods or any other little change he wants well It is his game. I am not gonna disrespect him by pushing back I always have the option of not playing
The Game seems to say you need a god, it could be more clear but it is not. Now that is up to your GM as it should be.
I always tell people 1 step, I know it is not a rule, but if you do not know your GM(like a PFS game) 1 step is safe. As clerics must be 1 step so it's safe for paladins to have a god within one step. All gods listed in the setting are with in one step. So showing up with a god more then one step is something you should only do if you know the GM will allow it
However the thought that a general requirement is somehow placed on the paladin by a slight mention in two different class features that doesn't come up anywhere else, and when justifications can be had readily and easily it smacks of "gamism" or "dm character driving" too much for my tastes.
Not at all, it does stat god. You just are hunting loopholes. But it is your GM world you are playing in. If you wish to make that kind of call then you should GM. That simple
There's roleplaying and there's powergaming. I'm sure we've all run into paladin players who felt it was their right to be rude to everyone who didn't kowtow to their inherent goodness and smite anything that looked at them funny.
Part of the trouble with the nebulous goodness approach is that it plays into the hands of exactly this sort of powergamer. Most players will agree to let the DM play the gods, the priests, and the full church hierarchy. But defining Evil, or for that matter Good? Hell no!
There's a difference between playing Sir Galahad and playing Judge Dredd with a License to Smite.
Not at all, it does stat god. You just are hunting loopholes. But it is your GM world you are playing in. If you wish to make that kind of call then you should GM. That simple
However the thought that a general requirement is somehow placed on the paladin by a slight mention in two different class features that doesn't come up anywhere else, and when justifications can be had readily and easily it smacks of "gamism" or "dm character driving" too much for my tastes.
Fine give me a quote.
The ONLY spot that a divine link is mentioned is the Divine Bond and the Holy Champion class abilities.
No where does it say, "A paladin must have a god."
You are making something out of thin air on the pretext that something is casually mentioned in two separate and minor class abilities.
Fine give me a quote.
The ONLY spot that a divine link is mentioned is the Divine Bond and the Holy Champion class abilities.
No where does it say, "A paladin must have a god."
You are making something out of thin air on the pretext that something is casually mentioned in two separate and minor class abilities.
Lets see shall we
1. "paladins seek not just to spread divine justice but to embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve. "
2."Upon reaching 5th level, a paladin forms a divine bond with her god. This bond can take one of two forms. Once the form is chosen, it cannot be changed."
3."At 20th level, a paladin becomes a conduit for the power of her god. '
That seems to be 3 times it says it that is just 2 times less then the cleric. So yeah it does say that as clear as the cleric does. Except the cleric stats a small number do not have a god, paladin does not state this.