|
I've read through everything and I think there's one thing that has yet to be addressed. Within an order of paladins there will be different paladins with different "jobs." Some may be military tacticians, some may be judges, some may be the executioners, others may be knights, archers, footsoldiers, etc. Not every paladin (even within the same order) is pressed from the same mold, and PC paladins should be allowed to reflect this diversity. Also I am sure there are multiple orders following the same gods. Each god has different domains and these orders may focus on the different domains from that deity.
I envision most PC paladins like the gunslingers in the Dark Tower series. They travelled the domain meting out law and justice. It seems to me that most adventuring paladins would fall into the justicar/judge dredd type of paladin.
You are now $0.02 richer.
I think, ultimately, that the penance should fit the misdeed. A paladin who cheated in a friendly game of dice, a paladin who lied to a tax collector, and a paladin who betrayed their order and religion for a perceived slight should not be treated the same way.
Yeah but what you are missing is that the cheating and lying are really the worst examples of dishonour that a Paladin could bring on himself - to whit, the absence of personal integrity! To cheat and lie in those examples is the WORST offence, because there isn't even a mitigating circumstance... it's not like it was a die roll against Hagrid the Horrible where if you lose he decapitates his prisoners and if you won he would let them go - thus creating the moral quandry; this was low level stuff where walking the line should be a no brainer.
A code is a code, and cannot simply be paused or discarded for convenience etc, its a polarised viewpoint; either you are a cheat or you are not, there aren't shades of grey.
"Semper Fi" is not "Semper Fi - except on Fridays"
Within an order of paladins there will be different paladins with different "jobs." Some may be military tacticians, some may be judges, some may be the executioners, others may be knights, archers, footsoldiers, etc. Not every paladin (even within the same order) is pressed from the same mold, and PC paladins should be allowed to reflect this diversity.
Sure, but only a few of the roles will make for good adventuring Pallies - like imagine taking the scholar:
Party Leader: "Hey I got a boat and a mountain of rations, was thinking of getting the guys over for the weekend on heading on down to the Borderlands for some Dungeoneering, wanna come?"
Paladin: "Bummer dude, I have to decipher a pile of Scrolls for the Arch-Lectors' report on Monday, wont be able to make it - toooootally bogus".
|
|
Sure, but only a few of the roles will make for good adventuring Pallies - like imagine taking the scholar:
Party Leader: "Hey I got a boat and a mountain of rations, was thinking of getting the guys over for the weekend on heading on down to the Borderlands for some Dungeoneering, wanna come?"
Paladin: "Bummer dude, I have to decipher a pile of Scrolls for the Arch-Lectors' report on Monday, wont be able to make it - toooootally bogus".
hence why i quantified what i thought constituted an adventuring paladin:
I envision most PC paladins like the gunslingers in the Dark Tower series. They travelled the domain meting out law and justice. It seems to me that most adventuring paladins would fall into the justicar/judge dredd type of paladin.
Indeed :P
I think from a storytelling perspective the notion of different Orders within the Order could be quite a good angle, and indeed you could roll it into the Paladin class a bit like the Knights of Solamnia and their different rankings.
As you say though, for PC Pallies it's going to be cut from a very limited number of roles :)
KOS, how I miss thee!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_Solamnia
|
|
Indeed :P
I think from a storytelling perspective the notion of different Orders within the Order could be quite a good angle, and indeed you could roll it into the Paladin class a bit like the Knights of Solamnia and their different rankings.
As you say though, for PC Pallies it's going to be cut from a very limited number of roles :)
KOS, how I miss thee!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_Solamnia
It just gets on my nerves how most people see paladins as a cookie cutter, "you have to play it like this" class. People forget that even deities have multiple facets (hence why every deity has several domains)...if deities can have that many "faces" then their mortal followers would definitely be extremely varied and distinct. Take Iomedae, the goddess of valor, rulership, justice, and honor. She has the domains Glory, Good, Law, Sun, and War. While related, there are multiple facets just within that one god that different paladins are going to identify with differently.
Skill points! Those were FEATS! Too many feats for a non-fighter.
TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL!
Next week I'm thinking Arby's.
Tonight we dine... where it is reasonable affordable!
Some people are on a budget here.
Take Iomedae, the goddess of valor, rulership, justice, and honor. She has the domains Glory, Good, Law, Sun, and War. While related, there are multiple facets just within that one god that different paladins are going to identify with differently.
Sure I agree. On the flip side, how many sub-sects would develop a militant order though? War would, Glory would, Law MIGHT, but Sun and Good - probably not so much.
Really though, at the end of the day, the only thing driving cookie cutter characters is the cookie cutter players who don't add their opwn flavour and instead roll with defined stereotypes :)
|
|
Take Iomedae, the goddess of valor, rulership, justice, and honor. She has the domains Glory, Good, Law, Sun, and War. While related, there are multiple facets just within that one god that different paladins are going to identify with differently.Sure I agree. On the flip side, how many sub-sects would develop a militant order though? War would, Glory would, Law MIGHT, but Sun and Good - probably not so much.
Really though, at the end of the day, the only thing driving cookie cutter characters is the cookie cutter players who don't add their opwn flavour and instead roll with defined stereotypes :)
I think the reason why paladins get this treatment so often is due to the LG reguirement. I don't see why they weren't given the "any lawful" requirements or none at all. Why can you not be a paladin for a deity that isn't LG? Are the deities of other alignments so much less powerful than LG ones that they are incapable of bestowing the same types of gifts to their most fervent followers/enforcers?
When I look at the Paladin as a class, it was introduced waaay back in the day when there really were only a limited number of archtypes.
So there were the 4 Core classes, and 4 'PrC's (for want of a better term)
Fighter
Paladin
Cleric
Druid
Thief
Assassin
Magic User
Illusionist
Paladins were there for noble warriors (LG), Druids were N, and Assassins were the Evil guys.
If we got right into the heart of it, there have (from time to time) been all sorts of non-LG variants, usually termed Hell Knights yada yada.
Ultimately though, at the end of the day, the Paladin schtick only rolls with a Lawful base concept - and LN doesn't really fit the bill either.
Its going to end up LG or LE - and for an Evil aligned Militant Order you'd want a skillset and abilities reflective of their motives - hence a new class would be needed.
Paladins, as written, are too tightly wrapped in LG
which leaves me to wonder, wotc got rid of the alignment deal with the paladin, why did Piazo keep it.
that strict code, and that is really the most lawful part of the class......
Well to be fair, I think WotC jumped the (Paladin) Shark by removing the alignment restrictions. A chaotic evil Paladin makes about as much sense as a LG Assassin.
I am happy with Paladins, and the notion of Anti-paladins - both firmly glued to a Lawful axis, but at opposing ends of the spectrum.
I would allow a non-LG pally in my game. I think the important thing is that he is the representative of some of god by his actions, and he has to follow a code to represent that god correctly. If he misrepresents the particular deity then the deity puts him on timeout(takes his powers away).
I know this is not RAW, but it allows for all deities to have unique pallies, and at the same time, does not allow players to do what they want without fear of reprisal from their deity.
...and he has to follow a code to represent that god correctly. If he misrepresents the particular deity then the deity puts him on timeout(takes his powers away).
But there's the problem right there. Chaotics aren't real flash at following a said 'code', they are prepared to compromise the rule of law in order to achieve their desired ends. What end they are trying to achieve is what determines their placement along the G/N/E axis. Furthermore, Chaotic gods are too caught up in individualistic freedoms to get too bogged down in dogma. Imagine being the Paladin of the Hippy God - "everything is kinda ok man, as long as you dont get all heavy yeah, and if you kinda break the rules then thats cool too - because rules are like totally made by The Man....dude"
Paladins have a set of LAWS that they follow. A 'code' is more like a 'guideline'; just not the same thing.
Why can you not be a paladin for a deity that isn't LG?
You can. The paladin has the alignment restriction, not the deity. A paladin doesn't necessarily even require a deity.
|
|
Why can you not be a paladin for a deity that isn't LG?You can. The paladin has the alignment restriction, not the deity. A paladin doesn't necessarily even require a deity.
I guess what I'm getting at is if a paladin chooses to follow a LE or CN deity, why should the paladin's alignment be restricted to LG? Shouldn't paladins be the paragon of their deity (or ideal) rather than the paragon of society's view of what law and good are?
I guess what I'm getting at is if a paladin chooses to follow a LE or CN deity, why should the paladin's alignment be restricted to LG?
Because that's what paladins are. If a LE or CN deity wants a champion, fine, but that champion won't be a paladin. It'll be something else.
|
|
I guess what I'm getting at is if a paladin chooses to follow a LE or CN deity, why should the paladin's alignment be restricted to LG? Shouldn't paladins be the paragon of their deity (or ideal) rather than the paragon of society's view of what law and good are?
I knew this was coming up. The diety sponsors the Paladin not the other way around. The sponsoring of a Lawful Good Paladin has to fit whithin the Power in question's portfolio. Cyric for example, the God of Murder, Theft, and Lies, would not, could not sponsor a Paladin even for a subterfuge because such an act would be utterly foreign to his portfolio. Maybe you'd see how it would work as a metagaming player but thematically it simply doesn't fly.
In Arcanis where the gods have no alignment, Paladins are devotees to the aspect of the God that embodies the Lawful Good ideals of the Paladin, they can easily be in a situation where they striking down Chaotic Evil devotees of the same God.
So i come back to the question of whether non-LG deities are weaker than their counterparts or not. The paladin class is very easily adaptable to any alignment (auras, etc), yet LG deities are the only ones with the power to "sponsor" these champions that embody their ideals? Sounds as though these goody two-shoes deities have been given preferential treatment.
...yet LG deities are the only ones with the power to "sponsor" these champions that embody their ideals?
Not so. For example, there is a class called "cleric" that can fill the role of deity champion quite nicely.
So you're telling me that a CE god of war and destruction is limited to a moderately effective martial class whereas a LG god of say plants and sun can have a battlemaster championing it?
Since I didn't say that, obviously I'm not telling you that. You want a battlemaster for a CE god of war and destruction? Go for a CE fighter. That still not good enough? Take some initiative and convert these for your own use.
|
|
So you're telling me that a CE god of war and destruction is limited to a moderately effective martial class whereas a LG god of say plants and sun can have a battlemaster championing it?Since I didn't say that, obviously I'm not telling you that. You want a battlemaster for a CE god of war and destruction? Go for a CE fighter. That still not good enough? Take some initiative and convert these for your own use.
Yet if you play a plain ole CE fighter, you don't receive any benefit from the deity you are championing--basically, like you said, the only way to benefit from a deities blessing for a non-lawful, non-good deity (maybe one step away on either axis) is to be a cleric...
As for converting the rules, it's not like it's hard...pick a deity or alignemnt when you create pally...adjust auras, channel energy, and code sections accordingly, then...well, no, that's it. Seems like it would have been an easy fix that would make sense from both a metagame and game perspective.
Yeah but what you are missing is that the cheating and lying are really the worst examples of dishonour that a Paladin could bring on himself - to whit, the absence of personal integrity! To cheat and lie in those examples is the WORST offence, because there isn't even a mitigating circumstance... it's not like it was a die roll against Hagrid the Horrible where if you lose he decapitates his prisoners and if you won he would let them go - thus creating the moral quandry; this was low level stuff where walking the line should be a no brainer.
A code is a code, and cannot simply be paused or discarded for convenience etc, its a polarised viewpoint; either you are a cheat or you are not, there aren't shades of grey.
"Semper Fi" is not "Semper Fi - except on Fridays"
I was not saying that any of the above are okay. My point is that while there are many ways to fall short of the code, the magnitude of the infraction matters. Getting drunk when you have sworn to, among other things, conduct yourself honorably is an infraction of the code, but a relatively minor one imo. Having sworn a 30-page code that basically says that you will fight evil and uphold good and then switching sides Anakin Skywalker style is something completely different, mitigating circumstances or now. What I was basically trying to say is that the punishment and atonement involved in restoring a paladin to grace can not be the same for effectively withholding a few silver coins and for capital treason and mass murder.
No one is perfect, not even a paladin. Sometimes, even a holy warrior falls short. Yet there's falling short and falling short.
Yet if you play a plain ole CE fighter, you don't receive any benefit from the deity you are championing--basically, like you said, the only way to benefit from a deities blessing for a non-lawful, non-good deity (maybe one step away on either axis) is to be a cleric...
The "only way"? Nope. Cleric/fighter, for example.
That aside, no one's going to play a CE fighter in my game, so the perceived limitations don't concern me. As a DM, if I want my NPC CE fighter champion of Blood and Chaos to have special abilities, he'll have special abilities.
As for converting the rules, it's not like it's hard....
Then I fail to see what the complaint is.
|
|
The "only way"? Nope. Cleric/fighter, for example.
That aside, no one's going to play a CE fighter in my game, so the perceived limitations don't concern me. As a DM, if I want my NPC CE fighter champion of Blood and Chaos to have special abilities, he'll have special abilities.
As far as my use of CE as an example it was just that...an example. There are deities of every alignment therefore there would be (in my opinions) paladins to every deity and therefore paladins of every alignment.
As for multiclassing, that right there is just penalizing to a player and in no way comes close to what a paladin is (auras, companion, LoH, etc, etc).
Then I fail to see what the complaint is.
The complaint is that, when there are other alignment restrictions placed on character classes they are more of "due to the strict discipline required x class must be of lawful alignment" whereas with a paladin the requirements state that they must be of lawful alignment and adhere to an arbitrary definition of good because if they don't they'll be a commoner w/ a good bab and weapon skills.
Look at modern religions as an example. There are people within religions that are assured that there way is the only way and they will go to great lengths to make sure that people who can't be brought to their way of thinking are punished. Feasibly this type of paladin could be LG...walking around smiting non-believers who won't convert, etc. But according to how the class is written, you have to adhere to local laws and this abstract def. of "good." If you go around smiting neutral non-believers (while this may work for your character) you would fall harder than a broke investor from his high-rise during the great depression. The class as written can be very restrictive for character development
/endrant