OK, my only post to this thread will be:
Alignment threads are torture...
It's just that the game doesn't have any arbitrary limitations on your behaviour.So, when my character takes an action that changes their alignment to something which makes me vulnerable to a spell/ability based on his game-system approved morality stance; this is not an arbitrary limitation on my behavior?
Of course not. Your choice, you freedom. That includes the freedom to bear the consequences of your actions. But the rules won't make you automatically fail all attack rolls when you try to kill random children on the street.
After all, if you do things in real life, you'll have to live with the consequences, too. You do something others don't want you to do? They might punish you for it. And it doesn't have to be something you consider wrong, either. There's all kinds of arbitrary systems around that judge your behaviour! You might not think it bad to make a copy of your friend's computer game so you don't have to buy it, but the law calls it a crime and will punish you. You might not think it bad to have casual sex with some stranger you meet, but her father might think it bad and "invite" you to a shotgun wedding.
Killing, by itself, is not evil*.*Again, recall, we are speaking of within the confines of the pulp fantasy milieu/alignment universe.
Killing in real life, is not inherently evil, either.
I knew several pets that were put down, i.e. killed by the vet, but I don't call him evil for it. I don't call whoever slaughters the chickens, cows and pigs I so like to eat evil, either.
Neither does the law, by the way, in both cases.
OK, my only post to this thread will be:
Alignment threads are torture...
But nobody is forced to go there. They all want it.
Sticks and stones may break my bones, but posts and threads excite me!
I love alignment posts. I take the examples and arguments and link to them to show my players what my take on alignments is. Since one of my games has a paladin, this should prove extra useful.
All of which is just to say: dot for interest!
Of course not. Your choice, you freedom. That includes the freedom to bear the consequences of your actions. But the rules won't make you automatically fail all attack rolls when you try to kill random children on the street.It's just that the game doesn't have any arbitrary limitations on your behaviour.So, when my character takes an action that changes their alignment to something which makes me vulnerable to a spell/ability based on his game-system approved morality stance; this is not an arbitrary limitation on my behavior?
This seems to be what some players forget - especially the ones that decide "I'll be chaotic neutral - that means I can do anything I like!" and promptly decide to act chaotic evil.
Certainly the limitation isn't arbitrary, either - the details of the alignment system are there for all players to read. The precise interpretations might be hazy, but by and large players should at least know to ask the DM if they have questions.
Don't be obtuse, you know we're not talking about slaughtering cattle for meat, or putting down pets for a needful release. We're talking about the taking of Human,or at least sentient life which is counted as "people" in the fantasy settings we play in.
There is quite obviously no one from peta or India on these boards, Killed a human? who cares, punch a cow? off with your head!!!
There is quite obviously no one from peta or India on these boards, Killed a human? who cares, punch a cow? off with your head!!!
Don't be obtuse, you know we're not talking about slaughtering cattle for meat, or putting down pets for a needful release. We're talking about the taking of Human,or at least sentient life which is counted as "people" in the fantasy settings we play in.
Might be interesting to have a campaign setting where animals we regard as livestock are sacred ...
... or talk during theatre performances,
Hey, now, let's not take this too far. There are some redlines that just need to be respected if civilization as we know it is to survive.
Might be interesting to have a campaign setting where animals we regard as livestock are sacred ...There is quite obviously no one from peta or India on these boards, Killed a human? who cares, punch a cow? off with your head!!!
Don't be obtuse, you know we're not talking about slaughtering cattle for meat, or putting down pets for a needful release. We're talking about the taking of Human,or at least sentient life which is counted as "people" in the fantasy settings we play in.
I've always questioned why settings have to have the same ideas across the world, Why can't a part of the setting have livestock and another consider them sacred? That's what I assumed when I made my slaver character, where he was from no one cared about sentience, other creatures were the sacred ones, and yet everyone calls him evil.
Many paladins, perhaps most, would be hard to get along with. There is a degree of rigidity inherent in the concept which most players don't role play.No. Actually, too many players play the class as far more rigid than it actually has to be.
Think of the Pholtans in Greyhawk. Extremely inflexible, preachy, fanatically self-righteous. Largely offensive to anyone who doesn't share their beliefs.Those are Pholtans alright. Or not, I don't know the guys.
But that's not the only (or even a good) way to play a paladin.
In fact, it's a really bad way to play a charismatic, lawful good character, and an excuse to be a jerk.
I had paladins like that in groups often enough. Actually, too often (0 times would be too often, but it was more than that).
One of them just died the other day. Very tragic. Tragic because I couldn't make it to the session so I didn't see the idiot die!
+1
Paladins by far are the most difficult class to play, in a roleplaying sense, and I've seen them played poorly more often than I've seen them played well. Either as the self-righteous jerks described above, or just as a set of statistics without any moral code.
In my mind, a paladin can be pretty varied but I like to play them as:
-- humble
-- self-sacrificing
-- brave
-- kind
-- merciful
-- faithful
-- steadfast
-- reluctant but effective leaders
-- leaders by example more than by preaching
Also, keep in mind that the Greyhawk setting was created by a guy who believed the greatest "heroes" were actually neutral types like Mordenkainen and Gord, and layered equal scorn on both "good" and "evil" characters in his novels. I detect more than a bit of bias. It's no wonder he portrayed paladins as muscular TV evangelists with boards inserted rectally.
|
Perhaps it's because culturally we as a people don't really relate very well to Lawful Good archetypes, Americans as a people are more individually oriented, not as communal as other cultures, so our ideals tend to be more Chaotic.
There's a truth to that. Our 'heroes' on TV are the cops / government agents / etc. who break (or bend to the screaming point) rules of evidence, search and seizure, witness interrogation, etc. and we nod with vicarious satisfaction when an authority figure on TV breaks a rule to catch a bad-guy (and howl with outrage when a cop / official in the real world does anything that even *whiffs* of abuse of authority...).
Even our more idealistic comic-book superheroes, like Superman and Captain America, pale in popularity to characters like Wolverine, who pretty much ignore 'the law' and do whatever the hell they want to do.
Also, keep in mind that the Greyhawk setting was created by a guy who believed the greatest "heroes" were actually neutral types like Mordenkainen and Gord, and layered equal scorn on both "good" and "evil" characters in his novels. I detect more than a bit of bias. It's no wonder he portrayed paladins as muscular TV evangelists with boards inserted rectally.It's hard to imagine a Paladin who doesn't at least stray close to that trope every once in awhile. By the way Gygax isn't the only one to have that bias, Most of the Harper type heroes like Khelben seem to view Paladins the same way, as much as a problem as an aid. I think that that the humble Paladin you describe is going to be the uncommon one. I imagine that most Paladins tend to fall to the Miko Miyazaki side of the fence.
Perhaps it's because culturally we as a people don't really relate very well to Lawful Good archetypes, Americans as a people are more individually oriented, not as communal as other cultures, so our ideals tend to be more Chaotic.
Good observations, and I don't really disagree because a lot of people play paladins wrong, IMHO, which reinforces the negative stereotypes. There is also the fact that, as people, we are made more than a little uncomfortable by people who are, well, better than us. So we delight in tearing them down, exposing their feet of clay, so to speak. So, of course every person claiming to represent all that is good in life must be either an inflexible jerk, or a hypocrite or something, because they couldn't really just be that Good. Because that would mean it is possible, and what would that say about us?
People with strongly held faiths and/or moral codes also make those who don't share them uncomfortable, for many reasons. Certainly people who press their own moral codes on others can be annoying, to say the least, but in my view a paladin shouldn't be trying to force other people into believing as he does. He should instead state his faith quietly and firmly and live and act in such a way as to be an example to others.
I like my paladins better and that's how I run them (or insist they are run, if I'm DMing). Miko Miyazaki would have been stripped of her paladin powers early and often in any game I was running.
Interesting point on American culture. I'm pretty well-traveled, and my observation has been that, in many ways, Americans are more law-abiding than most cultures. We're one of just a few cultures that routinely line up in neat queues to get on the bus or plane, for example. And one of the few in which most people will stop at a red light and wait the full duration in the middle of the night with no one around. Of course we do take our freedoms seriously, and our freedom of speech protections are amongst the widest anywhere, not to mention the whole gun thing, which most of the world just doesn't understand. So I see where you're coming from.
Perhaps it's because culturally we as a people don't really relate very well to Lawful Good archetypes, Americans as a people are more individually oriented, not as communal as other cultures, so our ideals tend to be more Chaotic.There's a truth to that. Our 'heroes' on TV are the cops / government agents / etc. who break (or bend to the screaming point) rules of evidence, search and seizure, witness interrogation, etc. and we nod with vicarious satisfaction when an authority figure on TV breaks a rule to catch a bad-guy (and howl with outrage when a cop / official in the real world does anything that even *whiffs* of abuse of authority...).
Even our more idealistic comic-book superheroes, like Superman and Captain America, pale in popularity to characters like Wolverine, who pretty much ignore 'the law' and do whatever the hell they want to do.
Of course you also have to consider that we are the most litigious country in the world by far. We have more lawyers per capita than any country in the world, and far more laws on the books. No one else is even close. So what does that say about us?
Perhaps it says that we wish we could be more Chaotic and like to think of ourselves as wild and free, but in RL we are pretty heavily Lawful.
Even our more idealistic comic-book superheroes, like Superman and Captain America, pale in popularity to characters like Wolverine, who pretty much ignore 'the law' and do whatever the hell they want to do.
Except Wolverine doesn't do what the hell he likes; he doesn't shy from drastic action, but he's got his own code and he sticks to it. Wolverine doesn't kill out of convenience, although he does out of necessity. He's rough, but he doesn't beat up random people in the street.
In short, Wolverine could make a good archetype for a paladin with a curmudgeonly demeanour ...
Interesting point on American culture. I'm pretty well-traveled, and my observation has been that, in many ways, Americans are more law-abiding than most cultures. We're one of just a few cultures that routinely line up in neat queues to get on the bus or plane, for example. And one of the few in which most people will stop at a red light and wait the full duration in the middle of the night with no one around. Of course we do take our freedoms seriously, and our freedom of speech protections are amongst the widest anywhere, not to mention the whole gun thing, which most of the world just doesn't understand. So I see where you're coming from.
It's ironic, American society tends to be very conservative, yet idolises rebels. It insists people conform, but refuses to construct some of the social structures that other developed societies consider necessities (such as a universal healthcare) on the basis that they 'violate freedoms'.
Don't be obtuse, you know we're not talking about slaughtering cattle for meat, or putting down pets for a needful release. We're talking about the taking of Human,or at least sentient life which is counted as "people" in the fantasy settings we play in.
Killing in real life, is not inherently evil, either.I knew several pets that were put down, i.e. killed by the vet, but I don't call him evil for it. I don't call whoever slaughters the chickens, cows and pigs I so like to eat evil, either.
Neither does the law, by the way, in both cases.
I know that some people call all killing murder. So be more precise.
Besides, even killing people is not inherently evil in real life. Sometimes you just have not choice, because the bastard is dead-set on killing you, and the circumstances don't really give you a way to subdue him without killing him without giving the guy too much of an advantage. And that's just one example.
It's hard to imagine a Paladin who doesn't at least stray close to that trope every once in awhile.
Then I mourn your imagination.
You Americans (well, those in the thread who think that Americans can't do a decent paladin) should look at your own Jim Butcher's works. That guy knows how to create a character that just screams PALADIN DONE RIGHT.
I talk of Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files. He has a very strong and strict code of conduct, is immensely religious and unwavering in his belief, and can be a bit preachy at times. But only a bit. Most of the time he doesn't push his agenda on others, even when one of his close friends (and comrade in arms) is a wizard (considered in Christian lore to be a dark art).
No, he just lives his ideals, leads by example.
That's what a paladin should be. The guys are supposed to have tons of charisma, after all. And charisma is not just to fuel smites, people. Nagging jerks aren't charismatic. Lay off the vinegar route, paladins should be honey!
Another great Paladin is found in the Discworld novels. Carrot Ironfoundersson might not have divine power, but he's a perfect example of how a paladin should behave, and how he should try to win over others.
You Americans (well, those in the thread who think that Americans can't do a decent paladin) should look at your own Jim Butcher's works. That guy knows how to create a character that just screams PALADIN DONE RIGHT.
I talk of Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files. He has a very strong and strict code of conduct, is immensely religious and unwavering in his belief, and can be a bit preachy at times. But only a bit. Most of the time he doesn't push his agenda on others, even when one of his close friends (and comrade in arms) is a wizard (considered in Christian lore to be a dark art).
No, he just lives his ideals, leads by example.
That's what a paladin should be. The guys are supposed to have tons of charisma, after all. And charisma is not just to fuel smites, people. Nagging jerks aren't charismatic. Lay off the vinegar route, paladins should be honey!
Another great Paladin is found in the Discworld novels. Carrot Ironfoundersson might not have divine power, but he's a perfect example of how a paladin should behave, and how he should try to win over others.
Wait wait wait wait WAIT!
When these boards talk about annoying typical paladins they are referring to one that nags about doing the right thing all the time!???
Not what I thought at all... Usually the paladin is hated by the group because he refuses to solve some problems the easy way because it breaks his code of conduct. I've never played with a naggy paladin.
Another great Paladin is found in the Discworld novels. Carrot Ironfoundersson might not have divine power, but he's a perfect example of how a paladin should behave, and how he should try to win over others.
100% in agreement. Paladins do not have to be preachy, smite-o-matic two dimensional stereotypes - in fact, those are likely to fall really fast.
You Americans (well, those in the thread who think that Americans can't do a decent paladin) should look at your own Jim Butcher's works. That guy knows how to create a character that just screams PALADIN DONE RIGHT.
I talk of Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files. He has a very strong and strict code of conduct, is immensely religious and unwavering in his belief, and can be a bit preachy at times. But only a bit. Most of the time he doesn't push his agenda on others, even when one of his close friends (and comrade in arms) is a wizard (considered in Christian lore to be a dark art).
No, he just lives his ideals, leads by example.
That's what a paladin should be. The guys are supposed to have tons of charisma, after all. And charisma is not just to fuel smites, people. Nagging jerks aren't charismatic. Lay off the vinegar route, paladins should be honey!
Another great Paladin is found in the Discworld novels. Carrot Ironfoundersson might not have divine power, but he's a perfect example of how a paladin should behave, and how he should try to win over others.
+1 on Michael Carpenter. He rocks as a paladin.
You Americans (well, those in the thread who think that Americans can't do a decent paladin) should look at your own Jim Butcher's works. That guy knows how to create a character that just screams PALADIN DONE RIGHT.
I talk of Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files. He has a very strong and strict code of conduct, is immensely religious and unwavering in his belief, and can be a bit preachy at times. But only a bit. Most of the time he doesn't push his agenda on others, even when one of his close friends (and comrade in arms) is a wizard (considered in Christian lore to be a dark art).
No, he just lives his ideals, leads by example.
That's what a paladin should be. The guys are supposed to have tons of charisma, after all. And charisma is not just to fuel smites, people. Nagging jerks aren't charismatic. Lay off the vinegar route, paladins should be honey!
Another great Paladin is found in the Discworld novels. Carrot Ironfoundersson might not have divine power, but he's a perfect example of how a paladin should behave, and how he should try to win over others.
Been a while since I read Butcher's stuff as Dresden got a little preachy/predictable, but I do agree on Michael. He's a great paladin.
Well, I suggest you go through the loop hole in the system and conduct your torture the Ace Ventura way: scratch silverware across a plate, get in their face and poke your bare eye-ball. You know, things of that nature will get the job done while keeping your alignment in tact.
Also! nails across the chalkboard works for all of my PCs when garnering that need-to-know-now information. Nothing is more potent. Nothing.
Well, I suggest you go through the loop hole in the system and conduct your torture the Ace Ventura way: scratch silverware across a plate, get in their face and poke your bare eye-ball. You know, things of that nature will get the job done while keeping your alignment in tact.
Also! nails across the chalkboard works for all of my PCs when garnering that need-to-know-now information. Nothing is more potent. Nothing.
Also, making victims listen to Justin Bieber.
(okay, bad example, that one results in an instant alignment shift all the way to CE, and likely to a spontaneous transformation into a demon)
The thing is it's only HIS own code. He's not big on playing by rules set down by anyone else, and he holds even the idea of authority in contempt for the most part. He's strongly in the Chaotic Good archetype although he has ventured close to Neutral Good at times.Even our more idealistic comic-book superheroes, like Superman and Captain America, pale in popularity to characters like Wolverine, who pretty much ignore 'the law' and do whatever the hell they want to do.Except Wolverine doesn't do what the hell he likes; he doesn't shy from drastic action, but he's got his own code and he sticks to it. W
I would concur, but you can take the idea and add a bit more respect for an authority to make a paladin out of the personality type.
To me:
Cruel actions are evil.
Kind actions are good.But what if...
You have to be cruel to be kind?
I know this is kind of late, but THANK YOU for the Nick Lowe link. I was referring to the song (and, uh, Shakespeare), of course, but I had no idea there was a video!
If it ain't Stiff, it ain't worth a f@!*!
To Slavery...
In a country where slaves are legal und common, having slaves doesnt mean you cant be good.
Very good examples would be north and souths Madeline and the whole Main Family. Yes they had slaves, it was a way of being, but they DID try to give them the best possible live. And Orry nearly lost his mind when the evil overseer tortured the slave.
To torture....
Myself I am playing a LN Inquisitor of Erastil in Kingmaker.
Dont even think that I won´t torture or kill as a last resort.
Afterwards I will atone for my sins, but the inquisitor is the guy who will take the evil act on himself for the greater good, and is absolutly willing to atone and even condem himself.
Torquemada is one of the evilest guys in the human history, right there with Hitler, Stalin and Vlad Tepes. There's no way real world inquisition might be good in D&D terms