Did you ever think about banning the paladin from your game world just to avoid all the "a paladin can't do that" arguments?
The one I see here on the boards are much more acrimonious than I ever see at my home games. But the ones at my home games are more than bad enough.
I like the concept clear back to when they were first introducted in the games. In PF I even like the mechanics. I can even usually deal ok with any single semi-reasonable interpretation on the restrictions.
However, I don't think I've ever seen any 2 people agree on that interpretation (unless 1 just agress with whatever the other is saying). Most GM's can't even stay with one set of rulings.
We almost had a flower-child-redeem-the-sinners paladin and an oath of vengence paladin in the same party. I was almost ready to just close up the campaign before it even started. Luckily one player decided to switch on his own.
Still every single fight (except the ghoul attack) and most non-combat encounters have started at least a modest argument that centers around the paladin's code. Even if he wasn't there! We had a discussion on whether the paladin should take action against one of the other PC's when he found out later that there was shady deal being considered.
It always seems like there is at least 1 out of our 6 players that wants to be a paladin. But I almost always feel like it detracts from the game rather than adds to the game.
I probably won't ever actually do it since I know so many people like it, but I have seriously considered banning the paladin. Anyone else?
Ok, rant over.
Did you ever think about banning the paladin from your game world just to avoid all the "a paladin can't do that" arguments?
It always seems like there is at least 1 out of our 6 players that wants to be a paladin. But I almost always feel like it detracts from the game rather than adds to the game.
I probably won't ever actually do it since I know so many people like it, but I have seriously considered banning the paladin. Anyone else?
Ok, rant over.
Just get rid of the code, boom no more issues from the class. No need to ban it.
Never had problems with them in any games offline. DMed for two and played one myself, as long as the player and the GM sit down and make sure they're on the same wavelength as far as the code and their deity's dogma (if any) go, all's well as far as I've experienced.
Only places I've seen the arguments break out is on forums such as this and online gaming servers for Neverwinter Nights, usually when one paladin's player (or the player of a connected class such as cleric) sees another paladin acting in a way they think is inappropriate and starts up a fuss, getting players splitting into cliques and camps and forcing the staff to intervene.
Worst our table has seen is some gentle ribbing for "taking a dive" when a pally still had some HP's left. Some people take things too seriously I suppose, but we have always taken the aproach that if your character does his best to be honest, good and fair over the course of his career that is good enough and if you do slip up huge..thats what atonement is for.
Sounds like your groups are much more relaxed about it than mine are.
Did you ever think about banning the paladin from your game world just to avoid all the "a paladin can't do that" arguments?
The one I see here on the boards are much more acrimonious than I ever see at my home games. But the ones at my home games are more than bad enough.
Honestly I have gamed since 1980 and I have never had any issues playing a Paladin or with other peoples paladins in any of the games I have ever played in. I see far more flack about them on message boards than anywhere else.
I have never played in a game that banned them, though I will state that in any game where they were an option the GM made it clear what he thought their code and morality were for his game so maybe I have just been lucky and gotten really smart DM's for the last 32 years.
Paladins are hard to play due not only to the strict and narrow moral stance they are often required to take but also due to the possible conflict in moral views between player and GM in many games.
I prefer to look at it as playing the game on 'hard mode'. Yeah it is tougher because of the restrictions but that just means you have to be a better/more creative player to do it right.
If your group is not ready to do a lot of RP about morality, justice, etc. and your running a campaign where the other characters are pretty much the kill the monsters and scoop the loot types, then maybe a Paladin is not the best thing for your game.
I find a lot of the problems with Paladins comes from game masters not making it clear from the get go how aligment and morality is viewed for their world and not having a good conversation with the paladin player and the group on what the Paladin character is expected to be, morality speaking, given that GM's setting and the Paladins 'order/vow' and religion.
Getting that sort of thing cleared up before game start usually goes a long way.
Another issue I see, IMO, is a lot of gamers unwilling to role play that their paladins can screw up or deal with their own screw ups, like other characters, since the results of that means they can lose their powers. Many, from what I have seen on the boards, like to rationalize nearly any behavior to avoid the issue, which also leads to many of the Paladin arguments we see, IMO.
Bottom line: Talk to your GM and group if your going to play a Paladin so everyone is on the same page about what Paladins are and do if your going to play one. If that conversation makes it seem that you cannot come to a concensus then consider playing another class for the groups sake.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with paladins has nothing to do with their fluff or the mechanics of the class. Its fundementally a player issue.
The first item of note is generally when players decide to play a paldin the code is front and center to their character. This strictly speaker ng isn't an issue but it conflicts with the following.
A lot of players don't seem to want their heroes to be heroic. They lie they cheat they steal many want to play chars with good in their alignment then do a lot of not good things. Most players don't want to deal with prisoners, they are poorly equipped to handle them in any meaningful way.
Lastly if your going to play one be sure dm and player are on the same page as far as the code and the gods interests and you should be fine.
I would probably just ban the code, change his alignment to one step from his deity, and buff the fighter.
The role-playing challenges of a paladin IS the game balance for their powers.
I happen to really like paladins, and encourage them at my table. There's one in my Rise of the Runelords PF campaign right now.
I have NEVER had an issue with paladins in any actual games I've either played or GMed in over 30 years of playing. Only once have I seen a paladin fall from grace, and it was a deliberate roleplaying/character development decision on the part of the player.
Honestly, all the paladin/alignment rants on the boards seem to me to stem from immaturity.
Now, you kids get off my lawn!
The Paladin Conundrum: If a Paladin joins the party, at least one party member will immediately change their goal from helping the party to making the Paladin fall. The Paladin is the center of all disputes, whether present or not. If you remove Paladins (or the Paladin Code) from the game, someone will immediately want to play a Paladin (or character with the Paladin Code).
/facepalm
I've rarely seen them be so powerful that it disrupts my encounters.
I am actually very laid back on the code.
Last time I was GM, to try and head off the arguments, I said "you as the player tell me what you think your paladin code should be and how it will be enforced. As long as you don't state something completely unreasonable, we will go with that for the campaign." The player came up with something and I agreed to it. I then told all the other players, "I am not going to be real strict on the paladin code and this is what we are using for paladins."
They still had to argue what seemed like almost every action or inaction into the ground. I would interrupt with, "I don't see this as a conflict with his code. I am not imposing a penalty for it." They would then bring up the next little nit picking item.
I have seen at least 4 groups behave this way. I have only been the GM part of the time in 2 of them. I wish I had your groups attitude toward the subject.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds to me like you have one of three problems.
1. Your players are jerks - however if this alone was the issue you'd have more problems than just the paladin thing, so moving along
2. Your players are bored and have nothing better to do than nitpick - can't make a call on this
3. Your players just plain don't like paladins - this is where I'd lay my bets, it seems to me like they repeatedly keep going out of their way to find a way for the paladin to screw up
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Last time I was GM, to try and head off the arguments, I said "you as the player tell me what you think your paladin code should be at how it will be enforced. As long as you don't state something completely unreasonable, we will go with that for the campaign." The player came up with something and I agreed to it. I then told all the other players, "I am not going to be real strict on the paladin code and this is what we are using for paladins."
You handled it well, Gronk. It sounds like some of your players want to be the GM and make the judgment calls. This usually happens when most of the table has GM'ed a good deal in the past. I have encountered this in other rules disputes, but I guess I am fortunate enough to have a group that feels close to how I do about Paladins. You may want to do away with the code. A Paladin is not so powerful that he requires a balancing element that turns into an RP-albatross.
To answer your question, I have "banned" Paladins my entire GM life. I make it clear to my players that they may not bring any character to the table that is going to be completely opposed to group harmony. This usually includes evil characters and most Paladins. The few Paladins I have had in groups had much more relaxed codes, so I would not really call them Paladins anymore. This is just my two copper on the matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What, ban pallys instead of using the opportunity to do some actual ROLE playing? ...
Hopefully unintentional insult aside, the players are not doing any role playing. They are stopping the role playing to have an ooc argument.
... My last pally was an nasty piece-of-work ... His tactical 'suggestions' which he would not take part of but would gleefully describe provoked response, but as he put it "what constitutes honorable fighting is between you and your deity, I meet my foes as my code directs me but it would be wrong to force you who follow another deity to follow my deity's code." Also amusing was having the rest of the party object when I granted mercy to surrendered foes, "I grant you the mercy of a swift execution so you can face Pharasma in a state of repentance and not worry about adding more crimes to the judgement of your soul as you surely will if if you remain alive" ...
I've seen many threads where people talk about this. I don't think the sophistry to call this lawful good holds water. However, if the player really wanted to play this I probably would have just rolled my eyes and not stopped him.
... when a possibly-evil-and-at-least-neutral rogue thinks you are going too far role-playing a pally it is a good thing... the player needs two things. a strong sense of arrogance so they can force the other players to accept their take on the pally's code without backing down...
I hope it's not what you meant, but this comes across like "I'm going to force you to play my way so I can have fun and I hope you don't."
Just get rid of the code, boom no more issues from the class. No need to ban it.
House rule we have:
Uphold your deities ideals. REspect the law in all places you come, but when tere is a conflict with your gods ideals: Ideals wins!The only one who is allowed to make calls about aligment issues is the GM. The res: Shut up. Works quite well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find a lot of the debate over what a Paladin can and can't do is really a debate between people who like them and people who don't.
We made life easy early on - we got rid of the code and the alignment restrictions and instead made Paladins scions of a particular god, meaning there were 'Paladins' of every alignment who's code was basically that their actions always strive to further the agenda of their deity or at the very least support and affirm their deity's perspective on the world. Detect Evil was done away with as a class feature (it rp-blocks too many great scenarios anyway) and Smite could be used against any intelligent being who stood in the way of their deity's designs.
After all, those Paladins powers are divine in nature and therefor, by definition, must come from something or someone divine - it ain't the power of clean living that's giving them all those spells and abilities.
I think the word you're looking for is stubborn, not arrogant.
Honestly as a paladin player, I've had more issues with GMs singling me out than anything. At one point, my paladin of Pelor lost his powers because I took the BBEG as a prisoner after he begged for mercy. Went through a whole kangaroo court session in Heaven and was sent to Hell to "live with the devils I love so much". The GM was constantly pissed that I'd show mercy to bad guys. My cohort was an ex-murdering gnoll that I had converted to the glory of Pelor.
There are more stories than that but I've learned to never play divine characters again.
Yeah I would quit that game and tell the DM to find another punching bag.
Yeah I would quit that game and tell the DM to find another punching bag.
I was young and spiteful and instead made a barbarian that killed all the NPCs we came across. Good or bad.
Way to go Odraude! Youth is wasted on Paladin-hating GMs!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did you ever think about banning the paladin from your game world just to avoid all the "a paladin can't do that" arguments?
I ban the arguments instead.
I played in a game where all five of us were Paladins, and it worked.
...Instead of having the players argue about the pally's behavior have the characters do it. Allowing OOC arguments is one way to handle it, but it is just as easy for the GM to interrupt with "that's nice, but how does your character feel about it?" A discussion of the Paladin Code in character can really flesh out the nature of the characters involved and gets the players to create a view of good/evil for the characters...
In four different groups, it doesn't happen. The players are so involved in the discussion, I've never been able to get any IC reference involved. I will try again next week, but I don't expect it to work.
I'm not going to get involved with your concept of what is involved with playing the code. Mainly because that is the sort of discussion I am currently frustrated with.
As far as the 'arrogance' statements. I guess I am unsure what you mean. The way you described it sounds like a person I would not play with. I play this game to relax. I don't find someone having fun at my expense relaxing.