Now, i know that most people see a paladin as a LG character no matter what, and i don't really disagree with this that much.
However, That being said, i don't understand why gods such as Asmodeous, or any other god, cannot have their own paladins.
With this in mind, i would like the opinions on the following House Rule that i run, to see the general consensus.
To begin with, i run a subjective alignment system. This works in that a character effectively has two alignments. a Mechanical alignment (MA) which I as the GM keep track of and a personal alignment (PA), Which is what the character see's themselves as.
My ruling with paladins, is that their PA must be LG - In other words, they must follow the tenants of their god the the letter (the Lawful), and Proceed as to the betterment of the gods cause (the greater good). The MA however, would be what everyone else see's the character as, and how they react in terms of game mechanics.
An example of justification of this method (forgive the extreme example) Is Adolf Hitler, Who by most peoples reckoning would be LE (He killed many people, but never broke an actual German law, he just changed them from inside the system) But in his own mind, he was LG - Acting to the betterment of the Aryan race. [SN. I'm not justifying the man, just providing an example]
Through Roleplay, Paladins can still fall from grace, usually if their perception changes on the acts they are doing, or if their MA changes very drastically from more than one step from their god.
In terms of powers granted, i swap [Evil] with [Law] [Good] and [Chaos] as required to supplement the paladins abilities, so that it is not ruined by its own mechanics (detecting evil on a LE paladin for example would show himself... not very useful).
So, Opinions on this? Are there any ways in which you think i could improve this house rule (and no, i will not restrict them to LG, i just don't think its realistic, no matter the setting).
~ Hinairusu
you could have them play an inquisitor. It has a lot of similarities, but I think that the paladin ought to be LG- sorry.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lawful Good is the alignment of paladins because it is the most demanding alignment to play. In return they get a lot of powers and abilities. If they cease being LG, then the abilities have to tone down at least because the burden of maintaining a stringent code is relaxed (Chaotic Good cannot by their nature stick to a code, for example). Evil is not restricted to refraining from good deeds, so long as they do evil in the long-run - LG characters are much more restricted: a paladin falls for a single evil deed.
Hence if you want 'paladins' that are not LG, you have ease away some of their abilities, or reduce them in scope in some way. My own suggestion, if you want to go down that path, would be to instead introduce some feats or archetypes of other classes to fill the gap of the 'divinely inspired' warrior of other alignments.
I would argue that LG is actually one of the easier alignments to play, but that's down to interpretation.
Inquisitors do fulfill a similar role, but they are still not quite the same as a paladin.
For example, Why can Cayden Cailean not have a Paladin of his cause? Or Ketephys - Paladins of the hunt. the restriction on one step of Deity and LG means that these deities cannot have any holy warriors of their cause, which is what i always understood a paladin to be.
As for terms of their abilities, Their abilities are tied directly into the following of their gods, rather than anything else. Their abilities, while powerful, Don't to me to seem in any relation to how hard they are to play, or out of balance with the other classes. (Forgive me here) - DnD 4th ed (Yeah i know) didn't restrict paladins, and yet their abilities did not have to be curtailed if they were not LG. Why in pathfinder does the system mean that if they are not LG they must have weakened powers? (response to Dabbler)
Also, As i said, Their PA would still be LG in terms of their deities codes - so they would still have to abide by the tenants of their god. so while mechanically they would appear Chaotic, they wouldn't believe themselves to be.
The paladin is a very powerful class- I would argue that it's in many ways overpowered comparted to other classes.. Restricting the class to lawful good alignments only is the primary game balance for the class-- it's a difficult alignment to play correctly.
If you want to play a similar flavored character that doesn't have the LG restriction, play an inquisitor.
Paladin are hardly so strong as to justify a restriction to a specific alignment, IMO. Just compare them to Oracles or Druids.
In 3.5 Unearthed Arcana there were variant Paladins of the various "extreme" alignments, CG, CE, LE. IMO there's nothing wrong with the idea that a CG deity like Cayden Cailean on a Neutral deity like Pharasma might want a holy warrior who exemplifies their ideals.
How would some one think they were acting lawful but instead act in a chaotic manner?
lawful character give their word and don't break it, they believe that systems of law need to be followed and they are disciplined in how they go about their lives.
a chaotic character has no reason to keep his word until it no longer suits him. he believes that authority is flawed and does not trust that if he has to work within the system things will be accomplished.
I mean, do what you want with the class, but an inquisitor can certainly be a holy warrior for any faith.
I like my paladin to be LG. They are examples of truth, honor, and knightly virtue. Their powers are derived from their virtue. The fact they are that kind of character is what makes them so interesting and unique.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin are hardly so strong as to justify a restriction to a specific alignment, IMO. Just compare them to Oracles or Druids.
In 3.5 Unearthed Arcana there were variant Paladins of the various "extreme" alignments, CG, CE, LE. IMO there's nothing wrong with the idea that a CG deity like Cayden Cailean on a Neutral deity like Pharasma might want a holy warrior who exemplifies their ideals.
Agreed.
Many will say a non-LG Paladin is sacrilege and badwrongfun.
Some will claim that's a balancing point, because paladins are "too powerul", and forget that wizards, druids and clerics are much more powerful and can have lots of different allignments.
Personally I think allignment is a pointless mechanic, and that fun should be ultimate goal of the game. Does a Player really want to play a CG, Paladin? Let him. Does he want to play a NE Anti-Paladin? Let him. TN is a bit weird, but why not? Maybe he's working for a balance between good and evil. Just adjust the mechanics for the character/player.
But really, whenever you post anything about Paladins, be ready to face a lot of accusations of badwrongfun, because for some reason, people tend be quite fanatical about the class.
I would argue that LG is actually one of the easier alignments to play, but that's down to interpretation.
I never said it wasn't easy, I said it was demanding. A paladin's code requires that they perform certain actions and refrain from others. That's demanding. One reason Paladins get so much - oodles of abilities, healing, spell-casting and the best combat power of any class, Smite Evil - is because they are restricted in other ways.
Inquisitors do fulfill a similar role, but they are still not quite the same as a paladin.
For example, Why can Cayden Cailean not have a Paladin of his cause? Or Ketephys - Paladins of the hunt. the restriction on one step of Deity and LG means that these deities cannot have any holy warriors of their cause, which is what i always understood a paladin to be.
Yes they can have holy warriors - they just are not, mechanically, the paladin class as is.
How would you write down the paladin's code for a paladin of Cayden Cailean? He's chaotic, by definition chaotic characters do not stick to codes, so that makes it pretty difficult to be limited by a code, does it not?
As for terms of their abilities, Their abilities are tied directly into the following of their gods, rather than anything else. Their abilities, while powerful, Don't to me to seem in any relation to how hard they are to play, or out of balance with the other classes. (Forgive me here) - DnD 4th ed (Yeah i know) didn't restrict paladins, and yet their abilities did not have to be curtailed if they were not LG. Why in pathfinder does the system mean that if they are not LG they must have weakened powers? (response to Dabbler)
Let's see, paladins get better saves than any other class, including the monk. Their AC is up there with the best. They can dish out more hurt than any other class when smiting, and they can heal in addition and get a stack of immunities that also act as party buffs. They even get a companion. So yes, I would that paladin's DO get more than any other combat class. The flip side of the paladin is their code and alignment restriction. As I mentioned above, they have restrictions on their deeds and actions. This is the paladin's limiting factor.
However, if you change the alignment of the paladin, you have to re-write the code. A chaotic character shouldn't even follow a code, an evil character does not have the same restrictions as a good one. So if you lose the paladin's limiting factor, you should lose the edge off their abilities. Otherwise it's just "I want to smite things and be badass, but I don't want to deal with the down-side of the class" - like asking for extra skills and saves as a fighter, but not lose anything in return.
Also, As i said, Their PA would still be LG in terms of their deities codes - so they would still have to abide by the tenants of their god. so while mechanically they would appear Chaotic, they wouldn't believe themselves to be.
Aside from the matter of being of one alignment but believing you are of another, which is a debate for another thread, the code WILL be different for different deities and alignments.
Paladin are hardly so strong as to justify a restriction to a specific alignment, IMO. Just compare them to Oracles or Druids.
Apples to oranges. Compare them to fighters and rangers instead, and you see paladins are THE toughest of the full BAB classes, and the hardest hitting. Not the most versatile, perhaps, but without a doubt the strongest.
In 3.5 Unearthed Arcana there were variant Paladins of the various "extreme" alignments, CG, CE, LE. IMO there's nothing wrong with the idea that a CG deity like Cayden Cailean on a Neutral deity like Pharasma might want a holy warrior who exemplifies their ideals.
Yes there are, and they had some differences from one another. In Pathfinder the anti-paladin is not a powerful as the paladin, thanks to the differences between healing and harming.
I'm not objecting to the other alignments or deities having holy warriors., in fact I think it's a good idea. But consider: the paladin is structured around being (but not restricted to) the knight in shining armour concept. Would a holy warrior of Cayden Cailean be a knight in heavy armour? No way! He'd be a swashbuckling vagabond. That character concept is more skill-heavy, and relies on wits more than strength. This paladin would be more like duelist than a conventional paladin, so much so that at the least they would be a very different archetype, if not a completely different class (same way that ninja is a rogue, samurai is a cavalier).
Aside from the matter of being of one alignment but believing you are of another, which is a debate for another thread, the code WILL be different for different deities and alignments.
- Actually, That's the whole point of this thread - How it interacts with playing a paladin.
Also, in terms of Cayden? Carry Tankards, Poor out a splash for luck before engaging in something risky/dangerous, Interrupt not others drinking (its how they worship him), Enjoy your adventuring.
All of these could be played in a lawful way - and they would be tenants of his god - as far as i can interpret them from his description.
Cayden Cailean Is indeed a difficult one to embody for this, but it was meant to be a difficult example. Why should he not have a Paladin.
I Think Lemmy has the idea of what i was going for here.
Also, I'll state again,because i don't think i was clear the first time. even if this topic degenerates into a "OMG PALADINS MUST BE LG" thread, it wont achieve what i want here. I want advice on how to improve this rule, not remove it. How can i adapt this for balance. How can i apply to the players wanting to play a LE paladin their codes, Etc. Just getting it out there that I'm not interested in another LG paladin debate - there are many on this forum, and all of them are pretty uninteresting.
Lawful Good is the alignment of paladins because it is the most demanding alignment to play. In return they get a lot of powers and abilities. If they cease being LG, then the abilities have to tone down at least because the burden of maintaining a stringent code is relaxed (Chaotic Good cannot by their nature stick to a code, for example). Evil is not restricted to refraining from good deeds, so long as they do evil in the long-run - LG characters are much more restricted: a paladin falls for a single evil deed.
Hence if you want 'paladins' that are not LG, you have ease away some of their abilities, or reduce them in scope in some way. My own suggestion, if you want to go down that path, would be to instead introduce some feats or archetypes of other classes to fill the gap of the 'divinely inspired' warrior of other alignments.
This is one of the reasons I dislike the anti-paladin class. Being forced into chaotic evil alignment, with a "Here are the rules: don't follow rules. If you are lawful and follow codes you will lose your powers. Remember if you break this code and set of rules you will lose your powers"
As for your setup: It's an interesting idea, but personally I can easily imagine a paladin of any lawful or even neutral alignment without needing to resort to the idea of a double alignment system. The anti-paladin presented by Paizo, and Unearthed Arcana's paladins of different faiths seem to present that enough. What I'm trying to say is that I believe what you want to do will work, but also that perhaps it is more effort than it is truly worth, and that it'd be easier to simply design the paladin for other alignments.
Aside from the matter of being of one alignment but believing you are of another, which is a debate for another thread, the code WILL be different for different deities and alignments.
- Actually, That's the whole point of this thread - How it interacts with playing a paladin.Also, in terms of Cayden? Carry Tankards, Poor out a splash for luck before engaging in something risky/dangerous, Interrupt not others drinking (its how they worship him), Enjoy your adventuring.
All of these could be played in a lawful way - and they would be tenants of his god - as far as i can interpret them from his description.
Except that this is a standard of behaviour, a code. That's Lawful, and CC is chaotic. His code is basically, "have a good time and do the right thing." Nice and easy, but that's the problem.
Cayden Cailean Is indeed a difficult one to embody for this, but it was meant to be a difficult example. Why should he not have a Paladin.
Because paladins are lawful and he isn't. A paladin is a poor choice for CC, really - he's just not that kind of god. But a holy warrior similar to a paladin is another matter.
I Think Lemmy has the idea of what i was going for here.
Also, I'll state again,because i don't think i was clear the first time. even if this topic degenerates into a "OMG PALADINS MUST BE LG" thread, it wont achieve what i want here. I want advice on how to improve this rule, not remove it. How can i adapt this for balance. How can i apply to the players wanting to play a LE paladin their codes, Etc. Just getting it out there that I'm not interested in another LG paladin debate - there are many on this forum, and all of them are pretty uninteresting.
You are asking how to do something that wasn't meant to be done. But hold fire on this, I'm chucking some ideas down and I'll have something I can post up in a day or two.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Morality is one of the great philosophical debates of the real world, and folks (including myself) have argued over their subjectivity for centuries. It's a fascinating topic.
But in D&D, morality is unequivocally objective. Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos are forces that exist in the universe. Magic interacts with it. Certain creatures (demons, devils, angels, etc.) are literally made of it.
In this sort of world, your "personal alignment" is meaningless. You can think the moon is made of cheese and unless you're in a very, very outlandish campaign setting, that doesn't make it so.
So I don't really see purpose there.
Regarding paladins, for me the word "paladin" has certain connotations based on its origins, initial influences, and game history, that preclude evil or chaotic versions. That doesn't mean an evil god can't have (un)holy champions, just that I personally wouldn't call them paladins, and see no reason to.
I believe that some campaigns/maerial use "anti-paladin" to denote an evil version of a paladin. ymmv
But hold fire on this, I'm chucking some ideas down and I'll have something I can post up in a day or two.
~ I look forward to hearing them.
Thank you for your feedback so far guys, at least i know to avoid running games at a PFS Game xD
And yes Sirokko - i can see it as well, But my players asked me for a way in which we could use the system to allow for it, so i created this, and was wondering how well it would be taken.
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5ucm?Aeonic-Paladin-True-Neutral-Alternate-Clas s
Here is my True Neutral Paladin :D
OK, here is my first draft of a 'paladin of freedom' concept for Pathfinder.
I'd appreciate feedback, as I have toned down some abilities, added some new ones and have, I hope, come up with a viable class that's a bit more 'roguey' than 'knighty' in concept. Code is not as strict as a paladin's, but abilities are also less extensive. This works well with the idea of a fighter that is quite prepared to put the knife in your back if that's what it takes.
While this doesn't cover all the bases, the paladin covers LG (which can kind of cover LN and NG as well) this concept covers CG and CN, while the anti-paladin covers the evil alignments.
Oh look, one of the sacred cows of D&D being put under the butcher's knife by someone, just like Assassins being Always Evil along with using poison. Let's all attack the butcher and call him badwrong and/or doing it wrong so he/she will stop violating our sacred game rules!!
/sarcasm
Some sacred cows were born to be sacrificed!
/sarcasm
Some sacred cows were born to be sacrificed!
/sarcasm
...aren't you kind of missing the point with that one?
...aren't you kind of missing the point with that one?Some sacred cows were born to be sacrificed!
/sarcasm
Or are you missing the point of my point? :D
Perhaps I am. Do you consider some sacred cows worth their status?
I think some sacred cows are what makes D&D...well, D&D really. Paladins are one, in that respect. However, just because I do not think that the paladin itself should be touched insofar as alignment is concerned does not mean that I do not think other alignments and deities should not have their holy warriors along the lines of the paladin - an archetype that has many key differences and a scale-down in power given the less stringent requirements inherent in not being lawful good.
To be honest, the only exceptions I'd make to the Paladin deity selection are Pharasma and Milani, but the Paladin MUST STILL BE LAWFUL GOOD. And I still think Assassins should not be limited to Evil, but that's a story for another day.
In the first instance, how do you stand on other alignments having holy warriors?
In the second, if you are paid to kill people, it;s hard to see how you could not be evil, unless you are talking about using the assassin mechanics as a killer who targets for justice and not money.
Updating:
I believe the disparity comes from the name Paladin.
I was always of the belief that a Paladin was a Holy Knight of God, Sworn to uphold their beliefs.
If the community is so hung on up on the paladin must be LG - and always fail at stealth because of his big clunky armour, then Try this:
Paladin - Knight of Good - Rebel Knight
etc, untill there is a different name for each one.
Because realistically, That is what it looks like this is descending into.
That being said, I really like the idea you put forward there Dabbler, Do you mind if i use that in my game? I can see it ending very well with the party rogue already wanting to multiclass into it xD
I think Anti-Paladins should be lawful evil, not chaotic evil. I know that's a few posts back though.
I can see arguments before and against. I can see a Lawful Evil anti-paladin being a paladin who doesn't realise he has fallen, or who justifies their fall to themselves as doing 'what is necessary'. I see the chaotic evil anti-paladin as having embraced their fall, possibly going insane in the process. I'd accept an anti-paladin can be of any alignment.
That being said, I really like the idea you put forward there Dabbler, Do you mind if i use that in my game? I can see it ending very well with the party rogue already wanting to multiclass into it xD
I'd be honoured! Let me know how it pans out if you do, too, and any further feedback is always welcome.
Dabbler, Any chance you could gen abilities for a Paladin of ballence (TN) - I've got a player interested in it, Yet I've no idea where to start. Your class went down a storm already xD
Side note. I'm playing all of these as archetypes of paladin, To prevent stacking of abilities etc should they become LG, rather than a seperate class :)
Here is my in-game explanation from my Jade Regent pbp of why paladins MUST be Lawful Good (no ifs, ands, or buts) in the form of a conversation between the group paladin, Toshio, and Chaplain Tira of the Temple of Iomedae in Magnimar. Toshio had sought Tira out for an Atonement spell because he had temporarily lost his powers for committing what I deemed an evil act (he made a racial slur against the half-orc barbarian in the group during a heated moment - yes, I am a strict GM when it comes to alignment):
Toshio arrives at the Temple of Iomedae in time to put up his horse and attend the evening prayers. After that he is ushered into the austere office of Chaplain Tira Ronnova. Chaplain Tira is a gracefully aging Chelaxian aristocrat whose entire life has been lived in service to Iomedae. She had already been the senior most priest of Iomedae in Magnimar when Toshio entered the temple-fortress as a page at the age of 7. In some ways, Chaplain Tira was the one who had really raised him, as he had only seen his actual mother and father during brief vacations in the summer time until his training was finished a year ago.
Chaplain Tira greets him with a warm smile and a comradely embrace, and then takes her seat behind her large mahogany desk. She gestures to one of several chairs in front the desk. “Please, take a seat Toshio. I am glad that you were able to return in time for the Day of Inheritance. I see, however, that you are troubled. Please, tell me what is the problem and by the grace of Iomedae I will do what I can to help you and ease your heart.”
Toshio smiles in return, happy to see her despite the reason for his visit. “Chaplain, thank you for seeing me. It’s good to be here, but I wish I were here only for the celebrations.” His smile fades as he describes the situation. “I am indeed troubled. Not long ago, I used abusive words when one of my companions acted foolishly. Injured and angry, my tongue lashed out, speaking a slur against his race. I knew my error immediately, and a black cloud has come between Iomedae and myself. I have come to ask for your guidance in atoning for my mistake. I have apologized to Keng – he’s the one I insulted – but the cloud remains. What can I do?”
Chaplain Tira nods in understanding. “The sins of bodily action are obvious and fairly easy to curb. The sins of the mouth are much harder to catch. Sins of the mind and heart are the most subtle and insidious. Any of them, however, will block the light that we are given to share with the world. Toshio, have you ever wondered why paladins are held to a stricter standard than clerics? Have you ever wondered about the source of our power? If our goddess Iomedae set the standard, then whose standard did she follow before she ascended?”
“I hadn’t realized paladins are held to a higher standard than clerics. It doesn’t make sense to me. Clerics wield such power through their divine spells. Paladins have so little power by comparison. Just strength of arms.” Toshio finds he isn’t able to puzzle out an answer to this question.
Tira then asks, “Consider this as well: from whom did Iomedae get her power? It could not have been Aroden, for he was not an especially benevolent or kindly god. What do you think of this?”
Toshio ponders this for a moment. “If Iomedae didn’t get her power from Aroden, then she didn’t get it from any god. Could her power be from Good itself? Or Law? If that is the case, should those be our focus, rather than Iomedae herself? That would make sense, at least to my mind. But it also means our example is greater even than Iomedae – and our required path even narrower and harder to follow.” He looks to the Chaplain, hoping for confirmation of these concepts, or at least some additional guidance if his ideas are going in the wrong direction.
Chaplain Tira nods, “Yes, you are on the right track I think. Many philosophers and theologians have debated these ideas for centuries. It is still unknown who among the gods or beings that inhabit the great beyond are actually the eldest. Some of them may have even come from a universe beyond ours. Many claim there is a multiverse. Was Chaos the origin of all things? Or is there something, or someone who existed before or who even made the Maelstrom in order to house all the many worlds that this unknown god intended to make. No one knows for sure, and neither Aroden nor Iomedae have seen fit to tell us, if even they know – for they were both mortals who ascended to what we call godhood. The older gods like Pharasma are of course silent, – as they are about so many things. They may not know either. I agree, however, with those who say that there is a Divine Law or an Unknown Lord who takes precedence over all else both in terms of time and power, and that within the created order only Heaven, the realm of law and good presided over by the good deities and the archons, truly reflects this principle that is beyond and yet behind all things. Heaven is the ideal that all are bid to follow and emulate.
“Now when it comes to paladins and clerics, I am both so I know within myself the difference. Clerics are agents of the gods. As long as they do the will of the god to whom they worship and as long as they bring others to that god to direct worship to them, which may in fact empower them, then all is well. The gods will tolerate a bit of straying, and do not demand perfect conformity to their own principles as long as their will generally is done. One may say they are forgiving, others may say they are negligent. I suppose it depends upon the god in question. Paladins, however, are not simply agents of the gods they serve and in some cases hold values that are superior to the gods they serve, such as the paladins of Abadar the god of merchants. It is rumored that even some of the Hellknights are paladins, but I think that is an old wife’s tale. It is always a friend of a friend of a second cousin who knew of one. Anyway, paladins certainly serve in the priesthood’s of those gods who have them, but the principle they serve are those of Heaven alone, and this principle may be the Divine Law of the philosophers or the will of the Unknown Lord. We know not. What we do know is that as paladin’s advance in skill and determination they, or we I should say, become greater and greater vessels of grace. However, we must maintain a perfect conformity with that principle that transcends even the gods. It is almost inevitable that we misstep from time to time, but the gods have provided us with means of atonement. I imagine it is atonement that you seek, to bring your heart back into alignment with the principle that grants us our power.”
Me again: The atonement in this case was a mission to go undercover to a brothel in Low Cleft and check on the fate of a girl there who had been a friend of one who had sought haven at the Temple of Iomedae. In the course of that he was discovered slinking around the brothel by his other companions who were drunkenly carousing and looking for a fight and/or companionship. Much hilarity ensued including a battle with a vampire and a showdown between an evil priestess of Calistria and a Hellknight, but in the end the paladin got his powers back and once more lived up to his alignment.
A racial slur was an evil act? That seems more than strict, it sounds a little overboard. I could see a Paladin, if he held those beliefs, saying that.
He may not like or not trust a race or a country- and because he is Lawful he will Admit it! (lawful people are honest so, he is not going to hide his feelings) So he may not like that race, but he is good so while he may not think much of them and may not say nice things about them (which he honestly believes) he will go out of his way to help them because he is called to a higher service than his own personal feelings.
Racial slurs may be inappropriate by our standards, but if that is too harsh of a judgment and stifles character development.
Ubercroz: "A racial slur was an evil act?" Taishaku said he was strict.
Seriously, that is the whole point of the Paladin: being the ultimate role playing class in the game. Every other RP I've seen has been the creation of a player within the game. Nothing wrong with that, but THE Gold Standard hard wired into the game's mechanics is the bad-arse, literally knight-in-shining-armor, Paladin. Tough to play and I've only seen a few players that actually managed to pull it off.
A Paladin lost his powers because he offended someone???
It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so sad...
Why? Why must so many GMs try and make the Paladin's life a pain in the ass? Why do they want so much the moment when they get to say "Gotcha!" and screw the player?
I'm amazed by how far people will go just so the poor Paladin has no fun. I suppose a Paladin must admit to the evil dragon where he hid the innocent children too, right? I suppose he can't say, "no, honey." when his wife asks him if she looks fat in that dress.
It's almost funny how so many GMs see the forces of GOOD as bunch of jerks who can't wait to take a Paladin's power because he lied, gambled or used poison, no matter the circumstances.
I get that the GM was being "strict". But there is a difference between being strict and limiting your players options to role play.
If the paladin has good reason to say something mean about someone else, let him. It seems so arbitrary, racial slurs are evil (like killing someone, or stealing)? I guess its just you are punishing the character for verbally expressing the thought.
What if the character only thought the slur, is that evil too? Does he need to go and atone for his evil thoughts, even though he never acted on them? If the standard is the Paladin can never have an impure thought or say something mean... I guess they are a completely unplayable class.
And I have never understood people who say "I have only seen a few people play the paladin correctly," nodding their heads gravely as they contemplate the difficulty of that act. Yeah, paladins have a strict moral code, but there are a number of ways to play them correctly- any way that does not violate that code is fine.
In my opinion a completely racist paladin would be an interesting character. It would be interesting because he knows he has to protect the people he hates because it is the right thing to do. Now that is a paladin, he is flawed, he knows it, and he rises above his foibles to do the right thing.
I get that the GM was being "strict". But there is a difference between being strict and limiting your players options to role play.
If the paladin has good reason to say something mean about someone else, let him. It seems so arbitrary, racial slurs are evil (like killing someone, or stealing)? I guess its just you are punishing the character for verbally expressing the thought.
Actually I didn't really want to take away his powers for that - BUT I had created an Alignment Infraction System (inspired by the system in Hackmaster but the particulars are mostly taken from Buddhist ethics as I am a Buddhist minister) to track when people drift away from their alignments and had mapped out what acts are good, evil, lawful, or chaotic and I had already made it clear that verbal abuse is an evil act according to my system and according to the rules a paladin "loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act" (CRB p. 63). So I felt that if the Alignment Infraction System and the paladin code were to mean anything then his powers had to be taken away. However - I used it as a springboard for a side-adventure that was enjoyable to all and I've had no complaints from the player (who is one of the best role-players I've yet come across).
Ubercroz asked if it would be an evil act if he had only thought the slur. My system does take "thought crimes" into account. Giving in to greed or hatred that would lead to chaotic or evil acts may garner 1 point of alignment drift depending on circumstances (10 points will make you shift one step). Holding "false views" may also get points for Law, Chaos, or Evil (depending on the view and reasons for holding it). This is something that would have to be role played and I would consult with the player. In my pbp players frequently write about their character's inner thoughts and feelings. In some cases a character actually WANTS that kind of drift to either play out some character development or to make up for some unwanted drift. For instance, the Chaotic Neutral half-orc barbarian in our campaign has almost in spite of himself garnered point for Good (by bravely saving a city guard from burning to death) and for Law (by signing a legal contract) and so has deliberately done petty mean things or disruptive things in order to drift back to CN.
Oh and here is a link to my Alignment Infraction System rules:
http://gutwrenchingrpg.org/jr/2012/05/19/alignment-infraction-system/
i know i shouldn't add to the fire but...
according to all historical accounts i've read the paladins were known for strictly following chivalry, as well as the tenets of their church. so on the surface its seems lawful good, but i shouldn't have to tell you that being chivalrous is the same as being good (case in point the serial killer obsessed with killing "worthy" opponents). lawful does seem "paladin/anti-paladin". that being said archtypes not called paladins could address this. i also do think Cayden deserves a holy warrior similar to a paladin, and the inquisitor is probably not much more appropriate. PS chaotic doesn't mean you get to act however you want, i have changed players alignments due to them falling into recurring absolute patterns of behavior, they didn't even realize they were going neutral, but who does;). alright my 2 cp has been given, now watch as i get roasted by the flames.
I get that the GM was being "strict". But there is a difference between being strict and limiting your players options to role play.
If the paladin has good reason to say something mean about someone else, let him. It seems so arbitrary, racial slurs are evil (like killing someone, or stealing)? I guess its just you are punishing the character for verbally expressing the thought.
Here is exactly what happened in my Jade Regent campaign when the paladin lost his powers after the half-orc barbarian had a Leroy Jenkins moment:
Jharad (half-elf magus) whispers to Toshio (human paladin). “We should assume these things will rise. I suggest we get ourselves in a good position to receive them, then Jethrik (gnome bard) and I can wake them up with arrows: you and Keng (half-orc barbarian) in front, Jethrik and I in the middle slightly behind, Zeyala (human oracle) behind us. What do you think?”
“Good plan.” Jethrik whispers. “I’ll take the one on the left. You get the one on the right.”
“Good idea, but let’s smash all of them before they can rise, rather than letting them start after us,” Toshio says. “I don’t like skeletons. They don’t rest as they should. Take up positions to smash these on my signal. We can each smash one, with Zeyala standing back.”
Meanwhile, Keng, not stopping to listen to the others, walks over to the nearest of the skeletons and with his great axe smashes it to bits. He turns back to Toshio and says, “Just to be sure.” Right at that moment the three other skeletons in the cave begin to rise up, and even from the waters of the flooded parts of the cavern two more skeletons arise. Unlike the other skeletal samurai, these ones are unarmed and reach out with grasping bony fingers to claw at those who have intruded upon their uneasy rest.
One of them immediately rips into Keng with both claws. The other four skeletons converge on the rest of the team, and within moments Toshio and Jharad are lying on the cavern floor bleeding to death. Only Jethrik’s quickness and the fact that he is a smaller target spares him from any bloody wounds, while Zeyala’s position at the rear gives her a moment’s respite.
“By Pharasma’s divine light, return to slumber!” shouts Zeyala. As the flare of Zeyala’s radiant light touches them all of the skeletons in the cavern collapse and rise no more.
There is no time to be relieved however, for Zeyala sees that Jharad and Toshio are dying at her feet, and Keng's bloody wounds make it evident that even he is in no shape for another fight should any more skeletons come lurching out of the darkness.
Zeyala stands next to where Toshio and Jharad are lying and calls Keng over. “Power of the divine, heal and awaken my friends.”
Jharad sits up, feeling like Keng sat on him. Focusing on the half-orc he says calmly, “It never hurts to spend a little time preparing before rushing into battle. Next time lets do some of that, what do you think?”
“Yeah. Maybe. But it worked out!” Keng replies. “Where’s the treasures?”
Toshio groans as he sits up. “Of all the stupid… How do you live long enough to breed?” Immediately Toshio regrets his words. He can feel that the poison of his anger and the abusive words erupting from it has a created a cloud of evil, blocking the divine light that he normally feels shining from within.
I'd like to note that I work with people (fellow bartenders) who I can't imagine would ever say an unkind word about even the worst customer on even the most hectic high pressure night when all hell is breaking lose. I even overheard one customer ask what kind of heroin this bartender was on because he wanted some of it so he could be so calm and pleasant all the time. I have never seen the person in question even drink too much let alone ever do drugs. So if even a real life bartender can be like that, then I certainly expect the paladins in my game to uphold a superheroic standard of conduct as well.
As long as the paladin was aware it was an infraction I think that makes sense. I just don't like the idea of arbitrary punishment or "gotcha" moments.
I also like to be able to play a character more than one way. I think it would be fun to play a paladin who hated his job, but he worships the god of fate and recognizes it is his lot in life to be a paladin and to hold up law and goodness. He resents the people he protects, he doesn't get along with people well but he will lay his life on the line for them because it is his fate, and it is what is demanded of him. He will uphold all of his laws, he will protect the innnocent (though not without comment) and in all ways uphold the virtues of paladinhood... he's just a jerk.
I like that this could potentially be a character, in your ruleset it would not work, because a paladin can only be played 1 way. Its fine I guess, but once you have done it... why do it again?
Dabbler, Any chance you could gen abilities for a Paladin of ballence (TN) - I've got a player interested in it, Yet I've no idea where to start. Your class went down a storm already xD
Side note. I'm playing all of these as archetypes of paladin, To prevent stacking of abilities etc should they become LG, rather than a seperate class :)
Now that's a challenge...what can drive a man to neutrality? Apathy, maybe. On the flip side, there's Moorcock's idea of the cosmic balance to play with...let me see what I can do.
And yes, the Paragon is a paladin archetype, it cannot be stacked with Paladin levels - I would presume a CG Paragon who lost their powers becoming NG who then became LG could become a paladin, swapping over abilities, but they would retain their skill ranks per level and not gain any armour proficiencies.
With regard to paladins and their source of power:
I think a paladin's source of power is divine, yes, but it comes from the strength of their convictions. While the gods, and the heavens themselves, may forgive a paladin's infractions, the real question is: can the paladin forgive himself? That is why sorry is not enough, the paladin needs atonement in order to be forgiven by an outside source to re-affirm their faith in themselves.
Apples to oranges. Compare them to fighters and rangers instead, and you see paladins are THE toughest of the full BAB classes, and the hardest hitting. Not the most versatile, perhaps, but without a doubt the strongest.
That's a bit faulty. Full Casters Vs Full BAB classes aren't simply a matter of personal taste, they're options within the same system presented as being roughly equal to the player. If the mechanics of the game don't require that wizards be limited to one specific alignment, then they really shouldn't require the same of Paladins.
LG only Paladins is purely a flavor/legacy issue at this point.
Roughly equal in spotlight time != roughly equal in power.
When you are dealing with two different classes that fill two different roles, then you look to spotlight time. A fighter has less options, but has the same spotlight time as a wizard because what he does is as important to the party.
When you compare two classes that fill the same role, then you look to power as the balancing factor. Paladins out-power fighters in many ways, so they need the balancing factor.
As long as the paladin was aware it was an infraction I think that makes sense. I just don't like the idea of arbitrary punishment or "gotcha" moments.
I also like to be able to play a character more than one way. I think it would be fun to play a paladin who hated his job, but he worships the god of fate and recognizes it is his lot in life to be a paladin and to hold up law and goodness. He resents the people he protects, he doesn't get along with people well but he will lay his life on the line for them because it is his fate, and it is what is demanded of him. He will uphold all of his laws, he will protect the innnocent (though not without comment) and in all ways uphold the virtues of paladinhood... he's just a jerk.
I like that this could potentially be a character, in your ruleset it would not work, because a paladin can only be played 1 way. Its fine I guess, but once you have done it... why do it again?
What you're describing strikes me as more of a grouchy reluctant do-gooder rather than a paladin who I see as basically a saint with a sword. Also, the high Charisma requirements of a paladin would mean they couldn't really be a jerk - rather they need to be inspiring to others. I agree that this could turn all paladins into cardboard cut-outs, but I don't think it necessarily does. Toshio in our pbp does have his grouchy moments and I even let him get into a drinking contest with the half-orc (they both passed out after slamming seven drinks) so I do give leeway when I can given my alignment system. Also, series like Smallville or the Paksennarrion novels by Elizabeth Moon show that there is much that can be done with a super powered Lawful Good paragon of all goodness to make them interesting and nuanced characters while still being within the bounds of Law and Good.
[
With regard to paladins and their source of power:I think a paladin's source of power is divine, yes, but it comes from the strength of their convictions. While the gods, and the heavens themselves, may forgive a paladin's infractions, the real question is: can the paladin forgive himself? That is why sorry is not enough, the paladin needs atonement in order to be forgiven by an outside source to re-affirm their faith in themselves.
Wow, I like that. It makes a lot of sense to me in regard to the necessity for the spell/ritual. I will have to use that as an in-game explanation as to the necessity of the Atonement. Thanks for the idea.
LG only Paladins is purely a flavor/legacy issue at this point.
You're on target. Paladin will always be associated with lawful good, because it has been that way since the creation of the class. Gygax was against an "antipaladin" ever being used (and likely other variants, but that's a guess), despite player desire for one in the Greyhawk setting.
Quick dictionary.com check resulted in this:
pal·a·din [pal-uh-din]
noun
1. any one of the 12 legendary peers or knightly champions in attendance on Charlemagne.
2. any knightly or heroic champion.
3. any determined advocate or defender of a noble cause.
Going with the "Knightly Champion," one could easily just rename the Paladin to "Divine Champion", add in Paths which reflected the alignments (Path of the Crusader, Malefactor, and so on for example with specific codes based on these {Codes of "Honor" for alignments can be found here}), and call it a day.
As long as the class is named "Paladin," purists will argue.
Threads like these make me understand what the Monk and Rogue players feel like.
"Everybody's already better at what I do, and still they want to steal what makes me special."
Paladins are Paladins. They're Lawful Good. If you're not Lawful Good, you can't be a Paladin. Go be something else.
(This was not aimed at anyone in particular, okay? But really: create true CG holy warriors, or LE ones. Don't dilute the Paladin. Please.)
I would argue that LG is actually one of the easier alignments to play, but that's down to interpretation.
Inquisitors do fulfill a similar role, but they are still not quite the same as a paladin.
For example, Why can Cayden Cailean not have a Paladin of his cause? Or Ketephys - Paladins of the hunt. the restriction on one step of Deity and LG means that these deities cannot have any holy warriors of their cause, which is what i always understood a paladin to be.
As for terms of their abilities, Their abilities are tied directly into the following of their gods, rather than anything else. Their abilities, while powerful, Don't to me to seem in any relation to how hard they are to play, or out of balance with the other classes. (Forgive me here) - DnD 4th ed (Yeah i know) didn't restrict paladins, and yet their abilities did not have to be curtailed if they were not LG. Why in pathfinder does the system mean that if they are not LG they must have weakened powers? (response to Dabbler)
Also, As i said, Their PA would still be LG in terms of their deities codes - so they would still have to abide by the tenants of their god. so while mechanically they would appear Chaotic, they wouldn't believe themselves to be.
Isee Paladins being the shining example of Good with a strict code. The 'lawful' part... is basically following their code. If their Code is based on CG... and they follow their god's mandates to a T, then arent' they STILL being 'Lawful'??
Honestly... I have an issue with Paladins being anything other than LG. All the OTHER alignments have so much slack in them... there really isn't much fear of 'falling.' Seriously... CG? You do whatever you think is 'right' without regard to what society wants? how do you 'fall' from THAT?? 90% of my characters have been CG and I've never had an alignment change yet...
As for 'holy warriors?' The system HAS that set up. We have Inquisitors... we have Clerics... We have Priest/Fighter multiclasses... There are LOTS of ways to 'promote your god with your sword' without getting the title 'Paladin'
I'd hate for that title to be watered down to meaningless... They've already been watered down quite a bit from 2E...
|
Unlike any other class in the game (including clerics!), paladins seem to draw hate from many DMs. Most seem to have a definate idea of how they should be played, and that any other way of playing them is therefore wrong, and would make you lose all your paladin powers!
In the Dragon Mountain boxed set for D&D 2.0, there was an NPC paladin called Sir Ovulus. There was a terrible NPC bard who was scripted to annoy the party. So, of course, the DM keeps having the bard do more and more extremely annoying things until a PC finaly says, 'Leave us alone, mate! We're trying to talk, here!' Then, as scripted, Sir Ovulus bursts in and threatens the party for 'Insulting the bard.' Things go tits up from there.
For some reason many DMs think that a paladin should be a total tool, telling other people what to do and theatening to kill if they don't comply. This is even if the god worshipped isn't that kind of god. The reason given is that paladins must be 'extra' lawful and 'extra' good, using very strange versions of law and good!
Paladins must retain their LG alignment. There is no requirement for some strange 'extra' version which looks suspiciously evil!
Other characters who are LG don't get this kind of negative attention. Even clerics, the ultimate god-botherers, dont get this kind of treatment from DMs.
One of my paladins had his abilities taken away, and neither he nor I knew why. When I eventually found out, it turned out that my paladin had said to an NPC that he would have a quiet word with one of the other PCs (who was being run by the DM!) when I got the chance. Anyway, we were involved in lots of fights and stuff, taking several gaming sessions over several weeks, and as a player I simply forgot about this conversation. So the DM took away my powers.
Other DMs focus one the whole sweetness and light aspect, and take away your paladinhood if you don't heal your enemies after combat. At the heart of the class, a paladin is a killer for his god! The LG alignment keeps them in check, but the paladin can be as sweet as he wants to be until he needs to deal some death to the Evil!
I once had a dual-classed (2nd ed.) conjurer/paladin who was forbidden by the DM to cast 'Nybor's Gentle Reminder', a spell which caused pain. I pointed out that it would be an evil act to randomly cast this on just anyone in the same way as it would be if I hacked at random people with my sword. But if I cast it on the Evil Wizard to disrupt his casting of Power Word: Kill it would be okay, just as I can twat him with the sword. DM would have none of it! Causing pain is evil; best to just hack him to pieces so I'm not stripped of paladinhood.
Roughly equal in spotlight time != roughly equal in power.
When you are dealing with two different classes that fill two different roles, then you look to spotlight time. A fighter has less options, but has the same spotlight time as a wizard because what he does is as important to the party.
When you compare two classes that fill the same role, then you look to power as the balancing factor. Paladins out-power fighters in many ways, so they need the balancing factor.
Battle/Metal Oracles can take the full BAB classes roll if they want to, they also can easily take over the Paladin's Flavor as a divinely empowered holy warrior if the player wants. So, yes, that's the balance point that Paladin's are up against.
Threads like these make me understand what the Monk and Rogue players feel like.
"Everybody's already better at what I do, and still they want to steal what makes me special."
Yes, whatever else the paladin must remain special. However, is a Martial Artist archetype a violation of this just because he is not necessarily lawful? I don't think so.
Paladins are Paladins. They're Lawful Good. If you're not Lawful Good, you can't be a Paladin. Go be something else.
That's what I am trying to create: something else, that can be a holy warrior, but isn't truly a paladin. It's an archetype as a ninja is to a rogue, only instead of better, probably mechanically weaker but morally less restricted.
(This was not aimed at anyone in particular, okay? But really: create true CG holy warriors, or LE ones. Don't dilute the Paladin. Please.)
That's what I'm trying to do. OK, I am using the paladin as the base for an archetype, but I am hacking it around a LOT to shift it to the different concepts, and watering down a lot of paladin abilities for the lack of a more stringent code.
Speaking of which...
Dabbler, Any chance you could gen abilities for a Paladin of ballence (TN) - I've got a player interested in it, Yet I've no idea where to start. Your class went down a storm already xD
...here is the first draft apotheosis, a more 'neutral' divine warrior.
For both the apotheosis and the paragon I've kept some basic features of the paladin, such as smite (both weaker) and immunity to disease. Both have much more watered down versions of lay on hands/channel energy. The paragon is much more of a swashbuckler than he is a knight, with more skills and a more rogue-ish feel. The apotheosis is more of a philosopher and an intellectual, his smite is very much more restricted.
What you're describing strikes me as more of a grouchy reluctant do-gooder rather than a paladin who I see as basically a saint with a sword. Also, the high Charisma requirements of a paladin would mean they couldn't really be a jerk - rather they need to be inspiring to others. I agree that this could turn all paladins into cardboard cut-outs, but I don't think it necessarily does. Toshio in our pbp does have his grouchy moments and I even let him get into a drinking contest with the half-orc (they both passed out after slamming seven drinks) so I do give leeway when I can given my alignment system. Also, series like Smallville or the Paksennarrion novels by Elizabeth Moon show that there is much that can be done with a super powered Lawful Good paragon of all goodness to make them interesting and nuanced characters while still being within the bounds of Law and Good.
I also like to be able to play a character more than one way. I think it would be fun to play a paladin who hated his job, but he worships the god of fate and recognizes it is his lot in life to be a paladin and to hold up law and goodness. He resents the people he protects, he doesn't get along with people well but he will lay his life on the line for them because it is his fate, and it is what is demanded of him. He will uphold all of his laws, he will protect the innnocent (though not without comment) and in all ways uphold the virtues of paladinhood... he's just a jerk.I like that this could potentially be a character, in your ruleset it would not work, because a paladin can only be played 1 way. Its fine I guess, but once you have done it... why do it again?
If a Paladin upholds his tenants, protects the innocent, and seeks out the destruction of evil does his attitude matter? Does he have to have the same reasoning that you want in order to keep his powers?
I have a Paladin of Abadar who does what he does because he is looking to promote prosperity. He believes that prosperity breeds peace, and prosperity is brought about by uninterrupted trade and a free market place. So he does what he does to protect peoples rights to wealth and property. He looks down on the lower classes as being unable to work hard enough to rise from their circumstances. He protects them all the same. He is generous and works hard to be an ideal to those less well off and is a little arrogant as a result.
Is that a paladin that would fly in your game?