Paladins, which are champions of good and law, have access to Knowledge (religion), which covers their good, but not Knowledge (local) which covers laws? Here's a link to the skill description:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/knowledge.html#_knowledge
Wouldn't it make a whole lot of sense is paladins were trained in the laws of the society they are operating in, in order to distinguish between legitimate rulership and, say, corrupt policemanship?
I think the primary reason behind it is the lawful aspect often takes a backseat to the religious aspect of things. Relatedly, they can still take ranks in it (and at no additional cost thanks to the Pathfinderization of cross-class skills), they just lack the class skill bonus.
So, technically they can do all these things, they just might not be as good at it as a class that gets it as a class skill, like a bard or a rogue, and I think that actually isn't too bad in the long run.
You have to remember a Bard, Rogue, maybe even Inquisitor(icr right Now) all need to know the laws well to be able to do their "Job". A Paladin just needs to know the basics of the laws.
Paladins, which are champions of good and law, have access to Knowledge (religion), which covers their good, but not Knowledge (local) which covers laws? Here's a link to the skill description:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/knowledge.html#_knowledge
Wouldn't it make a whole lot of sense is paladins were trained in the laws of the society they are operating in, in order to distinguish between legitimate rulership and, say, corrupt policemanship?
What's stopping you from putting skill points into Knowledge (Local)? You can still train yourself in it even though it's not a class skill. The only difference is the +3 bonus from being a class skill.
A paladin only needs to know his own laws (ie, his code of conduct).
He's under no obligation to follow the laws of the area he happens to be in. In many cases, his code would lead to the paladin breaking laws that he considers unjust.
What's stopping you from putting skill points into Knowledge (Local)? You can still train yourself in it even though it's not a class skill. The only difference is the +3 bonus from being a class skill.
Which you can fix with a trait that makes Knowledge (Local) a class skill.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins are not champions of good and law. They are lawful champions of good. Paladins do not get Smite Chaos, they cannot Detect Chaos at will, and they are allowed to freely associate with chaotic characters. They tend to support law because they are lawful characters, but they are not law's champions the way that they are good's.
Paladins, which are champions of good and law, have access to Knowledge (religion), which covers their good, but not Knowledge (local) which covers laws? Here's a link to the skill description:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/knowledge.html#_knowledge
Wouldn't it make a whole lot of sense is paladins were trained in the laws of the society they are operating in, in order to distinguish between legitimate rulership and, say, corrupt policemanship?
Paladins have never been police officers and do not serve secular authority - they serve the church only. Now if a government is also the ecclesiastic authority, it could be different, but that's a corner case of a specific setting. In most settings, paladins are defenders of a specific religion only, not civil law enforcement.
Think of paladins like Knights Templar or Knights Hospitalers, the duties of those units are military not law enforcement. A city guardsmen has never been classified as a paladin - at least not any game I've ever played/ran. You seem to be confusing modern law and civil authority to legal practices of the medieval period, and really the two have no comparison in concept nor execution.
The urban ranger on the other hand better represents law enforcement, and guess what? He has Knowledge (local) as one of his class skills.
There's nothing wrong with creating a paladin archetype that fits the concept of police officer. Such an archetype needs to be created for it, as the default paladin does not fit this premise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin only needs to know his own laws (ie, his code of conduct).
He's under no obligation to follow the laws of the area he happens to be in. In many cases, his code would lead to the paladin breaking laws that he considers unjust.
I disagree with that interpretation:
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority
That appears to indicate that a paladin must respect local authority of all kinds, which includes laws of the land he is in, provided the authority is "legitimate." Laws of a bandit group or laws of a false, illegitimate king need not be heeded.
Which you can fix with a trait that makes Knowledge (Local) a class skill.What's stopping you from putting skill points into Knowledge (Local)? You can still train yourself in it even though it's not a class skill. The only difference is the +3 bonus from being a class skill.
I disagree with that interpretation:
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority
That appears to indicate that a paladin must respect local authority of all kinds, which includes laws of the land he is in, provided the authority is "legitimate." Laws of a bandit group or laws of a false, illegitimate king need not be heeded.
Did you make a mistake? Look at what you quoted. We mentioned a game mechanic. No where saying they don't have to respect authority.
EDIT: Never-mind, i see what happened.
Hmm, I would say Paladins could be a small village's sheriff/guard captain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Plausible deniability for when they violate the laws?
Paladin Fayt Grave: "Oops sorry didn't know it was illegal to draw my sword in the City limits. What about that guy using a Short Sword? Oh so those are legal ok." *Draws his short sword*
(True Story)
Hmm, Paladin could be like chiefs of the police in most cities. With Inquisitors being like U.S. Marshalls.
Remember Medieval Europe was extremely religious.
It just seemed to me that, as a class morally bound to "respect legitimate authority," the paladin would as a matter of course receive training in the only Knowledge skill that applies to the laws of the land. I realize that as a religious institution they are not a policing force, and have no legitimate authority in a realm (unless it is a theocracy of their specific faith, I suppose).
It seems like working for a hamburger joint, as a grill cook, and not learning how to shape the meaf into patties. "Just put them on the grill and roast 'em, Son, that's all you need to know."
Plausible deniability for when they violate the laws?
I like it.
Lucent, that's what I'm doing. You will rue this day.
Somewhere there's a Devil in a legal department wincing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I interpret "respect legitimate authority" as "I won't resist the local officers of the law (and similar) if they question me, fine me, or arrest me".
I don't interpret it as "as long as the laws were created by someone with legitimate power, I have to follow those laws".
Why? Because following the second interpretation and following your other codes of conduct can very easily conflict. Say a law in an NE society says you have to sacrifice a slave every year. The paladin can't do that and remain a paladin, so he has to break that law.
I interpret "respect legitimate authority" as "I won't resist the local officers of the law (and similar) if they question me, fine me, or arrest me".
I don't interpret it as "as long as the laws were created by someone with legitimate power, I have to follow those laws".
Why? Because following the second interpretation and following your other codes of conduct can very easily conflict. Say a law in an NE society says you have to sacrifice a slave every year. The paladin can't do that and remain a paladin, so he has to break that law.
That does make good sense.
Except for when you are arrested and executed for killing a corrupt guardsman.
I see it thusly: If you'd known the local laws, you could have used them against the society trying you for guardsman-murder, and by using their own laws against them prove yourself to be innocent.
I have a feeling I'm not presenting my point very well, sorry.
One of the problems with Paladins in regards to skills is that they only get 2+Int. This means even if Kn. Local was on their list I imagine it would be hard for most to find the points to put into it.
This is only compounded by where most paladins would arrange their ability scores. Most paladins would favor str., con. and cha IMO. over int., so they're probably not getting very many skill points.
I guess it comes down to the concept of using skill points to balance classes.
Remember Medieval Europe was extremely religious.
Medieval Europe was definitely extremely religious compared to today, however city guards have existed since the first city-states, and they were always simple patrol men, wall and gate guards, not religious knights, which are what paladins. Even in theocracies - the holy guard of the ruling offices might be paladins, but the street guard patrol have always been just fighters (ie: paid mercenaries).
One of the problems with Paladins in regards to skills is that they only get 2+Int. This means even if Kn. Local was on their list I imagine it would be hard for most to find the points to put into it.
This is only compounded by where most paladins would arrange their ability scores. Most paladins would favor str., con. and cha IMO. over int., so they're probably not getting very many skill points.
I guess it comes down to the concept of using skill points to balance classes.
Police officers/city guard don't need skills, just need to know how to do combat and detain suspects. Investigators are a completely different animal and paladin/fighters don't make effective investigators.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The real question is:
Why don't they have Knowledge(Planes) so they can identify Angels, Demons, Devils, etc?
I'd make a case for Intimidate as well. Scare those criminals into obeying the law!!!
Paladins don't care what kind of demon or devil they face. They simply detect evil, then smite evil, then smash evil into a bloody pulp :)
because paladin skills were base lined on fighter swapping out some stuff for cleric class skills.
as mentioned, if you are stuck with 2+INT ranks, it doesn't really matter what is class skills anyways.
know: local is bizzar-o anyways, since it covers both 'streetsmart' knowledge and knowing about humanoid racial abilities (while 'people' is under know: geography), not to mention the wierdness of 'Local' knowledge that apparently applies to ALL locations even if you just plane-shifted to them. Reading it as necessary to apply only to a specific locality would bring up wierd questions re: the Humanoid knowledge aspect (only Humanoids common in that area? Why would Humanoids be so split up in that way, while Aberrations aren't?) as well as being equally justified (read: not) as other Knowledge skills also being limited, e.g. Nature applying only within a given region.
with a good CHA paladins can be good at intimidate anyways if they invest ranks in it.
Paladins don't care what kind of demon or devil they face. They simply detect evil, then smite evil, then smash evil into a bloody pulp :)
Heh... That's true. But knowing more about their enemies could only make their jobs easier.
Sure, they can smite and ignore DR, but it'd be nice of him to tell his friendly Fighter if he should be using his silver sword or his cold-iron spear. Besides, knowing the creature's secial abilities is very helpful to create appropriate strategies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because, who is going to gossip with a freakin' paladin??
It seems like working for a hamburger joint, as a grill cook, and not learning how to shape the meaf into patties. "Just put them on the grill and roast 'em, Son, that's all you need to know."
I suspect that's a lot more common than you might think.
But I do see where you're coming from vis a vis the Paladin. I can actually see both sides of the situation, really. You could always houserule it, or ask your DM to do so.
Kn. Local has more uses than this, but in my mind it has primarily a "streetwise" application. Does't fit with paladins.
Remember Medieval Europe was extremely religious.Medieval Europe was definitely extremely religious compared to today, however city guards have existed since the first city-states, and they were always simple patrol men, wall and gate guards, not religious knights, which are what paladins. Even in theocracies - the holy guard of the ruling offices might be paladins, but the street guard patrol have always been just fighters (ie: paid mercenaries).
True, but a small village with a temple might have a Paladin leading the city guard. (i.e. a town sheriff)
True, but a small village with a temple might have a Paladin leading the city guard. (i.e. a town sheriff)
But that's true of any class. A paladin is no more likely to be the town sheriff than a fighter is, or a cavalier or ranger or even a monk. That alone isn't justification for these classes to have Knowledge (Local) as a class skill.
Besides, if someone wants to run a paladin as though they did have Knowledge (Local) as a class skill, that's the reason why feats like Skill Focus and various traits exist.
Personally, I think that the best sheriffs are bards, but since bards DO get Knowledge (Local), they're not really relevant to the point that I was trying to make.
A paladin gets knowledge nobility instead of knowledge local. Often there are two sets of laws on for the commoner and one for the nobility. The paladin is usually a member of the nobility that make sense.
I am not saying they need Knowledge(Local) or should have it. Just there is a precedent for them to maybe have it.
Also you have to remember that not all paladins are combatants.
Although an older Paladin might work as the leader of the village guard captain. Maybe a Middle Aged Paladin who is getting to old for the Front Line.
Dosent Knowledge (local) refer to a spesific location?
For example a spesific city, forest, or county.
Dosent Knowledge (local) refer to a spesific location?
For example a spesific city, forest, or county.
No, although some settings do change knowledge (local) to do just that (primarily Forgotten Realms).
Dosent Knowledge (local) refer to a spesific location?
For example a spesific city, forest, or county.
No, you are thinking of how Perform makes you choose.
Local works like Swim, it is the same everywhere.
I am not saying they need Knowledge(Local) or should have it. Just there is a precedent for them to maybe have it.
Also you have to remember that not all paladins are combatants.
Although an older Paladin might work as the leader of the village guard captain. Maybe a Middle Aged Paladin who is getting to old for the Front Line.
You see that's the thing I have a problem with. Paladins ARE combatants,everything else aside that's what they are, the sword of the powers that are Lawful and Good. When they think they're done, fate tosses them another foe to fight.
It's also why very very few Paladins live to reach middle age, much less any older.
So you are telling me there is no way that a Paladin might end up being in charge of defending a small religious village?
Personally I would say Paladins would require Nobility and Diplomacy more simply to allow them to win over the support of the Nobles.
I interpret "respect legitimate authority" as "I won't resist the local officers of the law (and similar) if they question me, fine me, or arrest me".
I don't interpret it as "as long as the laws were created by someone with legitimate power, I have to follow those laws".
Why? Because following the second interpretation and following your other codes of conduct can very easily conflict. Say a law in an NE society says you have to sacrifice a slave every year. The paladin can't do that and remain a paladin, so he has to break that law.
Definitely disagree with this. A paladin would be bound to do his best to work against this nation legally, trying to change those laws rather than just disobeying them. At the end of the day, yes, he's not going to let it happen, but he's got to exhaust his legal attempts to change the law before just flat out disobeying.
Also, the idea of a NE society is a strange one (not that it's not possible, within the framework of the game, but it's a strange concept in the real world). If they had a law that a slave had to be sacrificed every year, and they were truly neutral evil, they wouldn't be that concerned with following the laws anyway, if it didn't suit them.
Also, the idea of a NE society is a strange one (not that it's not possible, within the framework of the game, but it's a strange concept in the real world). If they had a law that a slave had to be sacrificed every year, and they were truly neutral evil, they wouldn't be that concerned with following the laws anyway, if it didn't suit them.
I dunno, not only Lawful people follow the laws. Just like not every Chaotic character is a full-blown anarchist.
You can be neutral or even chaotic and still follow laws. You don't have to be chaotic all the time and in every aspect of life.
Otherwise, no Chaotic person would ever get a job. And no Lawful person would ever try anything new. At all.
A chaotic character can be organized and law-abidding, but she may have problems dealing with authority and ususally values her independence and freedom more than organization and stability. She's not against having a governement, but would rather it had as few rules as possible.
I don't know why you replied to me, I don't see any contradiction between what you wrote and what I wrote. I wholeheartedly agree with you, and have made a similar argument on many an alignment thread.
NE Societies: Rome under Nero, some Viking tribes, and Russia under a few of their Czars/Tzars. To name a few.
I interpret "respect legitimate authority" as "I won't resist the local officers of the law (and similar) if they question me, fine me, or arrest me".
I don't interpret it as "as long as the laws were created by someone with legitimate power, I have to follow those laws".
Why? Because following the second interpretation and following your other codes of conduct can very easily conflict. Say a law in an NE society says you have to sacrifice a slave every year. The paladin can't do that and remain a paladin, so he has to break that law.
Definitely disagree with this. A paladin would be bound to do his best to work against this nation legally, trying to change those laws rather than just disobeying them. At the end of the day, yes, he's not going to let it happen, but he's got to exhaust his legal attempts to change the law before just flat out disobeying.
Of course the paladin would do his very best to get those laws changed. He still wouldn't be obligated to follow the law, which was the only point I was trying to get across.
@Yosarian: The Mongol Horde under the Khan Dynasty was more LN to LE. Based on how soon you submitted. Though that was on an individual basis.