|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is not false, it is inherit in your position. "The Paladin is A. Lets make him A,B, and C." You have already admitted to changing the Paladin to fit your vision of him. "Remove respect legitimate authority, take out the part about lying." How is that not watered down?In my opinion, "opening up" the Paladin, "waters down" the Paladin.This is false. If the rules allowed NG and/or CG paladins, paladins could still be LG. Any LG paladin would be the same then as they are now. No part of that paladin would be 'watered down'. That fear is baseless.
In the same way that changing the druid from 'must be true neutral' to 'any neutral' didn't 'water down' what is the essence of a druid, and that changing rangers from 'any good' to 'any alignment' didn't 'water down' the essence of rangers.
In order to do so the 'lawful' part of the fluff must be either removed or joined by chaotic alternatives, but this is no more 'watering down' than the equivalent alterations to the codes of druids or rangers.
Furthermore, even after the change, any LG paladin you make will not be 'watered down' in any way.
|
Oh, so you disagree with ciretose about this part?This is a false. There is no choosing the code over good. The code is good. The fact that you see it as a choice shows your lack of understanding of the Paladin.
Ciretose's idea of a paladin who must choose 'following the code' over either doing good or preventing evil would result in a paladin that is essentially lawful neutral.
Do you even read what I post.
I literally said the exact same thing up thread.
Literally.
|
|
In my opinion, "opening up" the Paladin, "waters down" the Paladin.This is false. If the rules allowed NG and/or CG paladins, paladins could still be LG. Any LG paladin would be the same then as they are now. No part of that paladin would be 'watered down'. That fear is baseless.
Except the part where Paladin's are universally trusted and known for honor, honesty, etc...
If having being a Paladin not having any meaning in the game isn't "watered down" to you, I you must like your Whiskey clear...
|
|
I'm saying that an alternate version of a paladin in a chaotic good flavor is a reasonable thing to permit. It doesn't matter whether we call it a paladin, or whether we call his ideals a code. In my opinion, tabletop gaming could use a paladin-equivalent who devotes his life to the cause of freedom, complete with powers to fight evil equal to the traditional paladin, but with an uncompromising attitude regarding oppression.
And the only person arguing against you from our side is Shallowsoul.
EDIT: Also, the Chevalier does almost exactly what you describe.
|
|
Upon analysis, the code in the CRB is not strict in terms of being so restrictive that a chaotic person could not abide to live their lives according to something like it. The only adjustment needed would be to the 'respect legitimate authority' part.This is like saying the law isn't strict in terms of being so restrictive that a cannibal can't abide to live their lives according to something like it, they would only need to adjust the "Not Murder and eat people" part.
Chaotic people don't like authority. That is what makes them chaotic people.
The brevity of this statement leads you to a false conclusion.
Chaotic people don't like those with authority making them do something they believe to be wrong solely on the basis of that authority. They won't have an issue with any authority which acts according to chaotic principles, like his church, or the heirarchy of the job he loves because that job doesn't try to tell him how to live his life because it's none of their business, restricting themselves to what is their business: the job.
Incidentally, have you favourited my 'True Hero (paladin archetype)' yet? If not, why not?
|
|
This is a false. There is no choosing the code over good. The code is good. The fact that you see it as a choice shows your lack of understanding of the Paladin.
Ciretose's idea of a paladin who must choose 'following the code' over either doing good or preventing evil would result in a paladin that is essentially lawful neutral.
The Paladin believes following the code is the path to the greatest possible good, in all situations.
That is why they follow the code.
A Chaotic person, on the other hand, would toss any "code" not of their own making to the side in a second if it was making them do something they didn't agree with.
That is why they are chaotic and the Paladin is Lawful.
Lawful believes the path to the greatest possible good is through following rules, because the people in Authority know best.
Chaotics believe they know better than those in Authority.
Which is why is it so ridiculous to argue a Chaotic person is going to defer to an Authority figure's code and judgement in all aspects of their life and still be chaotic.
It is like saying you are going to sleep with lots of people and still be celibate.
|
|
Upon analysis, the code in the CRB is not strict in terms of being so restrictive that a chaotic person could not abide to live their lives according to something like it. The only adjustment needed would be to the 'respect legitimate authority' part.This is like saying the law isn't strict in terms of being so restrictive that a cannibal can't abide to live their lives according to something like it, they would only need to adjust the "Not Murder and eat people" part.
Chaotic people don't like authority. That is what makes them chaotic people.
The brevity of this statement leads you to a false conclusion.
Chaotic people don't like those with authority making them do something they believe to be wrong solely on the basis of that authority. They won't have an issue with any authority which acts according to chaotic principles, like his church, or the heirarchy of the job he loves because that job doesn't try to tell him how to live his life because it's none of their business, restricting themselves to what is their business: the job.
Incidentally, have you favourited my 'True Hero (paladin archetype)' yet? If not, why not?
Funny, I haven't found the verbosity of your statements leading to enlightenment.
When you can't cite anything in the rules to back up your description of something that exists only within the rules, maybe your position isn't consistent with the people who wrote the rules.
And to be very blunt, your opinion of what you wish the rule was < the actual rule.
"Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More wood for the flames here is the 3.5 paladin of freedom's code reprinted.
Code of Conduct
A paladin of freedom must be of chaotic good alignment and loses all class abilities if he ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin of freedom's code requires that he respect individual liberty, help those in need (provided they do not use the help for lawful or evil ends), and punish those who threaten or curtail personal liberty.
Associates
While he may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin of freedom will never knowingly associate with evil characters (except on some sort of undercover mission), nor will he continue an association with someone who consistently offends his moral code. A paladin of freedom may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are chaotic good.
|
|
Paladin's are universally trusted and known for honor, honesty, etc...
Not by their enemies in the game world. They would be as 'universally trusted' as lawyers and politicians!
The creatures in our game worlds don't have access to the CRB to be certain of how the game mechanics of 'falling' work.
If having being a Paladin not having any meaning in the game isn't "watered down" to you, I you must like your Whiskey clear...
I realise that you see the 'law' part as the strong drink whiskey and the NG and CG parts as weak as water, but that shows a lawful bias.
If law is whiskey, then chaos is not water, chaos is brandy and neutrality is vodka. From an objective standpoint we must give each alignment equal status. You persist in a subjective view that law is best and everything else is worse.
That is not the basis upon which to make fair and just decisions about alignment restrictions in the game.
Furthermore, your accusation that NG and CG paladins would not have any meaning show the same bias, where only law is worthy of praise. Every single contributor who believes that opening up the allowed alignment to 'any good' believes that the true meaning of paladins is their goodness. This is not 'no flavour', just keeping the dominent flavour while changing one of the ingredients.
|
|
More wood for the flames here is the 3.5 paladin of freedom's code reprinted.
Code of Conduct
A paladin of freedom must be of chaotic good alignment and loses all class abilities if he ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin of freedom's code requires that he respect individual liberty, help those in need (provided they do not use the help for lawful or evil ends), and punish those who threaten or curtail personal liberty.Associates
While he may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin of freedom will never knowingly associate with evil characters (except on some sort of undercover mission), nor will he continue an association with someone who consistently offends his moral code. A paladin of freedom may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are chaotic good.
Although used for an alternate class, this code is perfectly acceptable for a CG paladin, and was written by the devs of the game!
Assertions of the impossibility of a chaotic good paladin's code are demonstrably false, although I expect the usual 'it doesn't count if it disagrees with us' defence sooner rather than later.
Lion order edict:
Edicts: The cavalier must protect the life and lands of his sovereign at all costs. He must obey the commands of his sovereign without question. He must strive to expand the power and prestige of his realm.
Looks pretty stict and subservient to not be lawful only.
|
|
The Paladin believes following the code is the path to the greatest possible good, in all situations.This is a false. There is no choosing the code over good. The code is good. The fact that you see it as a choice shows your lack of understanding of the Paladin.
Ciretose's idea of a paladin who must choose 'following the code' over either doing good or preventing evil would result in a paladin that is essentially lawful neutral.
Your vision of a paladin believes that following the code is the path to the greatest possible good, in all situations!
Which means any time there is a conflict between 'following the code' and 'doing good', then your version of the paladin (LN) would follow the code at the expense of doing good!
Your paladin would not lie (code) when a lie would save the life of an innocent (good)! You would have your paladin be satisfied that he has followed his code while he warmed his hands over their still smouldering corpses, when he could have saved them!
Your version of paladin allows evil to triumph. It conflates, by your own admission, 'following the code' as 'doing good'; defining 'law' as 'good'.
Any paladin worthy of his status would sacrifice that status in a heartbeat in order to save innocents, thereby proving himself worthy. Any paladin that imagined his own continuing paladin status as more important than the lives of innocents would fall.
|
The Paladin believes following the code is the path to the greatest possible good, in all situations.This is a false. There is no choosing the code over good. The code is good. The fact that you see it as a choice shows your lack of understanding of the Paladin.
Ciretose's idea of a paladin who must choose 'following the code' over either doing good or preventing evil would result in a paladin that is essentially lawful neutral.
Your vision of a paladin believes that following the code is the path to the greatest possible good, in all situations!
Which means any time there is a conflict between 'following the code' and 'doing good', then your version of the paladin (LN) would follow the code at the expense of doing good!
Your paladin would not lie (code) when a lie would save the life of an innocent (good)! You would have your paladin be satisfied that he has followed his code while he warmed his hands over their still smouldering corpses, when he could have saved them!
Your version of paladin allows evil to triumph. It conflates, by your own admission, 'following the code' as 'doing good'; defining 'law' as 'good'.
Any paladin worthy of his status would sacrifice that status in a heartbeat in order to save innocents, thereby proving himself worthy. Any paladin that imagined his own continuing paladin status as more important than the lives of innocents would fall.
This flavor of paladin really belongs in a Demagogue archetype.
|
|
More wood for the flames here is the 3.5 paladin of freedom's code reprinted.
Code of Conduct
A paladin of freedom must be of chaotic good alignment and loses all class abilities if he ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin of freedom's code requires that he respect individual liberty, help those in need (provided they do not use the help for lawful or evil ends), and punish those who threaten or curtail personal liberty.Associates
While he may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin of freedom will never knowingly associate with evil characters (except on some sort of undercover mission), nor will he continue an association with someone who consistently offends his moral code. A paladin of freedom may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are chaotic good.
Thats not a code to be honest. No good character will willfully commit an evil act.
Acting on in your alignment isn't a code.
By then the designers must have forgotten their own alignment rules.
It's okay Shallowsoul we know the Paladins code can be difficult since you can't even know what a paladin is until you meet one.
I've never met a paladin in real life myself...
I'm not so keen on the conduct being a straightjacket. A paladin is good becuase he is good, not becuase he is told to be good right?
If law is whiskey, then chaos is not water, chaos is brandy and neutrality is vodka. From an objective standpoint we must give each alignment equal status. You persist in a subjective view that law is best and everything else is worse.
And this is where your version leads us. I don't want to be objective. I don't want all alignments to be equal. I like good being better than evil. I don't want a CG Paladin and a NG Paladin and CN, TN, NE, etc. At that point the Paladin is meaningless, he is Holy Warrior #3. In Pathfinder, the Paladin is a warrior for good. His strict adherence to the code makes him lawful. To change this is to either change what the Paladin is or change what the alignments mean. I have seen nothing here to convince me Paladins should be changed in the CRB when you can so easily change them in your game.
You can open up options without making a character meaningless. Just because a few paladins are a little different doesn't make yours any less special. If all paladins are the same then it actually makes them a little more boring I think.
They don't like authrity for authorities sake - they like or dislike it based on its action. It isn't "well, I like everythin that guy does, but because he is authority, I dislike him."Upon analysis, the code in the CRB is not strict in terms of being so restrictive that a chaotic person could not abide to live their lives according to something like it. The only adjustment needed would be to the 'respect legitimate authority' part.This is like saying the law isn't strict in terms of being so restrictive that a cannibal can't abide to live their lives according to something like it, they would only need to adjust the "Not Murder and eat people" part.
Chaotic people don't like authority. That is what makes them chaotic people.
The Paladin follows the code because it is the code. They do not decide from moment to moment "do I still agree with this." This is the point that gets passed over again and again. The CG Paladin could operate within a code of conduct if it was what they wanted to do already. The Paladin lives his life by the code. The CG Paladin could make a "deal" to curtail certain actions in exchange for divine powers. The Paladin follows the code without thought of reward. The CG Paladin would cast aside a code he felt was restraining him from accomplishing his goals. The Paladin knows the code is better than himself. To make CG a Paladin is to destroy either Chaotic or the Paladin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can open up options without making a character meaningless. Just because a few paladins are a little different doesn't make yours any less special. If all paladins are the same then it actually makes them a little more boring I think.
Alignment is morality not personality. You could have a thousand different LG good people without them ever being the same. Would you say there are only nine different personalities in the game world?
I would say cutting everyone who was evil, didn't care, or wasn't into adhereing to laws and codes would cut down on it severely if thats what your asking.
There are not 9 different personalities, but there are many many less when you can't act outside of one with specific text surrounding it. It definitely hurts when it specifies things that would otherwise be open to personal interpretation(such as poison).
It can only serve to make you more unique when your not one of many similiar people, but one of many diverse.
I would say cutting everyone who was evil, didn't care, or wasn't into adhereing to laws and codes would cut down on it severely if thats what your asking.
There are not 9 different personalities, but there are many many less when you can't act outside of one with specific text surrounding it. It definitely hurts when it specifies things that would otherwise be open to personal interpretation(such as poison).
It can only serve to make you more unique when your not one of many similiar people, but one of many diverse.
If you want to use poison, then you don't want to play a Paladin. If you want to lie, cheat and steal, then you don't want to play a Paladin. (Even if you are lying to, cheating, and stealing from evil.) If you want to "do your own thing" then you don't want to play a Paladin. What you want are the Paladin's mechanics without the Paladin's restrictions. And again, that is fine for your game. I don't want the Paladin stripped of its meaning in order to achieve "balance." Asking why Paladins have to be lawful good is akin to asking why do wizards have to be smart. It is how the game works. You can change it, but for your game. Don't make everyone change, that's just selfish.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I want to use poison, its becuase I want something dead. In 3.5 they added a group of poisons under a different name good guys could explicitly use. Poison is not always evil.
If you lie, sometimes its to protect yourself and others if only for feelings. Lieing is not always an evil act.
If you cheat and steal, you might be stealing something back or that belonged to an ancient temple, or something that will be used for evil. Do you know how much I've stolen off dead people when I play DnD? Stealing is not always evil.
It doesn't steal from the meaning. You define what something means. If I play a fighter following the same code as a paladin, am I a paladin or a fighter?
I didn't say anything against your idea of what a paladin is, or about what the book said. All I said was that options are good and people have different ideas about how things are and should be interpreted. I would rather have options to allow everyone to be happy and carry on their own interpretation. Its how I play my games and how I like them. You don't need to tell me how I want my paladin, its really insulting when you tell me what I think and want. That is mine, you may ask or guess, but please do not tell me who I am.
|
|
More wood for the flames here is the 3.5 paladin of freedom's code reprinted.
Code of Conduct
A paladin of freedom must be of chaotic good alignment and loses all class abilities if he ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin of freedom's code requires that he respect individual liberty, help those in need (provided they do not use the help for lawful or evil ends), and punish those who threaten or curtail personal liberty.Associates
While he may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin of freedom will never knowingly associate with evil characters (except on some sort of undercover mission), nor will he continue an association with someone who consistently offends his moral code. A paladin of freedom may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are chaotic good.Thats not a code to be honest. No good character will willfully commit an evil act.
Acting on in your alignment isn't a code.
By then the designers must have forgotten their own alignment rules.
Assertions of the impossibility of a chaotic good paladin's code are demonstrably false, although I expect the usual 'it doesn't count if it disagrees with us' defence sooner rather than later.
It took 1 hour 53 minutes.
|
|
Paladin's are universally trusted and known for honor, honesty, etc...Not by their enemies in the game world. They would be as 'universally trusted' as lawyers and politicians!
The creatures in our game worlds don't have access to the CRB to be certain of how the game mechanics of 'falling' work.
Enemies, as in evil.
And in the game world for the setting one of the most well known deities was a Paladin.
|
|
I like good being better than evil. I don't want a CG Paladin and a NG Paladin and CN, TN, NE, etc. At that point the Paladin is meaningless, he is Holy Warrior #3.
I don't want non-good paladins either, because:-
In Pathfinder, the Paladin is a warrior for good.
My. Point. Exactly.
His strict adherence to the code makes him lawful.
Although a 'strict adherence' to a lawful code would be lawful, a strict adherence to a good code would not be lawful, but good. There is no such action as 'I'm following the code DM!' The actions taken while 'following a code' are what shows your alignment, and the code as written inthe CRB allows almost an infinite number of choices of what to do in any situation, even for the LG paladin. This idea of a 'strict' code, where every action a paladin takes is dictated by the code, simply does not exist in the CRB, nor ever was in any incarnation of the paladin.
It must be realised that the code in the CRB is not strict, in terms of dictating everything you do. Shallowsoul helped illustrate that when he claimed that the recently posted chaotic good paladin's code is not really a code because 'acting on your alignment isn't really a code', simply not seeing that the chaotic code is exactly similar to the 'lawful' code in the CRB, clause for clause. Each clause in the 'lawful' code is replaced by a similar clause in the 'chaotic' code, without any change in it's 'strictness' at all! This is not difficult, because both codes are heavily 'good', rather than either 'lawful' or 'chaotic'.
|
|
Chaotic characters resent being told what to doYour over-literal (mis)interpretation of that line leads you to the absurd conclusion that chaotic aligned people 'resent being told to do' so much that they would stop doing what they do want to do the moment someone else tells them to keep doing it!
You mean reading the line?
Because it literally says what it says.
Do you now read things as they are written? Maybe if I added exclaimation points?
EDIT: Because the issue isn't "At the moment" it is based on submitting to be told what to do by someone else, as a requisite for the class.
|
|
I've never met a paladin in real life myself...
I'm not so keen on the conduct being a straightjacket. A paladin is good becuase he is good, not becuase he is told to be good right?
Which has nothing to do with the differences between Chaotic and Lawful.
If you submit to someone else's authority as to what is right and wrong to the point that you literally follow a code they are judging you on, you are not chaotic.
Because that is the opposite of Chaotic.
It is like saying you kill puppies and poison small children, but you aren't evil.
Chaotic means that you follow you consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what you promise if they feel like it.
Do you disagree with that definition of Chaotic?
I've never met a paladin in real life myself...
I'm not so keen on the conduct being a straightjacket. A paladin is good becuase he is good, not becuase he is told to be good right?
Which has nothing to do with the differences between Chaotic and Lawful.
If you submit to someone else's authority as to what is right and wrong to the point that you literally follow a code they are judging you on, you are not chaotic.
Because that is the opposite of Chaotic.
It is like saying you kill puppies and poison small children, but you aren't evil.
Chaotic means that you follow you consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what you promise if they feel like it.
Do you disagree with that definition of Chaotic?
Please see the non alignment restricted Order of the Lion Edict
That wasn't a responce to what you think that was a responce to I think. It is nothing like saying I kill puppies and baby orphans and I'm not evil. Do not put words in my mouth, it is insulting and ruins what you are saying becuase I am distracted by those bad feelings. Ask me nicely what I meant if you have to.
I did not disagree or agree in my statement. It had nothing to do with it.
If I want to use poison, its becuase I want something dead. In 3.5 they added a group of poisons under a different name good guys could explicitly use. Poison is not always evil.
If you lie, sometimes its to protect yourself and others if only for feelings. Lieing is not always an evil act.
If you cheat and steal, you might be stealing something back or that belonged to an ancient temple, or something that will be used for evil. Do you know how much I've stolen off dead people when I play DnD? Stealing is not always evil.
It doesn't steal from the meaning. You define what something means. If I play a fighter following the same code as a paladin, am I a paladin or a fighter?
I didn't say anything against your idea of what a paladin is, or about what the book said. All I said was that options are good and people have different ideas about how things are and should be interpreted. I would rather have options to allow everyone to be happy and carry on their own interpretation. Its how I play my games and how I like them. You don't need to tell me how I want my paladin, its really insulting when you tell me what I think and want. That is mine, you may ask or guess, but please do not tell me who I am.
I didn't say poison, lying or stealing is evil (although I will now, because they are). I was saying those are not things a Paladin does (it is written in the Rule book). You want there to be more options? Well you're in luck! The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game gives you the option to change anything you don't like about the game. Yea for you!
I keep seeing "it would only be a little change." All you would have to do is remove respect authority, and let them lie when they need to, oh and use poison if it helps, and steal when they want to, and they can't be beholden to a deity maybe a "loose contract," and etc., etc. It keeps going until you are left with a bland flavorless class. I like that the Paladin has meaning. I don't want "he's a Paladin" to be as vague as the description "he's a fighter." If you can change it in your game why does it have to change for everybody's game.
I have my own setting that I use to play Pathfinder. In my setting, elves and dwarves are almost none existent. Players can choose them with the understanding that elves are rare and revered as mythical creatures while dwarves are hated and face prejudice wherever they go. Does this match up with the CRB? No. Why should it? It is my game. I don't advocate that everyone should play my game. Why should we all play yours?
(And I apologize for assuming you wanted to play a certain way based on your post advocating playing a certain way. My bad.)
Using a poison to render something asleep is evil, but beating them until they are is fine?
Using a poison to render something asleep is evil, but beating them until they are is fine?
Hilariously, I've seen a lot of npcs die from crits when they are attacked for nonlethal. Using poison might actually be safer than being crit by a greatsword for non lethal.
Lying may not be always evil, but it is always dishonest. Paladins are never dishonest no matter their audience.
Although a 'strict adherence' to a lawful code would be lawful, a strict adherence to a good code would not be lawful, but good. There is no such action as 'I'm following the code DM!' The actions taken while 'following a code' are what shows your alignment, and the code as written inthe CRB allows almost an infinite number of choices of what to do in any situation, even for the LG paladin. This idea of a 'strict' code, where every action a paladin takes is dictated by the code, simply does not exist in the CRB, nor ever was in any incarnation of the paladin.
And this, I feel, is where the misunderstanding lies. This is what has all of us running around in circles. You are looking solely at the actions of the character and ignoring motivation entirely because it invalidates your position.
GM: "what are you doing this round?"
Player: "well, I want to do A but the code disallows it so I will defer to the code's judgement and do B instead"
GM: "ok, since you always do that go ahead and change your alignment to lawful"
GM: "what are you doing this round?"
Player: " well, I want to do A but the code disallows it but I'm sure it's the right thing to do so I'll go ahead and do it"
GM: "ok, that violates your code so you fall."
If you want to do good and you do good then you are good.
If you want to do evil and you do evil then you are evil.
If you want to submit to a higher authority and you do submit then you are lawful.
If you want to use your own judgement and you do use it then you are chaotic.
Now, where is the confusion?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arguments about theoretical decent uses of poison are loopholes in a code a Paladin would never look to exploit.
Arguments about theoretical decent uses of poison are loopholes in a code a Paladin would never look to exploit.
Becuase paladins keep a copy of the CRB on them and know what their conduct becuase of that... I don't think this is how paladins are supposed to work. He would like to find the better solution though, which may lead him to things like this.
Arguments about theoretical decent uses of poison are loopholes in a code a Paladin would never look to exploit.Becuase paladins keep a copy of the CRB on them and know what their conduct becuase of that... I don't think this is how paladins are supposed to work. He would like to find the better solution though, which may lead him to things like this.
Are you saying Paladins don't know they follow a code? Or know what the code they follow entails? The code says don't use poison. Paladins do not use poison. What they think about "good" or "fair" uses of poison are is irrelevant because they lawfully follow their code. A chaotic might decide this time was okay and violate the code. That is why they are not Paladins.
That is ridiculous. Do all classes in your mind need to keep a copy of the CRB on them to know what options are available to them?
|
|
Please see the non alignment restricted Order of the Lion EdictI've never met a paladin in real life myself...
I'm not so keen on the conduct being a straightjacket. A paladin is good becuase he is good, not becuase he is told to be good right?
Which has nothing to do with the differences between Chaotic and Lawful.
If you submit to someone else's authority as to what is right and wrong to the point that you literally follow a code they are judging you on, you are not chaotic.
Because that is the opposite of Chaotic.
It is like saying you kill puppies and poison small children, but you aren't evil.
Chaotic means that you follow you consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what you promise if they feel like it.
Do you disagree with that definition of Chaotic?
Please see the definition of Chaotic.
If I had a player who wanted to play a chaotic order of the lion I would ask them in what way are they chaotic.
Similarly if I had a player who wanted to play a lawful order of the Cockatrice, I would ask them in what way they were lawful.
And neither is submitting to be bound to following a code of morality adjudicated by someone else with regards to compliance.
Arguments about theoretical decent uses of poison are loopholes in a code a Paladin would never look to exploit.
No but I argue that non-lethal (no ability damage/drain) should be fine for a paladin. But some how poisons got a blanket ban while other options that are far more violent remain.
|
|
Arguments about theoretical decent uses of poison are loopholes in a code a Paladin would never look to exploit.Becuase paladins keep a copy of the CRB on them and know what their conduct becuase of that... I don't think this is how paladins are supposed to work. He would like to find the better solution though, which may lead him to things like this.
You don't think Paladins are familiar with the code they have sworn to follow?
Seriously? That is your argument?
Arguments about theoretical decent uses of poison are loopholes in a code a Paladin would never look to exploit.No but I argue that non-lethal (no ability damage/drain) should be fine for a paladin. But some how poisons got a blanket ban while other options that are far more violent remain.
From the viewpoint of the Paladin, violence may be necessary to fight evil but disgracing yourself should never be an option.
That is ridiculous. Do all classes in your mind need to keep a copy of the CRB on them to know what options are available to them?
That was sarcasm. I was joking becuase the paladin isn't opening up the CRB and going "Hey look I can't use poisons! How can I get around that..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is ridiculous. Do all classes in your mind need to keep a copy of the CRB on them to know what options are available to them?That was sarcasm. I was joking becuase the paladin isn't opening up the CRB and going "Hey look I can't use poisons! How can I get around that..."
Something not being grasped is the Paladin doesn't see his code as a hindrance or a list of do's and dont's. He sees it as a common sense guide on how to carry himself.
There is no conflict.
Does the paladin know he has a code?