No, just an honest question. I don't know if the paladin knows he has a code. Just seems like one of those things thats player knowledge vs pc knowledge.
Edit: Just a responce to the earlier statement about how a paladin can't try to look for loopholes in his code. Then I joked about how they carry a CRB on them to look at their code.
|
No, just an honest question. I don't know if the paladin knows he has a code. Just seems like one of those things thats player knowledge vs pc knowledge.
Edit: Just a responce to the earlier statement about how a paladin can't try to look for loopholes in his code. Then I joked about how they carry a CRB on them to look at their code.
You honestly aren't sure if someone would know that they are following a strict code with specific rules that governs nearly aspect of their life.
Do you think they just lucky that everything they do matches the code?
I thought Malachi's argument that his personal opinion trumps what is written the book was the most off the wall, ridiculous argument I would read in this thread, but we now have a worthy contender for that spot.
I think your making assumptions. Maybe the paladin doesn't have to pretend to be a good guy becuase he's a good guy. You don't follow laws and are good becuase you have to. You do it becuase you are lawful good.
I don't think calling my arguement ridiculous is nice. I'm not really trying to argue, and I don't appreciate you infering negative things about me.
|
|
I think your making assumptions. Maybe the paladin doesn't have to pretend to be a good guy becuase he's a good guy. You don't follow laws and are good becuase you have to. You do it becuase you are lawful good.
I don't think calling my arguement ridiculous is nice. I'm not really trying to argue, and I don't appreciate you infering negative things about me.
Dude, you are arguing that they aren't actually following a code, that they are just lucky.
Yes I think that argument is ridiculous.
I didn't do that at all, or at least I don't think so. I'm not actually thinking of the conclusions or ramifications of what I say, just asking the question.
In other news, where do they get their code? Do I get one when i take a level in paladin in a fancy booklet that falls into my lap?
I didn't do that at all, or at least I don't think so. I'm not actually thinking of the conclusions or ramifications of what I say, just asking the question.
In other news, where do they get their code? Do I get one when i take a level in paladin in a fancy booklet that falls into my lap?
Where and how they come upon the code is up to your discretion, that they follow a code is in the book.
|
|
Where and how they come upon the code is up to your discretion, that they follow a code is in the book.I didn't do that at all, or at least I don't think so. I'm not actually thinking of the conclusions or ramifications of what I say, just asking the question.
In other news, where do they get their code? Do I get one when i take a level in paladin in a fancy booklet that falls into my lap?
And that they know what the code would be is the only way one could possibly follow a it.
I don't see RAW that they know the code nor anything about how they come up on it. I think youc an easily follow the code without knowing you have it, its mostly just "Be a good person" after all. With a bit of "Slay bad guys" thrown in.
I did see a part in the fluff where they adhere to an ironclad discpline about law and morality.
|
|
I don't see RAW that they know the code nor anything about how they come up on it. I think youc an easily follow the code without knowing you have it, its mostly just "Be a good person" after all. With a bit of "Slay bad guys" thrown in.
I did see a part in the fluff where they adhere to an ironclad discpline about law and morality.
How do you follow instructions you don't know about?
I can't believe you are doubling down on this. Seriously, are you just trolling?
By not following instructions at all of course. Your just do. Your just the sort of person to be righteous, follow the law, and fight evil where it arises. You might give charity where it is needed, you don't steal or cheat or do anything dishonorable becuase that would be wrong. You respect authority becuase it avoids trouble and because it helps the world work.
Is doing that without being told a bad thing? I know some people that would respect and try for that sort of thing. They may not all succeed. You see where I'm going with this right?
Please don't call me a troll becuase you don't understand whats going on in my head. Sometimes people have a different view of things. You can ask me in a nicer way without the word troll I'm sure.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have learned some things in this thread.
Chaotic people-
-are disciplined while they are reckless
-are commited to their whimsies
-keep their word while they lie
-steal, deceive, and poison in pursuit of justice
-follow a Code while they follow their heart.
[/sarcasm]
But get seriously pissed when you suggest chaotic means arbitray or random.
|
|
By not following instructions at all of course. Your just do. Your just the sort of person to be righteous, follow the law, and fight evil where it arises. You might give charity where it is needed, you don't steal or cheat or do anything dishonorable becuase that would be wrong. You respect authority becuase it avoids trouble and because it helps the world work.
Is doing that without being told a bad thing? I know some people that would respect and try for that sort of thing. They may not all succeed. You see where I'm going with this right?
Please don't call me a troll becuase you don't understand whats going on in my head. Sometimes people have a different view of things. You can ask me in a nicer way without the word troll I'm sure.
I will agree that I don't understand what is going on in your head.
It isn't a matter of "being nice"
There is a specific code of conduct that they have to follow or they lose all powers.
If they follow that code is not decided by them.
Saying "They just happen to follow the code" is an absurd argument.
I find it ridiculous they just magically know their code.
Being nice is an important thing for a paladin I would think. I suppose nice and good aren't always the same thing though.
|
|
I find it ridiculous they just magically know their code.
Being nice is an important thing for a paladin I would think. I suppose nice and good aren't always the same thing though.
Who said they magically know the code? That is your either or? They don't know it or they magically know it?
People don't read in your world?
I don't even know...
MrSin, are you looking at the code as it's listed in the book, more as a guideline that the Paladin's player must follow, other than for the Paladin himself?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well I asked whether they knew the code and how they got it. I get "Of course they know the code!" and "Well they find it somehow".
and yes, I'm looking at it more as something the player must follow than the paladin. The player does in fact have a CRB and reads the code. The Paladin does not have so much access to the CRB.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By not following instructions at all of course..
The Paladin does follow a code.
|
|
Well I asked whether they knew the code and how they got it. I get "Of course they know the code!" and "Well they find it somehow".
and yes, I'm looking at it more as something the player must follow than the paladin. The player does in fact have a CRB and reads the code. The Paladin does not have so much access to the CRB.
And again I ask, do books exist in your world.
In Golarion, one of the primary deities was a Paladin and has extensive written lists of expectations and requirements. Temples exist in every decent sized town...
But they just happen to follow the code. Randomly. By chance.
By not following instructions at all of course..The Paladin does follow a code.
You picked out that part without putting the rest of the paragraph. A paladin does follow would need a code. Otherwise someone might thing they were incapable of doing anything but following.
And yes, there are books usually. Just not a CRB with a paragraph about what a paladin's code is. What if the paladin doesn't serve Iomodae or Saranrae? What if he serves Shelyn? what if he only knows Shizuru? Or what if he's an atheist? Is he just not a paladin then?
I didn't say that. I said they were good people doing good lawful things. I don't think this is important enough to care about to be honest.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Or what if he's an atheist? Is he just not a paladin then?
A casual reading would suggest that a paladin couldn't be an atheist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By not following instructions at all of course..The Paladin does follow a code.You picked out that part without putting the rest of the paragraph. A paladin does follow would need a code. Otherwise someone might thing they were incapable of doing anything but following.
And yes, there are books usually. Just not a CRB with a paragraph about what a paladin's code is. What if the paladin doesn't serve Iomodae or Saranrae? What if he serves Shelyn? what if he only knows Shizuru? Or what if he's an atheist? Is he just not a paladin then?
I didn't say that. I said they were good people doing good lawful things. I don't think this is important enough to care about to be honest.
I would suggest the player and GM sit down and discuss the code, where it came from, what it entails. I'm really surprised no one has mentioned this yet. It should have been the first post in my opinion.
Well to be fair people get stalwart over whats RAW. I'd think that would be one of the first thoughts to a solution to all problems.
I completely agree with that Durn.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to break this up a bit because it's long and there are a few different types of points I'm making.
Alignment Restrictions in General
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.
This.
While we're at it, I'd like to play a chaotic neutral monk. He'd have all the powers and abilities of a monk, he just wouldn't follow a lawful lifestyle or pursue the tenets of any sort of lawful discipline or regimen. What? That wouldn't affect the core concept of what 'monk' means at all!
I'd allow a CN monk. I'm reading the Book of Five Rings right now, and I would not characterize Miyamoto Musashi as a lawful person. He starts his book by saying “I have never had a teacher when studying the Ways of various arts... even in writing this book I am neither borrowing he ancient words of Buddhism or Confucianism, nor using old examples from the military chronicles or practices” - he refused to try to legitimate his work by appealing to tradition or authority, letting his skill speak for itself. The monk is called “lawful” simply because he's disciplined, as in self-disciplined, as in “invests a large amount of effort and work in honing a skill they value.” There's nothing in the description of a chaotic character that says they can't practice hard at something that they personally value. You could just as easily say “monks must be neutral in some respect, for they seek internal balance” or even “monks must always be nonlawful, because they promote flexibility over a rigid mind or body.”
Oh, and a lawful evil druid too. Why don't we see more of those? Devils should be able to use Wildshape without caring about nature! Pathfinder is unreasonably rigid!
I'd also allow a LE druid who doesn't revere nature – assuming that they belong to an appropriate shapeshifting cult, or have lycanthropic or other shapeshifting heritage. The nature worshipping druidic faith may be the most obvious way to get those powers, but it certainly isn't the only way. Nor does it take anything away from those who actually belong to the druidic faith.
|
|
Alignment and Codes
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.
But neither of those has a formal restriction on it. Meaning it's up to the GM and the player to decide whether that alignment is appropriate for a character who behaves in that manner. Whereas currently the alignment restrictions (for all classes, not just the paladin) mean that GMs and players are encouraged to skip this discussion and shelve or alter legitimate concepts because they're not allowed under RAW.
Thats not a code to be honest. No good character will willfully commit an evil act.
Sure they will. Multiple posters in this thread seem to think that one evil act won't change the alignment of a good character.
Acting on in your alignment isn't a code.
Then what is the current LG code, other than an elaboration on “a Paladin must be LG”?
Must help those in need, protect the innocent, punish those who threaten innocents, must not commit an evil act – Good
Must respect legitimate authority, be honourable – Lawful (by your definition of Lawful)
And even [Unearthed Arcana's Paladin of Freedom] I would be fine with, as it is specifically an alternative class.
Then can we please both ask for an official Paizo Paladin of Freedom archetype as a compromise? I would rather remove the restriction than make a CG archetype (which is what the Unearthed Arcana versions were before archetypes existed), but I think that having an archetype would be a huge improvement over the current “big no” state of affairs.
I don't want all alignments to be equal. I like good being better than evil.
Are you OK with law being equal to chaos? Because in theory, it's supposed to be on your two-axis system (as opposed to 4E's linear system where LG is Good Plus and there's no such thing as CG).
I don't want the Paladin stripped of its meaning in order to achieve "balance."
What about “fairness”?
|
|
A Paladin's Relationship with his/her Code
"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."
And the CG paladin is not being told what to do, because:
The Paladin follows the code because he believes in the code. The powers granted to him are a reward for his honor and virtue. .... He would follow the code even if he gained nothing.
Which means:
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"
This situation would never arise, because a real paladin would follow the code even if he gained nothing, because he believes in the code, and always agrees with the code.
Do you think they just lucky that everything they do matches the code?
If he follows the code because he believes in the code (or more accurately, what the code says), and he would follow the code even if he gained nothing, he doesn't have to get lucky, he just has to follow his natural inclinations.
|
|
How a NG or CG Paladin might Behave
Except the part where Paladin's are universally trusted and known for honor, honesty, etc...
In some campaigns, yes. In others, paladins might get no particular social benefits. Or you could call a “paladin” a LG member of the class (others being “champions”) and while only “paladins” are universally trusted, the others still get holy powers for fighting evil according to their own religion's/alignment's highest standards and are well respected by others of their religion or alignment for their commitment to their convictions.
Or you could play a paladin who respects everyone from the mightiest king to the lowest beggar, listening to and helping all so long as doing so does not assist evil causes, because they believe that all people are equal. This would include respecting legitimate authority (because cops and kings are people too) but would not necessarily mean obeying them when doing so would violate the paladin's conscience (by placing undue hardship on the common people). This paladin would be honourable according to their own definition of honour. The paladin does not lie (because they value truth), does not cheat (because this is disrespectful to others who do not cheat) and does not use poison (because the paladin values bravery and considers poison cowardly). However, this paladin does not necessarily adhere to society's definition of honour, which may require for example the execution of adulterers, suicide as atonement, or following one's lord in evil actions. This paladin also believes in new ideas over tradition, adaptability, and that people should be encouraged to follow their hearts rather than be bound by a duty that someone else imposes on them (the paladin does not see their paladinship as a duty, but as a personal calling). This paladin would be considered trustworthy and honest. I would consider this paladin good, but nonlawful.
What alignment would you call a person who joins an elite military group, where they will answer to one specific commander and that person only, in order to fight for freedom?
- They personally want to be part of the group, because they feel it is the best way to promote freedom
- They know and trust the commander they will be serving under and are confident that the commander shares their values and will give orders only for the good of the cause, not for the sake of exercising authority. If the commander does issue a frivolous order and the chaotic person believes that the incident is minor and not worth the loss of the group benefits, they defer to the commander in that instance but make their disagreement known as soon as possible. If they believe that the incident is significant - if the commander is frivolous in his orders or gives orders that do not serve to promote freedom in the big picture - the chaotic person will leave.
- They know that the only penalty for disobedience is being immediately removed from the group. They have been told this by the commander, the group, and/or ex-group members before joining the group. They can also observe that ex-group members have not been treated punitively.
- They will leave the group if something else comes up that better "promotes freedom" though this is unlikely as the group has been very dedicated to freedom for some time.
Can I get comment on these updates?
|
Why is this conversation still going?
They aren't changing the Paladin any time soon so if you want to play a Chaotic Good Paladin then you either need to find a DM that will accommodate you or go and play 4th edition.
We don't need anymore examples from real life, all you need to do is focus entirely on the alignment system that is present and at the moment, chaotic cannot truly follow a code without actually being lawful. You can have chaotic written on your sheet but you will be acting lawful.
Case closed.
|
|
What alignment would you call a person who joins an elite military group, where they will answer to one specific commander and that person only, in order to fight for freedom?-They personally want to be part of the group, because they feel it is the best way to promote freedom
-They know and trust the commander they will be serving under and are confident that the commander shares their values and will give orders only for the good of the cause, not for the sake of exercising authority. If the commander does issue a frivolous order and the chaotic person believes that the incident is minor and not worth the loss of the group benefits, they defer to the commander in that instance but make their disagreement known as soon as possible. If they believe that the incident is significant - if the commander is frivolous in his orders or gives orders that do not serve to promote freedom in the big picture - the chaotic person will leave.
- They know that the only penalty for disobedience is being immediately removed from the group. They have been told this by the commander, the group, and/or ex-group members before joining the group. They can also observe that ex-group members have not been treated punitively.
They will leave the group if something else comes up that better "promotes freedom" though this is unlikely as the group has been very dedicated to freedom for some time.
Sure, I must have missed them in the deluge of Paladins no longer even knowing what a code is...
That person sounds neutral to me. They don't resent the authority of the Captain, but they also aren't going to follow him if they disagree with him.
A Chaotic person would resent being given orders. They may still follow them, particularly if they can't come up with a better plan, but they aren't going to trust anyone who gives orders. They resent authority, by definition. It literally says that.
They also aren't lawful, because they aren't following orders because there is a legitimate authority telling them to, and they reserve the right to walk away from the orders if they don't make sense.
And the person isn't a Paladin, because Paladins follow the code of their deity/divine source no matter what, or they cease to be Paladins.
Good example that demonstrates the reason why a Paladin is LG.
|
|
Trying to look at it objectively for a moment, it's no surprise that a LN person such as yourself should prefer a vision where paladins believe law is more important than good, nor is it a surprise that a CG person such as myself should prefer a vision in which paladins believe that good is more important than law. However, I have both fluff and crunch to point to while you have only fluff.From the point of view of a Paladin, a chaotic good is about as distant from him alignment wise (two steps) as a Lawful Evil. You can not dismiss the importance of Law to a Paladin. (and by the way, we've got a creative director's opinion to this so it's not just fluff. Good is somewhat more important in that Paladins will irrevocably fall for voluntarily committing an evil act, but they can't maintain their status by performing chaotic ones either.
Exactly. A Paladin would view a Chaotic Good person as the kind of person who gets people killed because they won't follow orders.
In a Few Good Men when the Marines (LN who believed they were LG) met Tom Cruises Character (arguably CG or CN) they stated that they disliked him because "he had no code".
That movie is a great example actually. The Two Marines "fell" because they committed an evil act while following orders. The Marine at the end pointed out that they deserved to fall because although they were following orders, the order was an unlawful one and should not have been followed.
And on the flip side, Chaotic people often find Lawful behavior equally abhorrent.
Can I ask what the difference between upper left and northwest is?
Personally, I think a paladin could be rewritten to cover any alignment and just represent an ideal without being in a straightjacket code.
Thats... a really wierd metaphor thingy. I have trouble grasping it, but I think its just me and my late night grog.
Its always awkward when you discuss how a paladin reacts to bad laws imo. If thats what we're talking about... I think. I've never seen someone tell a paladin "Your being too chaotic! FALL!". I have oddly enough seen "your being too neutral good!" but never too chaotic.
I don't think the paladin should be entirely restricted to the Lawful Good corner. I think that quickly turns it into a straightjacket, as opposed to a guideline. I'm not saying they shouldn't be lawful good, just should be able to act without feeling like they're restrained. I've always found playing paladins in that situation almost cornered and stressful
|
|
MrSin, try this image, it helps visualize it.
-They know and trust the commander they will be serving under and are confident that the commander shares their values and will give orders only for the good of the cause, not for the sake of exercising authority. If the commander does issue a frivolous order and the chaotic person believes that the incident is minor and not worth the loss of the group benefits, they defer to the commander in that instance but make their disagreement known as soon as possible. If they believe that the incident is significant - if the commander is frivolous in his orders or gives orders that do not serve to promote freedom in the big picture - the chaotic person will leave.That person sounds neutral to me. They don't resent the authority of the Captain, but they also aren't going to follow him if they disagree with him.
And the person isn't a Paladin, because Paladins follow the code of their deity/divine source no matter what, or they cease to be Paladins.
Right, if they fail to follow their commander/divine source even when doing so requires personal sacrifice, then they get kicked out of the group (cease to be a paladin and fall).
If they fail to follow their commander/divine source, then either (1) the commander/source has ceased to serve the cause of freedom or (2) the person has ceased to believe that the cause of freedom is worth the effort.
(1) Because their commander/source is a divine representation of the ideals of freedom, the commander/source will never cease to advance the cause of freedom and will never require that those who follow him betray that cause, or put any restrictions on their freedom other than those absolutely required to serve the greater cause, such as requiring them to free slaves.
(2) If the person in question ceases to believe in advancing the cause of freedom, they should cease to be a paladin of that cause just as surely as a person who ceases to believe in protecting the innocent should cease to be a paladin. And this happens! LG Paladins do fall!
As long as the commander/god serves the cause of freedom and the paladin believes in the cause of freedom, they will serve that commander/god. If that requires that the paladin make sacrifices to protect the freedom of others, including sacrificing some amount of their own freedom, then that is what it takes - they are willing to make personal sacrifices - just like a paladin is willing to sacrifice his life to protect the lives of others.
|
|
It isn't following a cause, it is submitting to live by a code of conduct.
They don't just kind of follow the code a long as it fits what they want to do, they literally devote their lives to following the code. They aren't just "joining a group" they are changing how they act in nearly every way to be in compliance with a code.
Chaotic people don't willingly serve anyone. They may follow someone who they think is going the right direction.
If being chaotic doesn't mean rejecting outside authority in favor of following your own personal beliefs, what does it mean?
|
|
In Golarion, one of the primary deities was a Paladin and has extensive written lists of expectations and requirements. Temples exist in every decent sized town...
Do those 'extensive lists' match the code in the CRB? That's only a few lines. There is no way that the actual lines in the CRB are exactly the same lines that make up the paladins code in the game world. The words in the CRB are for the player, not the character in game.
Imagine for a moment that the words in the CRB were the actual words of the code in game. That is not a form of words that would be considered fit for purpose by the lawful paladins it would be written for. A lawful document, where a lawful person is swearing to live their life by that document, would not be worded in such a way that a fall or fall scenario would be possible. There would be codified, numbered clauses, with connections between them such as 'cannot lie unless a lie is the only way a paladin could save the innocent'. No lawful person would regard those scant lines in the CRB as the sum total of the code in game. The CRB makes it clear(ish) what the actual code should be about. It is meant to inspire players and DMs to understand how the paladin approaches life. It is not the actual code that is written in that temple in Golarion.
In fact, each god would have their own code, and each code would be similar in intent to the code in the CRB, with variations based on the specifics of each individual god.
No sensibly written code would allow for a situation where, no matter what the paladin chooses to do, he loses his paladinhood; the fall or fall scenario. No sensibly written code would contain the seeds of it's own pointless self-destruction, and one thing you can say about lawful aligned codes: they would be sensibly written!
The code in the CRB is not the code that the paladin sees in the game; it models itself on the same intent. That's why the question was asked recently: does the paladin know his code? Well, the paladin doesn't have access to the CRB! Good job, too! If the code in the CRB was all he had then he'd be doomed to fall no matter how virtuous.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The CRB makes it clear(ish) what the actual code should be about. It is meant to inspire players and DMs to understand how the paladin approaches life.
Yes. Yes, it is.
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment...
Whew! I'm glad we finally got all that settled!
I wonder what would happen if you tried to explain to a paladin that he was lawful good and had to be... Just another one of those wierd questions about Player vs. character knowledge.
To remain more on track, what is this thread about anymore?
I think the best part of this thread is someone called me "lawful." I kinda wish my dad could see this.
|
|
It isn't following a cause, it is submitting to live by a code of conduct.
They don't just kind of follow the code a long as it fits what they want to do, they literally devote their lives to following the code. They aren't just "joining a group" they are changing how they act in nearly every way to be in compliance with a code.
Except they aren't changing how they act in any significant way, because their code, being a code in accordance with chaotic and good values, would already describe the way that they act.
Chaotic people don't willingly serve anyone. They may follow someone who they think is going the right direction.
And this is incompatible with the RAW paladin how? The RAW paladin isn't actually required to submit to or serve a deity, they are required to act as the code directs. They are encouraged to follow a deity who is going in the right direction (defined as the same general direction as the code).
If being chaotic doesn't mean rejecting outside authority in favor of following your own personal beliefs, what does it mean?
It means believing that people should choose the direction of their own lives, as the CG paladin has chosen the direction of their life. This is the value for freedom and self-expression.
It means believing that all people are equal and that no special status can rightfully be imparted on you by birth or by titles granted by institutions or those in power. A person may distinguish themselves by skill or deeds and earn students and followers by this means, but must still respect their followers' right to self-determination. To lawful or neutral people this is often seen as disrespecting authority.
It means valuing adaptability and new ways of thought, believing that just because "this is the way we have done things" does not mean that this is the way things should be done.
It means preferring to live in the present, though this does not mean that a chaotic person is necessarily unable to consider the future. This can manifest as recklessness or irresponsibility.
It means rejecting traditions and laws that serve no purpose. A chaotic person believes that in an ideal world there would be no laws, but they will tolerate (especially if CG) some laws that are necessary to prevent people from infringing on others rights. (A CE person might act differently because being evil they don't accept that others have rights - they think might makes right.) For example, a CG person can accept a law against murder because murder takes away another person's right to life. A CG person may wish that no such law were necessary, or they might support vigilante justice as an alternative method for punishing those who infringe on others' rights, but they won't try to legalize murder. A chaotic person certainly will not strive to break all laws just because they are laws - they don't murder people because they resent being told not to murder people.
And the general style of the code is something that a CG person could live by, if they agreed with its contents. It's a set of broad statements about what kinds of behavior are acceptable and which are unacceptable. While it is very strict in requiring the character to behave by its guidelines without fail, it also allows a good amount of flexibility in deciding exactly how to do so. A paladin urged to help those in need and faced with a hungry person could give them a fish, teach them to fish, or bring them to a church that will feed them. Told to punish those who threaten innocents, the paladin could choose to execute evildoers or attempt to redeem them and have them perform restitution for their crimes. Some deities may have more specific instructions in this regard (eg Sarenrae overwhelmingly prefers redemption) but the core code does leave quite a lot up to the individual paladin's judgment.
|
My favorite literary paladin of all time, Paksenarrion, did not become a paladin by agreeing to a code adjudicated by another and living it. She gained her powers through Gird's direct blessing, for being a strong and good person with unshakeable convictions and willingness to act on them. Other paladins in her world trained to be paladins and were brought up steeped in the teachings of the Code of Gird. Gird himself, in mortal life, was prone to fits of drunkenness in which he lost control of himself and committed violence he later regretted. Paksenarrion never did.
|
|
The difference between Malachi and myself is that she believes that Paladin behavior can encompass the entire upper leftquarter of the classic alignment graph as defined by the two axes of law-chaos, good-evil,whereas I contend that the Paladin is actually restricted to the northwest corner of that graph.
What do you mean, 'she'? Both me and my forum identity (the paladin Malachi Silverclaw) are very definately male!
Also, I've no idea where you got the idea that I think paladins can be or could be LN or TN. Right now, paladins can be anywhere in that LG box. Some on this thread (mentioning no names but it rhymes with...er...'ciretose') believe that there is an even smaller box, entirely within the LG box, that occupies the extreme north west corner, that is a special kind of lawful goodness that applies only to paladins.
Although that is the situation now, I advocate a change to 'any good' (not 'any alignment' or even 'any non-evil'). I'm happy to see the anti-paladin be 'any evil'.
|
|
@Weirdo - Of course they are changing how they act. They are submitting to a code. That the code generally corresponds to what they would do already is irrelevant to the fact that they are now saying "I submit to following this code and being judged by that person."
Saying "I will follow this code" can be chaotic. Saying "I will follow this code that is adjudicated by someone else" is submitting to someone elses authority, as they get to judge you as to if you are doing the code correctly. They are the authority that tells you what to do and if you are doing it right, and you agreed to accept their judgment. You submitted to their authority.
If you want to get into RAW
"Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."
"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."