| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ask your GM what he expects of a Paladin.
Depending on his answer, my advice would be "Don't". Don't play a Paladin, that is, with someone whose views on alignment, morality, and the text of the Code differ ONE IOTA from your own.
Because it will be a living hell if they do.
On the religion issue, that depends A LOT on GM and setting.
In general, by RAW, a paladin that follows a set of ideals is also good; I'm currently playing a paladin that follows the ideals of goodness and law. She doesn't disbelieve in the gods, but she follows the ideals more because she believes strongest in them. Her background has her instructor not happy with this, though... A non-evil god is generally acceptable for a paladin under RAW as well, but again you want to check with your GM.
Edit: Also, listen to what Rynjin said.
You can play a godless paladin, a non religious one, or one of an evil deity if you really wanted to. None of that breaks the rules for being a paladin(though you might make it more rough). The big thing is that sometimes a GM has their own ideas about a paladin, like having to be within one step of their deity, needing a deity at all, or that you need to act like you've got a stick in the wrong place that makes you act all strict and uptight.
Also paladins bring a lot more rp potential than most other classes
They bring less actually. Less flexibility and expectations are limitations and therefore murder on potential. Forced roleplay isn't the same as potential.
The Inquisitor class pretty much fixes this whole issue.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can play a godless paladin, a non religious one, or one of an evil deity if you really wanted to. None of that breaks the rules for being a paladin(though you might make it more rough). The big thing is that sometimes a GM has their own ideas about a paladin, like having to be within one step of their deity, needing a deity at all, or that you need to act like you've got a stick in the wrong place that makes you act all strict and uptight.
Also paladins bring a lot more rp potential than most other classesThey bring less actually. Less flexibility and expectations are limitations and therefore murder on potential. Forced roleplay isn't the same as potential.
If your playing a paladin. Its to be a paladin. I always ask if they would rather be a knight (cavalier/fighter/knight), rather than. a paladin. In my exp. Paladins bring much more potential because the people wanting to play them have a thing for the Knight in shining armor. I am also less strict than some in terms of alignment such as, practical jokes (within the law/ code of pally are just fine)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For Pathfinder, the paladin codes are actually defined in "Faiths of Purity". This will likely mostly matter for Pathfinder Society play. In all other cases, talk to your GM.
Personally, I feel you are missing out on a lot of RP potential by stripping the Paladin of his or her moral considerations. From a powergaming perspective it may sound good, but that's a pretty weak argument (to me): if I wanted to powergame / play a fantasy slasher, I'd rather play Skyrim or something similar. Pathfinder, and other tabletop RPGs, are such an awesome hobby *because* you get to play a rich character, with morals, limitations, hopes and dreams. Don't do yourself a disservice - pick something that you have to work for, and the rewards are so much richer.
There's a difference between playing a character that you have to work for because it challenges your RP skills, and a character you have to work for because if you don't work the GM's shaft enough your character becomes a glorified Warrior.
Paladins aren't inherently harder to RP. They're very easy, in fact. No challenge whatsoever in the RP if your GM isn't a hardass, or has different interpretations of anything even tangentially related to morality than you do.
But you REALLY need to have an in-depth discussion with your GM before you play a Paladin.
1.possible but as yet not actual: having a latent possibility or likelihood of occurring, or of doing or becoming something
2.expressing possibility: describes a verb or verb form that expresses possibility, e.g. "may" or "might" in English
3.capacity for development: a capacity to develop, succeed, or become something
Potential means something much different than what people think it means I think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a difference between playing a character that you have to work for because it challenges your RP skills, and a character you have to work for because if you don't work the GM's shaft enough your character becomes a glorified Warrior.
Paladins aren't inherently harder to RP. They're very easy, in fact. No challenge whatsoever in the RP if your GM isn't a hardass, or has different interpretations of anything even tangentially related to morality than you do.
But you REALLY need to have an in-depth discussion with your GM before you play a Paladin.
I agree that it's good to have a solid understanding with your GM - but that goes for all character types. Likewise, I really don't see how a paladin is inherently very easy to RP. Maybe if you play it simply as a brute in shining armour that smites everything that shows up on the Detect Evil radar...
To give an example. I am currently playing a character that will multiclass into paladin in the near future. It's something that I've been roleplaying towards for a while now. Yes, he was born and raised in a temple - a CN one. He also was the son of a prostitute. There never was much of the shining knight about him, I can tell you that! It didn't stop him from trying to do the right thing, and I believe that soon he'll have earned enough confidence in his role in life that he'll seek out a temple that isn't quite so selfish.
So, in short: don't play monolithic, single-aspect characters. It's generally boring if it lasts longer than one or two nights, and there's a lot less room for growth. Think outside the box.
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
Imho, playing a holy paladin is a lot of fun. I'm not really religious so playing a paladin is a challenge, but I love roleplaying them. My current paladin of Iomedae is being fun because we are bouncing back and forth between Lastwall and Ustalav and there is such a huge difference between both countries. I made her and undead scourge since we're playing in Vyrlich a lot. She just annihilates undead! Give it a try, but talk with your GM first.
One technique I'm using in order to not hinder the party is that I don't try to force my beliefs on to others. That doesn't mean that I don't show signs of displeasure when seeing things that conflict with my views.
First of all... This is a completley legitimate philosophy for most/all paladins. My paladin is very big into 'free will' and is more than willing to let others make their own mistakes. He rarely 'forces' HIS standard on other people.
Rarely does not mean NEVER... He still doesn't condone poison or assinations or anything like that... but it's the kingmaker AP and he's the king, so anything done there is really done in HIS name... so there is a responsibility there too ;)
Still, the other players can be as sneaky as they want to be and backstab to their hearts content.
Secondly... Any questions about paladins should only be asked to your GM. ANYTHING we say here... is irrelevant. By RAW on some worlds the paladin does not need a god. I don't know many GMs who EVER allow one to be played without one.
I probably wouldn't allow a straight neutral god to have paladins... just seems off somehow. LG and N don't have much overlap to justify the 'pinnacle of the godly champion' attached to it...
But really, every Paladin question ever seem to generate 5-10 pages of bickering and critizing... so really... it's the DM that needs to approve your character.
I consider the Paladin to be one of the hardest and advanced classes to manage well... and if your 'new' at Rping... it may be a bit much at first. But seriously, have a conversation with whoever is going to be running the world your in.
I really don't see how a paladin is inherently very easy to RP. Maybe if you play it simply as a brute in shining armour that smites everything that shows up on the Detect Evil radar...
To give an example. I am currently playing a character that will multiclass into paladin in the near future. It's something that I've been roleplaying towards for a while now. Yes, he was born and raised in a temple - a CN one. He also was the son of a prostitute. There never was much of the shining knight about him, I can tell you that! It didn't stop him from trying to do the right thing, and I believe that soon he'll have earned enough confidence in his role in life that he'll seek out a temple that isn't quite so selfish.
Absolutely ZERO of which has to do with the class itself.
However, when sticking to class stereotypes, the Paladin's is hands down the easiest to RP. He's the Good Guy. It's not hard to play that.
Compare to pretty much any other class, whose built-in flavor is "I am one of a hundred things".
You can spice up any of them with your own additions, and are encouraged to do so, but the class itself is extremely easy to find flavor for...it's built right in, bundled and packaged 100%.
So, in short: don't play monolithic, single-aspect characters. It's generally boring if it lasts longer than one or two nights, and there's a lot less room for growth. Think outside the box.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say this wasn't intended to be a statement of your "superior RP skillz", and was just worded in such a way that the tone could be taken that way.
I agree that it's good to have a solid understanding with your GM - but that goes for all character types. Likewise, I really don't see how a paladin is inherently very easy to RP. Maybe if you play it simply as a brute in shining armour that smites everything that shows up on the Detect Evil radar...
Agreed. I think one of the things that sometimes trips people up is that due to the history of the paladin class, it is one of the few classes that basically requires role playing. Some GMs will allow non-paladin LG characters to get away with ignoring evil but they wouldn't give the paladin the same option.
The advise about talking with the GM before is good - but I wouldn't approach the conversation with the mindset that the GM is your adversary. Some times players want to define the rules of the campaign, but that is the GM's job. That doesn't make him/her your opponent when you're a player, it just means you have to adhere to his/her judgment.
|
|
So, in short: don't play monolithic, single-aspect characters. It's generally boring if it lasts longer than one or two nights, and there's a lot less room for growth. Think outside the box.I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say this wasn't intended to be a statement of your "superior RP skillz", and was just worded in such a way that the tone could be taken that way.I really did not take it that way at all.. why would you? Sounds like good friendly advice to me.
I really did not take it that way at all.. why would you? Sounds like good friendly advice to me.So, in short: don't play monolithic, single-aspect characters. It's generally boring if it lasts longer than one or two nights, and there's a lot less room for growth. Think outside the box.I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say this wasn't intended to be a statement of your "superior RP skillz", and was just worded in such a way that the tone could be taken that way.
I didn't take it that way. I chose not to.
But the way it was worded can sound a bit like an "expert" lecturing a newbie or summat.