I'm not sure at all on how the customs were. My character is a Sir, a Kingsworn knight, so would he introduce himself as such to everyone he meets, or would that come across as too arrogant for a paladin? Would it be a sort of unmentioned thing, as his reputation should precede him?
Just wondering how it will affect fellow party members and NPCs if I make myself above them in status. :)
A Paladin is sworn first to his vows, his code, and part of that is upholding the truth. So I would say yes, you have to introduce yourself as Sir Paladin [Insert Name], so that everyone knows you're a Paladin and a Knight of the Realm, in full disclosure. Otherwise you'd be lying through omission and that would be grounds to fall. Duh.
I will warn you, though, that you're setting yourself up for trouble. Now you have to uphold your code, your deity's code, and the code of the kingdom, and there's bound to be problems at some point, unless you're an exemplary do-gooder like myself, in which case you'll never have an issue.
Still, I'd do like I did and take the Absolute Loyalty trait if you can, as it'll let you atone once without a lot of issue. (Again, full disclosure, otherwise I might fall.)
In any case, enjoy your status as a vigilant knight of justice and righteousness! Remember the Paladin's motto: To detect and smite!
*Rides off on his noble steed to forewarn the evil masses of a new champion of goodness*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Bask in my greatness! Fool!"
I'd think the Sir would only come up in courtly circumstances.
Day to day, I'd hope his humility would win out, and not insist people call him Sir all the time. He may use it to pull rank, if an officer of the kingdom isn't taking him serisouly, but I doubt it'd be used day-to-day all that much.
If it matters...my paladins have all preffered to be called "Brother" <name> of <god's name>, if a title was necessary.
I've only played one once where a title was offered, and he refused it.
I don't know about paladins, since that's fiction, but if this guy has earned a military rank he'd probably want to be referred to by it until he gets to know someone even if the person he's meeting is a civilian. I think introducing yourself as "Sir (insert name here)" is fine.
Now, if your rank also includes some high-falutin title like "Sir Heimlich Von Maneuver, Master-at-Cheese to the Court of Cheddarton; Knight-Regent of the Village of Staples; High-Enforcer of the Seven Fingers of Nosepickering" then I'd just go with "sir".
There's certainly no standard or precedent for how a knighted paladin would refer to himself. It probably depends on the social situation. Full formal titles probably go something along the lines of Sir <name> of <country knighted in>, Paladin of <deity>. He might simply choose to go by Sir <name>, holy warrior of <deity> in his home country! or even Sir <name>, of <deity> if he's not arrogant about pointing out he's a paladin.
And, considering my own personal experience of nobility, he might just go with "Nat. Enn-Ay-Tee. Nat" when asked how to address him.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
However he wants. He's certainly under no obligation to use his title (not saying you are a Sir isn't the same thing as saying you're not a Sir).
I'm not sure at all on how the customs were. My character is a Sir, a Kingsworn knight, so would he introduce himself as such to everyone he meets, or would that come across as too arrogant for a paladin? Would it be a sort of unmentioned thing, as his reputation should precede him?
Just wondering how it will affect fellow party members and NPCs if I make myself above them in status. :)
It depends on the setting. Assuming a stereotypical Feudal Fantasy kingdom settting, if the Paladin is a Knight there should be nothing wrong with him introducing himself as such if he has earned the position.
After all the position is partly one of honor and having earned the title he has also earned the right to use it.
In one sense, NOT letting others know he is a knight (with the attendant powers and responsibilities that come with it) could be construed as deception, which while not completely prohibited from a Paladins actions could be construed as a type of lie depending on motivation.
But telling people who you actually are is never arrogant unless your character is trying to BE arrogant.
Taking a level or two of diplomacy should be sufficient for your character to know what social situations it would be proper to use his full honorifics in or not when introducing himself.
As for your reputation, it is better to be known as the knight. Sir Bob is probably more rare than someone named just Bob and as such it helps distinguish your from the other people who might have good reputations with the same name.
Also in many settings where a knightly title is used, it can be dangerous for peasants of those of lower social station to treat those of knightly station without the full respect they deserve. While I am sure the Paladin would not have a huge issue with familiarity from the masses there may be those more unscrupulous in the region who may wish to strike at the Paladin through punishment of the innocent. Punishing them for ill treatment under the lands social codes when they did not treat the Paladin with the deference his title deserves since they didn't know about it.
In settings where there are knightly or royal titles, the culture is based on a belief that there are different social stations and those tiers make the world go round. Folks generally will not begrudge your station unless you abuse it's power or are a jerk.
Just use of knightly titles and power means you reflect your Paladinly nature even better, being an example for other knights and nobles how one should act.
I think that introducing both your military position and position as a paladin is important for establishing your authority and jurisdiction. This gives a basic explanation of your position and intentions. And I fully believe that you should give such an introduction every time you met someone (well, obviously not to every barmaid and shop keep, but you get what I mean)
I say this because it brings up an often ignored approach to paladins I wish got more light. You see, when I look at their decent hit dice, access to heavy armors, large bonuses to perfect saves, and the ability to heal themselves for practically no action (when else are they using their swift actions?), I see a wide margin for diplomacy that few ever take.
"Hope for the best, prepare for the worst". I feel that this could well serve as a motto that works far better than "I smite [x]". Yes, that hill giant is probably going to try to smash you with that tree trunk. But what if he doesn't, and you decide to kill him anyway? Shouldn't the paladin, the shining paragon of virtue and mercy, at least take a small bet for a peaceful solution? Isn't someone that is willing to try to work with everyone he meets one of the truest and most compelling forms of the righteous hero?
That is not to say that you should play lawful stupid either, however. While a paladin should be honest, it doesn't mean he shouldn't appreciate basic strategy. Let him serve as bait and distraction while stealthier party members flank around and use prepared action to attack the opponents if they decide to be anything less than civil. If things go well, let them circle back around and regroup for a nice discussion. If not...well, we know how that story goes, right?
Of course, if you are attacked first, you certainly have the right to defend yourself, and since they have already shown that their violent intentions, no one could really blame you if the golden rule is applied upside their heads.
Sorry if I ended up going on a rant. Not entirely sure if this is on topic, but I feel it must be said.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think "DIE, FIEND" would suffice for 90% of encounters.
"prepare to die" would also work. And "technically" be appropriate in all situations (whe're all going to die someday, no?)
I guess it depends on the person, humble ones would only use full titles if they have to or are really pissed. Mostly it would be just Sir <name>. Now, the full of Righteous Zeal I AM holier than Thou type will go with the full paragraph title every chance he gets.
Well, it depends on the mores of the society and the status of the paladin on it. If it is customary for titles to be announced and the paladin has earned one, there is no problem to use it - it is even expected and could be considered good manners. Arrogance goes a lot deeper than the 5 seconds of introduction. If a character is a knight, sworn by the king, announcing himself Sir such and such when appropriate is only proper.
|
"Hi everyone! I'm Lysander Spurius Dragomir and I'm on an adventure! I'm not all that sure what it is we're here for, but whatever it is, it is impotent to remember two things. Firstly of all, be sure to always be near your adventuring buddy, that way you don't get losted or unlivinged. The second thing is that it is impotent to be successful, because by being successfully impotent in your mission, you can be impotently successful in your mission. Thirdly, and most importantly, let's all have a fun time on our adventure, any questions?"
"Hello, I'm Sir Karlan Bladetwist of the Knights of Ozem, captain of the city watch and we are here investigating the murder of a local businessman"
Well, it depends on the mores of the society and the status of the paladin on it.
FWIW, I've met lots of military officers and a few knights (in the real world). Very few of them introduce themselves by title (and none of the knights, although that's a smaller sample size).
Similarly, I've met a lot of physicians ("doctor") and even more university teachers (also "doctor" when not "professor"), and very few of them use titles socially.
Pterry Pratchett put it well. When Mrs Gaiter had tremulously asked her how one addressed the second cousin of a queen, Susan had replied without thinking, 'We called him Jamie, mostly.'
But that says more about modern Anglophone culture than it does about Golarion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not all that sure what it is we're here for, but whatever it is, it is impotent to remember two things. [/b]
...."I think our cleric has a spell for that."
Well, it depends on the mores of the society and the status of the paladin on it.FWIW, I've met lots of military officers and a few knights (in the real world). Very few of them introduce themselves by title (and none of the knights, although that's a smaller sample size).
Similarly, I've met a lot of physicians ("doctor") and even more university teachers (also "doctor" when not "professor"), and very few of them use titles socially.
Pterry Pratchett put it well. When Mrs Gaiter had tremulously asked her how one addressed the second cousin of a queen, Susan had replied without thinking, 'We called him Jamie, mostly.'
But that says more about modern Anglophone culture than it does about Golarion.
Certainly a fine point. I suppose that, in everyday life, officials would wear a uniform, badge of office, or maybe even some banner in order to indicate their authority. Allowing that to do the work instead of going on about a long list of titles probably endears you more to the audience.
There is a certain degree of leeway though if your campaign takes you to lands where your heraldry does not have much meaning though. If you are going to go around in a lizard folk village, you might want to give a bit more detail to your introduction, for instance.
Well, it depends on the mores of the society and the status of the paladin on it.FWIW, I've met lots of military officers and a few knights (in the real world). Very few of them introduce themselves by title (and none of the knights, although that's a smaller sample size).
Similarly, I've met a lot of physicians ("doctor") and even more university teachers (also "doctor" when not "professor"), and very few of them use titles socially.
It is a cultural thing, certainly. Today, in most cases it is not typical to introduce yourself by your job title except - in some cases - if you are there in an official capacity. For example, if I met a guy who happens to be a policeman at a party he would probably introduce himself as Peter, while if he were giving me a ticket he might introduce himself as Sergeant so-and-so. In some societies in Golarion, where hierarchy and breeding are more important, it would probably be different ,and you could say a paladin is essentially "on duty" while adventuring :P .
The more formal the location the more titles.
To the innkeeper -> Hi I'm Bob.
To the city Guard -> Hello, I'm Sir Robert.
To the local Lord -> Good evening I am Sir Robert of Ditzburg.
To the King -> Good evening Your Majesty, I am Sir Robert of Ditzburg, Paladin of Herbert, Defender of the Faith, etc etc etc (Until the King falls asleep and you can kill him for being evil).
|
I just can't help but assign the same baggage to calling oneself "Sir" as you would someone attatching "-san" to their own name in Japanese, even if it really isn't the case.
Couple that with the humility you'd expect from most paladins...
I imagine most announcing their status in terms of service rather than station. "I am John Smith, servant of Iomedae" feels more natural than leading with "I am Sir John Smith, etc."
IANAMHP, of course.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Hi. I'm Troy McClure...You may remember me from such scenarios as Hangman's Noose and Gods Mouth Heresy..."
|
Im with Vod up there, I would imagine HOW you introduce yourself depends on WHO, your adressing yourself too. However even introducing yourself to the lowest of the classes I would think a "I am Sir Bob." Is appropriate, and if you want to get rid of formality add the "but please you can address me as Bob." would be fine. A lot of it would also have to do with the culture in which you were raised.
A paladin raised at king's courts is going to be more formal than the one who was called to serve who was the son of potato farmers.
My Pali would usually introduce himself as "merely a humble knight."
Most people he met just called him "Knight" or "Sir Knight".
I played this character for nearly 2 years and greatly enjoyed it, but there was a secret about him that the DM and other players never knew.
I never came up with a name for him because I didn't expect to stay in the game that long.
It was fun.
ON THE OTHER HAND my barbarian will constantly shout his name and title at the start of battle. Along with a battle cry.
"I AM THE FANG OF BRAVERY GIVEN FORM! I'M ABOUT TO GET WILD, SO STOP ME IF YOU DARE!"
Well, this is also up to the character. I definitely think you can have a somewhat prideful paladin, as long as their ego doesn´t go out of control. Not every LG warrior of virtue and justice has to be exactly the same, after all.
Depends on the paladin, who they're with, and where they're from.
My knightly characters usually would just give their name, and possibly who they were a knight of if appropriate for the conversation. If they had a lot of titles, they'd usually use the one they considered most important.
They only mentioned detailed titles if it was important for the other party to be aware of those titles - i.e., yes, I really do have the authority to ask for whatever I'm asking for.
I think the most elaborate that ever got " I am [Name], Champion of [Deity], Knight-Commander and Dragon-Rider of [Nation], Lord of [Province within Nation]."*
That character didn't introduce himself like that in normal conversation, but he sure as hell signed proclamations with his full list of titles.
|
Depends on the culture, situation, and the personality of the paladin (with others giving some good examples).
It's important to remember that paladins are allowed to have flaws, as long as those flaws don't prevent them from performing their duties as a paladin. You could certainly play a paladin as a proud, stuffy knight who insists that everyone, his own party included, call him "Sir Valiant the Brave."
I'm not sure at all on how the customs were. My character is a Sir, a Kingsworn knight, so would he introduce himself as such to everyone he meets, or would that come across as too arrogant for a paladin? Would it be a sort of unmentioned thing, as his reputation should precede him?
Just wondering how it will affect fellow party members and NPCs if I make myself above them in status. :)
I play a Paladin of Iomadae. Yes always introduce yourself to the fulles extent of your title, after all you represent your deity.
I go the socially appropriate route, letting circumstances dictate formality. Keren Rhinn, while not a paladin, is a Knight of Ozem and Vigilant Defender of Lastwall, but if she's not at a formal event she might pick the relevant bits and let her armor say the rest for her.
But, that said, now it's got me wondering... Female knights. Do you follow military rules (all officers are "sir" regardless of gender)?
However he wants. He's certainly under no obligation to use his title (not saying you are a Sir isn't the same thing as saying you're not a Sir).
The point of a code of honor is not finding means of gaming the system but holding one's self to an ideal.
I wouldn't say in a time where it would be advantageous to a mission a Paladin shouldn't/wouldn't keep his mouth shut for the greater good. But, in most cases, I'd say he should use a style of formal address that clearly communicates he is a Paladin.
Vows regarding honesty and truthfulness are about purity of mind. A person who must remember which falsehoods and strategic omissions he has made doesn't maintain said purity, and is always distracted from his true measure in some small way.
So, yeah, I am "Sir Goodly of the Knights of the Inconveniently Judgmental" might not be what the party face wants to hear all the time, but, unless the group is actively infiltrating something, this is what I'd go with.
|
|
I go the socially appropriate route, letting circumstances dictate formality. Keren Rhinn, while not a paladin, is a Knight of Ozem and Vigilant Defender of Lastwall, but if she's not at a formal event she might pick the relevant bits and let her armor say the rest for her.
But, that said, now it's got me wondering... Female knights. Do you follow military rules (all officers are "sir" regardless of gender)?
I believe the apropriate title for a female knight type charector is Dame But i could be wrong. pretty sure i read that somewhere in like a nonfictional book on heraldry. But i cant give an exact qoute. It was from over a decade ago easily. But its what i have always went with in the games i run.
|
|
I believe the apropriate title for a female knight type charector is Dame But i could be wrong. pretty sure i read that somewhere in like a nonfictional book on heraldry. But i cant give an exact qoute. It was from over a decade ago easily. But its what i have always went with in the games i run.I go the socially appropriate route, letting circumstances dictate formality. Keren Rhinn, while not a paladin, is a Knight of Ozem and Vigilant Defender of Lastwall, but if she's not at a formal event she might pick the relevant bits and let her armor say the rest for her.
But, that said, now it's got me wondering... Female knights. Do you follow military rules (all officers are "sir" regardless of gender)?
At least in Britain. In a fantasy setting, go with whatever feels right - Sir, Dame, and Lady all work, or you could make up your own title.
So, yeah, I am "Sir Goodly of the Knights of the Inconveniently Judgmental" might not be what the party face wants to hear all the time
I am so tempted to make that an actual knightly order.
I believe the apropriate title for a female knight type charector is Dame But i could be wrong. pretty sure i read that somewhere in like a nonfictional book on heraldry. But i cant give an exact qoute. It was from over a decade ago easily. But its what i have always went with in the games i run.I go the socially appropriate route, letting circumstances dictate formality. Keren Rhinn, while not a paladin, is a Knight of Ozem and Vigilant Defender of Lastwall, but if she's not at a formal event she might pick the relevant bits and let her armor say the rest for her.
But, that said, now it's got me wondering... Female knights. Do you follow military rules (all officers are "sir" regardless of gender)?
At least in Britain. In a fantasy setting, go with whatever feels right - Sir, Dame, and Lady all work, or you could make up your own title.
So, yeah, I am "Sir Goodly of the Knights of the Inconveniently Judgmental" might not be what the party face wants to hear all the timeI am so tempted to make that an actual knightly order.
Dame might be the appropriate title technically, but it doesn't mean it is in practice, even in the real world. There are recorded cases of female 'kings' for example.
Long story short-due to the complicated nature of 'traditional' gender roles and language, Dame might have a connotation of being weaker, at least as a soldier. Sir could easily be co-opted as a gender neutral term for anyone with an official martial position. At least, within the slightly less gender biased world of the setting.
make something up appropriate to the setting... spear maiden, blade sister, etc...
|
|
Spear Maiden or Blade Sister might be fine names for an order of female knights, or perhaps a more ornamental title a la "knight of the realm," but they don't have the snap or ease of use that a title like "sir" does.
But, that said, now it's got me wondering... Female knights. Do you follow military rules (all officers are "sir" regardless of gender)?
Fact checked this initial assertion, and not all militaries use sir for all officers - ma'am is sometimes used.
Dame might be the appropriate title technically, but it doesn't mean it is in practice, even in the real world. There are recorded cases of female 'kings' for example.
Long story short-due to the complicated nature of 'traditional' gender roles and language, Dame might have a connotation of being weaker, at least as a soldier. Sir could easily be co-opted as a gender neutral term for anyone with an official martial position. At least, within the slightly less gender biased world of the setting.
It's absolutely fine to say that in a less gender-biased world, "sir" is considered a gender-neutral title. It's also fine to say that in a less gender-biased world, "dame" does not carry a connotation of soldierly weakness.
"No, I'm not staring at your t~&% [/body part of preference], I'm just concentrating on Detect Evil... WOW."
"Hello, I am Paralictor Bloodwrath, Hellknight Paladin of the Order of Pain. No, I am not a joke."
"Alright, just to get this out of the way before everything else... You're Evil, right?"
Spear Maiden or Blade Sister might be fine names for an order of female knights, or perhaps a more ornamental title a la "knight of the realm," but they don't have the snap or ease of use that a title like "sir" does.
But, that said, now it's got me wondering... Female knights. Do you follow military rules (all officers are "sir" regardless of gender)?Fact checked this initial assertion, and not all militaries use sir for all officers - ma'am is sometimes used.
It's absolutely fine to say that in a less gender-biased world, "sir" is considered a gender-neutral title. It's also fine to say that in a less gender-biased world, "dame" does not carry a connotation of soldierly weakness.Dame might be the appropriate title technically, but it doesn't mean it is in practice, even in the real world. There are recorded cases of female 'kings' for example.
Long story short-due to the complicated nature of 'traditional' gender roles and language, Dame might have a connotation of being weaker, at least as a soldier. Sir could easily be co-opted as a gender neutral term for anyone with an official martial position. At least, within the slightly less gender biased world of the setting.
I did say slightly. While you can't argue that there a lot of strong females within the setting (I mean, even the iconics have a fairly decent spread over both martial, skill, and magical classes), it is hard to speak on the experience for the average woman.
Armies accept female officers because Golarion is a world of champions. But what about the level 1 commoner or aristocrat (who make up the majority of the world)? Do they simply become "[x]'s wife"?
|
I think it's largely setting and situation specific, but consider:
Arthur: "Who are you? What do you seek?"
Lancelot: "I am Lancelot of the Lake, from across the sea, and I have yet to find a King who is worthy of my sword."
Arthur: "That is a wild boast. You lack a knight's humility."
Lancelot: "Not a boast sir, a curse, for I have never met my match in joust or duel."
I try and put myself in the shoes of my characters. If my character held some sort of position of authority or office he would consistently introduce himself with full tittle. If he were living as a private citizen then I would not advertise.
When I was in college, on the first day of my Sophomore year (I think), I arrived at one of my classes. Syllabi were passed around, and someone asked a question, addressing the professor as "Doctor Smith". His response was, "I didn't go to school all those years just so you guys would call me 'Doctor'. You can call me Frank."
That very same day I went to another class where someone addressed the professor as "Mister Johnson". (These names were changed, by the way. Both of these guys had very unusual names, which might be recognizable.) His response was, "I didn't go to school all those years for you to call me 'Mister'. The name is 'Doctor Johnson'."
No kidding.
Neither way is wrong, and I don't fault either man for his opinion. The former may be a little more laid-back and personable, but the latter was not arrogant or rude. Both men were friendly and respectable.
I have a paladin, right now, that is very focused on becoming a knight. It's very important to him, and when it happens, you can be sure he'll want to be addressed as one.
I have played a paladin in the distant past that would have absolutely scoffed at the idea of even accepting a title.
It's character dependent. You know your character better than anyone else. So, the question is: What would your Knight-Paladin do?
|
|
@The Crusader - safest to assume formality where others' titles are concerned and let them assume a more informal method of address.
The only knight I ever played in PF was very relaxed about his own title (including accepting unflattering nicknames), but very precise about others', at least until given permission to be more familiar.
Well title or no ....I am a knight....I sweep in and fight for all that is right and good...yen yang...add...you will not ruin my lands as you have ruined yours...IE...well If sir paladin does not want to be offended as your...hey I am president of the bank you will not address me as hey Kelly pr of the bank hows it going...Ego Ego Ego...then its a pissing game