Envall wrote:
I don't see any gain in making any alignment paladins. Two level dip for charisma to saves without all that silly code baggage!
HWalsh wrote:
As to why this is? The guy who created the AD&D Paladin, Gary Gygax, decreed it so. This was carried into D&D 3.x and, since Pathfinder is built from 3.5, it is so here.
While I can't argue that, ultimately, this is because Gygax decided that's how he wanted to Paladins to work in D&D, I would argue that there is some precedent for this, given the historical origins of the Paladin, namely in the Knights of the Round and the Twelve Peers of Charlemagne (from which the word Paladin comes (well, kind of, there's Latin origins, but that's a different topic)). I mean, those knights were upheld as the most pious, righteous, and just warriors of their times and kingdoms, occasionally to the point of being empowered by it. I mean, Roland managed to split a mountain in half, fought off (sort of) an army with a very small number of allies, and blew a horn so hard his head exploded, while the Knights of the Round Table could also do some pretty remarkable feats, including the laying on of hands, if I remember correctly. Furthermore, these knights were extremely loyal to their respective kings (for the most part) and their God, and at the time, the laws of king and god were The Law.
Basically, my point is that, while Gygax made the ultimate decision on how Paladins work, it wasn't without some serious inspiration.
Oh good. I needed another thread to waste my time on.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Envall wrote: I think there is value in keeping Paladin as one of the few classes where the class actually becomes a real job description in the world with its widely established lore.
Because they are so universally strictly defined holy warriors, they make sense as that. By now, there is a lot of loaded expectation to it that everyone knows instantly. Describing someone as Fighter tells the players nothing, but saying someone is a Paladin gives them right away good idea what they are dealing with. And I don't think this still limits your ability to tell any story, Paladins can still be either kind or mean, humble or arrogant and so worth in their quest.
Not only that, but there really is no NEED to detach Paladin from his flavor. There are ways to be divine warrior, get smite, etc. I don't see any gain in making any alignment paladins.
People regularly come onto the forums to ask why they can't play a CG paladin and you don't see any gain?
Not everyone comes to the table with the same expectations for paladins. Not everyone thinks it "makes sense" that the drunken hero Cayden can empower wise warpriests but not charismatic paladins.
I thought the same way you did, once. Then someone asked to join our game as a military officer who saw one of her superiors get away with murder and who instead of trying to reform the corrupt system flipped it the bird and swore an oath to protect innocents her own way. She wanted to play the character as a CG paladin. I asked the GM not to allow it because it "wasn't a real paladin." I am glad no one listened to me.
Warpriest and Inquisitor are perfectly satisfactory options for a non-LG holy warrior type.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Sure... If you don't value raw martial ability or charisma or smite.
Just saying you have Champion of the Faith WPs, Hellknights, and Zealot Vigilantes if you really value smite (and plenty of those can make charisma do stuff too)
Weirdo wrote:
People regularly come onto the forums to ask why they can't play a CG paladin and you don't see any gain?
Not everyone comes to the table with the same expectations for paladins. Not everyone thinks it "makes sense" that the drunken hero Cayden can empower wise warpriests but not charismatic paladins.
I thought the same way you did, once. Then someone asked to join our game as a military officer who saw one of her superiors get away with murder and who instead of trying to reform the corrupt system flipped it the bird and swore an oath to protect innocents her own way. She wanted to play the character as a CG paladin. I asked the GM not to allow it because it "wasn't a real paladin." I am glad no one listened to me.
We then did reversed development.
Back in the day, I actually wanted Paladin to become generic divine warrior template. But more content got released, Paladin shifted away from that for me and into Hellknight territory.
Champion of Faith Warpriest is really I guess the thing that really tied it all together for me. Combination of Smite [What you want] and mixture of blessings of your choice creates the "paladin" of any god you want. It is not the exact same abilities of Paladin, but those are not really required for most concepts you run into, like the one you posted as example.
On the other hand, I have never really run into the case where someone wanted to break the LG Paladin paradigm at the table. Would I allow it if I ever came up? Who knows. Here, at the forums, I can kinda casually say I would not indulge the urge to free Paladin.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Calybos1 wrote: Warpriest and Inquisitor are perfectly satisfactory options for a non-LG holy warrior type.
By that standard, why do you need a paladin class for LG holy warriors?
137ben wrote: Calybos1 wrote: Warpriest and Inquisitor are perfectly satisfactory options for a non-LG holy warrior type.
By that standard, why do you need a paladin class for LG holy warriors? 3.5 did it.
That's probably the start and end of it.
137ben wrote: Calybos1 wrote: Warpriest and Inquisitor are perfectly satisfactory options for a non-LG holy warrior type.
By that standard, why do you need a paladin class for LG holy warriors? You don't, which is why I prefer to recontextualize the Paladin from "Holy Warrior for a specific religion" to "Person who is so good, that the universe itself has invested in their continued survival by granting them otherwise inexplicable aptitude." That makes the "Paladin falling" thing less arbitrary, since divine advocates don't lose all their powers if they stumble, but the Paladin needs to continue being the most handsome, good-natured, and likeable person in existence for the universe to keep caring about them.
kyrt-ryder wrote: Sure... If you don't value raw martial ability or charisma or smite. >warpirest
>inquisitor
>not raw martial ability
Is this a joke post?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I believe the "RAW Martial Ability" is referring to BAB. Not having full BAB doesn't just affect their overall attack bonus but number of attacks and ability to access certain feats. Some people would also object to having to rely on buffing and spellcasting.
My issue with Champion of the Faith Warpriest, Inquisitor, and Zealot Vigilante is that they all need Wisdom. This in turn limits your ability to invest in Charisma, even if Charisma also affects some of your class features (eg Smite).
A Wis 10 Cha 16 Warpriest is severely handicapped.
And that's the kind of stat array I would pick I were to make a holy warrior who follows the guy who got so drunk he became a god.
PossibleCabbage wrote: You don't, which is why I prefer to recontextualize the Paladin from "Holy Warrior for a specific religion" to "Person who is so good, that the universe itself has invested in their continued survival by granting them otherwise inexplicable aptitude." That makes the "Paladin falling" thing less arbitrary, since divine advocates don't lose all their powers if they stumble, but the Paladin needs to continue being the most handsome, good-natured, and likeable person in existence for the universe to keep caring about them. I like this take.
It also fully supports "Any Good" paladins unless the universe happens to think Lawful Good is Best Good.
Entryhazard wrote: kyrt-ryder wrote: Sure... If you don't value raw martial ability or charisma or smite. >warpirest
>inquisitor
>not raw martial ability
Is this a joke post? Those aren't raw martial ability, they dabble in martial and magic [with some special abilities lending towards their overall martial mojo.]
'Raw Martial Ability' is a stat in this game. It's called Base Attack Bonus.
PossibleCabbage wrote: 137ben wrote: Calybos1 wrote: Warpriest and Inquisitor are perfectly satisfactory options for a non-LG holy warrior type.
By that standard, why do you need a paladin class for LG holy warriors? You don't, which is why I prefer to recontextualize the Paladin from "Holy Warrior for a specific religion" to "Person who is so good, that the universe itself has invested in their continued survival by granting them otherwise inexplicable aptitude." That makes the "Paladin falling" thing less arbitrary, since divine advocates don't lose all their powers if they stumble, but the Paladin needs to continue being the most handsome, good-natured, and likeable person in existence for the universe to keep caring about them. Why does the universe itself care, though? It has to care, otherwise it wouldn't yank those powers away when the Paladin stumbles.
Ventnor wrote: Why does the universe itself care, though? It has to care, otherwise it wouldn't yank those powers away when the Paladin stumbles. Why does magic work? How can someone load, aim, and fire a heavy crossbow 6 times in 6 seconds? Some things are mysteries and that's fine.
There's a level of moral reasoning that takes place above alignment (else aligned outsiders would be incapable of changing alignment, which they are apparently not) and that level contains whatever powers are responsible for investing in paladins (and for conservation of energy reasons, antipaladins).
We're talking about a game in which Alignment forces are part of the universe
It's just weird that Good and Chaos don't appear to be on speaking terms is all.
Probably because of the Code. As classic anti-pals have shown us, a rigid code of "don't do this or fall" for a chaotic person is combination of nonsensical and laughable and even if made what would it even look like? "Disrespect all authority, spread anarchy!" or maybe "Don't let anyone tell you what to do lawl"
The Code at the end of the day is meant to represent some form of sacrifice you're doing in exchange for those sweet sweet class abilities and honestly the one violation and fall doesn't gel with anything but LG (Grey Paladins pay for their flexibility before they're brought up).
That's my view anyway.
I cannot stress this enough.
Paladin is more than a God empowering them. If that were the case then you'd lose Paladin status for disobeying your God (You don't. You might lose spellcasting but that's it unless your alignment changes or you do something evil) or some such.
The core thing for a Paladin requires Lawful and Good.
Lawful because a Paladin MUST believe that there is a natural order to things. Good trimphs over evil. They must believe that ends DO NOT justify the means. It is this rigid way of thinking that gives a Paladin their power.
Why is a Paladin immune to fear? Gods aren't. Why is the Paladin?
Why does it go away if they fall?
The Paladin is immune to fear because they know that they cannot be defeated because good will win. Even if they fall, good will win. That belief is part of the package.
You can't do all of that as Chaotic Good.
As to the example someone gave about the military person. A LG Paladin could take action. LG doesn't mean you follow corrupt laws and never did.
CG means not liking ANY rigid rules. You CAN'T be CG and follow a code because following a code is Lawful behavior. CG is about freedom.
Heck Robin Hood wouldn't even be CG. He's NG or LG. He didn't stand up because people only, he stated that the Prince and Sheriff had corrupted the law.
Why is it so hard to accept that Paladins are unique?
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Mostly because everyone that argues that acts like a stereotypical paladin about it.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
HWalsh wrote: Why is it so hard to accept that Paladins are unique? Paladins are all individuals!
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Uniqueness is an element of chaos.
Conform to the collective, you will be assimilated.
Lucifer Cain wrote: This may be a silly question, but, I have a player that really wants to play a paladin but the thing is most of the party is CG or CN. I was wondering if there is a paladin archtype/alternate class anywhere that does not require them to be LG with out being an anti paladin and thus evil.
Thank you ahead of time for your responses.
Just uh....
just let him.
If youre the DM, whats stopping you?
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
TOZ wrote: Mostly because everyone that argues that acts like a stereotypical paladin about it. It's not a matter of argues...
While all Paladins are individuals they are ALWAYS Lawful and ALWAYS Good.
That DOES provide advantages and disadvantages. When a character is identified as a Paladin the game world should react accordingly. This means that characters will react positively or negatively toward them solely on that criteria.
While it is cute to see the "not nice" Paladin, and they happen, even the roughest bearer of the title will stand up to evil and injustice unwaveringly.
Some people just... Really... Hate the idea of shining heroes.
Personally, I'm a bit saddened by it. People want to, and have, torn it down and removed this unique thing. PF will probably be the last game to feature true Paladins because of it.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Walsh, some of us adore Shining Heroes but don't believe in gating character abilities behind a role-playing choice.
kyrt-ryder wrote: Walsh, some of us adore Shining Heroes but don't believe in gating character abilities behind a role-playing choice. That's just built in PF's DNA though. We have clerics, warpriests, druids, monks, barbarians, a whole truck load of PRCs all gated behind either alignment or some roleplay requirement. Paladins aren't unique in that respect beyond having the most strict set of RP requirements before being stripped of their class features.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Shining heroes aren't limited to paladins or Lawful Good characters.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
kyrt-ryder wrote: Walsh, some of us adore Shining Heroes but don't believe in gating character abilities behind a role-playing choice. Kurt, can't you see that not all classes are just collections of abilities. This isn't a video game.
I'm being very serious in that. This isn't an MMORPG where RP and abilities are separate entities. This is flavor and story baked into abilities.
Where would Star Wars be if the Jedi called on their hate and flung lightning? Where the only difference was the color of their saber?
You see these as "abilities behind a role playing choice."
Which is a "mechanics first" attitude.
That isn't a bad thing, but it lacks flavor.
The verisimilitude of the setting is a thing. A powerful thing for narrative storytelling. That has to come together with the mechanics otherwise you wind up with, "Honor is stupid." As a trope.
If, however, honor is the source of power then suddenly honor isn't stupid. Honor is required for that kind of power.
Don't tell me that it wouldn't happen. I've seen PF games where all restrictions were stripped away. Paladins suddenly become hardcore assassin's of the evil. Stabbing in the back, being dishonorable, using poison, lying, cheating... They aren't Paladins... Just a collection of powers.
I left the game after 3 sessions as it wasn't fun. It affected me so strongly I didn't touch fantasy RP for 3 years.
I stopped playing MMOs when they became all about DPS and numbers rather than about roleplay and concept.
I'm begging you... Don't try to strip world flavor from the game, you don't realize what you're destroying.
|
6 people marked this as a favorite.
|
To me, class=character is FAR more a videogame trait than 'characters are individual entities who grow and change according to their nature and circumstances when faced with adversity.'
Because my internal logic and assumptions are so overwhelmingly right that everyone should accept these self evident assumptions.
Obvoiusly. [/summary of most arguments on both sides of this argument so far]
kyrt-ryder wrote: To me, class=character is FAR more a videogame trait than 'characters are individual entities who grow and change according to their nature and circumstances when faced with adversity.' Not at all. That is actually realistic.
Ever been in the military? You'll notice that a LOT of members of the service tend to have similar views and abilities as others in the same branch or MOS. They are individuals but there are ABSOLUTELY certain common traits.
Ever studied a real martial art? I don't mean a McDojo, I mean a REAL school. You'll notice in the hardcore ones they have a similar world view, philosophy, and traits.
This is ESPECIALLY true in monestaries.
Some of this is indoctrination and some is simply wash out situations. As in, the instructors weed out people who don't fit the mold. The teacher won't take a student who lacks what they want to see.
That is WHY there were martial arts schools with hidden techniques all through Japan, China, and the rest of Asia for hundreds of years.
That actually speaks more to the setting. This isn't the modern world where a lot of that phased out as technology advanced. This is a fantasy setting mimicking that time period.
So the idea that, "In order to learn the techniques of the (insert), you must possess a strong belief in law and have an unerring moral compass."
Isn't a bad or unrealistic thing.
Now, add to that the idea of magic or metaphysics and you could have abilities that ONLY work if the person is Lawful Good because it requires Lawful Good energies in the body to work. It's not something you can do without it like you can't cause a lightbulb to glow without electricity.
Note that my statement:
Now, add to that the idea of magic or metaphysics and you could have abilities that ONLY work if the person is Lawful Good because it requires Lawful Good energies in the body to work. It's not something you can do without it like you can't cause a lightbulb to glow without electricity.
Also helps explain why Gray Paladins have slightly different abilities. Their bodies lack the proper metaphysical energies. They, instead, use different techniques to get a somewhat similar result.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
What if I fill the light bulb with fireflies or glowing moss?
More seriously, there are lots of different ways to look at paladins. It's fine to want them to stay the way they've been, and it's fine to want 9 -- or more! -- types of paladins. Or to want them only connected to gods, or only ideals, or whatever. They are all paladins.
knightnday wrote: What if I fill the light bulb with fireflies or glowing moss?
More seriously, there are lots of different ways to look at paladins. It's fine to want them to stay the way they've been, and it's fine to want 9 -- or more! -- types of paladins. Or to want them only connected to gods, or only ideals, or whatever. They are all paladins.
Then you'll get a different light with different properties. Hence the Gray Paladin. It'll be a thing that creates light, it might be the same amount of light, or a different color, it might lack the heat that a bulb generates. Will a ball of fireflies glow in freezing temperatures (no) or moss (no idea).
To say they're all Paladins... Uh... Maybe?
I'd never walk up to a student of Bok Hak Pai at a temple in Henan and a guy who studied BJJ at a studio in New York and claim, "You're both the same! You're both Martial Artists!"
I'd get my teeth handed to me... From both of them.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
HWalsh wrote: kyrt-ryder wrote: To me, class=character is FAR more a videogame trait than 'characters are individual entities who grow and change according to their nature and circumstances when faced with adversity.' Not at all. That is actually realistic.
Ever been in the military? You'll notice that a LOT of members of the service tend to have similar views and abilities as others in the same branch or MOS. They are individuals but there are ABSOLUTELY certain common traits.
Ever studied a real martial art? I don't mean a McDojo, I mean a REAL school. You'll notice in the hardcore ones they have a similar world view, philosophy, and traits.
This is ESPECIALLY true in monestaries.
Some of this is indoctrination and some is simply wash out situations. As in, the instructors weed out people who don't fit the mold. The teacher won't take a student who lacks what they want to see.
That is WHY there were martial arts schools with hidden techniques all through Japan, China, and the rest of Asia for hundreds of years.
That actually speaks more to the setting. This isn't the modern world where a lot of that phased out as technology advanced. This is a fantasy setting mimicking that time period.
So the idea that, "In order to learn the techniques of the (insert), you must possess a strong belief in law and have an unerring moral compass."
Isn't a bad or unrealistic thing.
Now, add to that the idea of magic or metaphysics and you could have abilities that ONLY work if the person is Lawful Good because it requires Lawful Good energies in the body to work. It's not something you can do without it like you can't cause a lightbulb to glow without electricity. You assume class = organization of origin.
I've played several Paladins, only one was loosely affiliated with an order [himself teetering on the edge between Lawful Good and Lawful Neutral], the rest were individuals without affiliations at all, only their conscience [some being true paragons of Lawful Good, some being more creative interpretations.]
I've played a number of monks, only the very first did time in a Monastary, and that was only during her early childhood [and she wound up being Chaotic Neutral anyway, with GM-permission.
The way I create flavor in this game is by writing individuals, characters who are themselves wherever they may fall on the alignment table, and I flesh those characters out with abilities appropriate to them.
I don't give two turds about the default flavor [but I do respect its value as a baseline for newer or less imaginative players.]
HWalsh wrote: knightnday wrote: What if I fill the light bulb with fireflies or glowing moss?
More seriously, there are lots of different ways to look at paladins. It's fine to want them to stay the way they've been, and it's fine to want 9 -- or more! -- types of paladins. Or to want them only connected to gods, or only ideals, or whatever. They are all paladins.
Then you'll get a different light with different properties. Hence the Gray Paladin. It'll be a thing that creates light, it might be the same amount of light, or a different color, it might lack the heat that a bulb generates. Will a ball of fireflies glow in freezing temperatures (no) or moss (no idea).
To say they're all Paladins... Uh... Maybe?
I'd never walk up to a student of Bok Hak Pai at a temple in Henan and a guy who studied BJJ at a studio in New York and claim, "You're both the same! You're both Martial Artists!"
I'd get my teeth handed to me... From both of them. Regardless of their desire to smack you around, the truth is they are both martial artists. And two individuals that uphold tenets of their gods/ethos/whatever could both have the title "paladin".
I've done it. It's worked. It worked 20 years ago, it works today.
kyrt-ryder wrote: I don't give two turds about the default flavor [but I do respect its value as a baseline for newer or less imaginative players.] Nice attempt at an insult.
In my experience as a Game Designer I've seen the opposite. A person who can't work within a framework of an IP often claims to be too creative. In reality they aren't creative enough to work within said framework and still create imaginative characters.
It wasn't intended to be an insult, it was a simple expression of my perspective.
I care not for the default, I see it as a baseline people can either employ or move beyond.
It wasn't my intention to call you new or unimaginative, only to say that I feel the baseline's greatest value is in those circumstances.
knightnday wrote: HWalsh wrote: knightnday wrote: What if I fill the light bulb with fireflies or glowing moss?
More seriously, there are lots of different ways to look at paladins. It's fine to want them to stay the way they've been, and it's fine to want 9 -- or more! -- types of paladins. Or to want them only connected to gods, or only ideals, or whatever. They are all paladins.
Then you'll get a different light with different properties. Hence the Gray Paladin. It'll be a thing that creates light, it might be the same amount of light, or a different color, it might lack the heat that a bulb generates. Will a ball of fireflies glow in freezing temperatures (no) or moss (no idea).
To say they're all Paladins... Uh... Maybe?
I'd never walk up to a student of Bok Hak Pai at a temple in Henan and a guy who studied BJJ at a studio in New York and claim, "You're both the same! You're both Martial Artists!"
I'd get my teeth handed to me... From both of them. Regardless of their desire to smack you around, the truth is they are both martial artists. And two individuals that uphold tenets of their gods/ethos/whatever could both have the title "paladin".
I've done it. It's worked. It worked 20 years ago, it works today. Actually it wouldn't and historically DOESN'T work. That has actually IN REAL LIFE been the cause of majorly bloody wars.
There were massive wars between the two Crane schools. Northern Crane (White Crane) and Southern Crane. Both were named Crane.
One was Fujian the other Tibet.
Eventually they both changed their name specifically to not be associated with the other school.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
HWalsh wrote: Don't tell me that it wouldn't happen. I've seen PF games where all restrictions were stripped away. Paladins suddenly become hardcore assassin's of the evil. Stabbing in the back, being dishonorable, using poison, lying, cheating... They aren't Paladins... Just a collection of powers. This is what I was referring to. These people who were playing 'Paladins' needed structure that they didn't have when the restrictions were stripped away.
This hasn't happened with my groups, because I tend towards players who take their character stories and identities very seriously. As GM I take a very proactive position to help my players build not only avatars with which to interact with the world- but individual people to experience the world through.
In my mind Paladin is an excellent title, a fantastic organization or perhaps loners upholding Justice and Honor and the Andoran Way.
But that's a roleplaying choice, and I would never impose a specific roleplaying choice [though I strive to inspire hundreds upon hundreds of roleplaying choices for the player to make themselves over the course of a campaign] upon a player. As a player I find such a heavy hand quite offensive personally.
TL;DR the basic flavor is good, but please allow players who show a sincere interest in the game and their characters to alter the recipe.
kyrt-ryder wrote: HWalsh wrote: Don't tell me that it wouldn't happen. I've seen PF games where all restrictions were stripped away. Paladins suddenly become hardcore assassin's of the evil. Stabbing in the back, being dishonorable, using poison, lying, cheating... They aren't Paladins... Just a collection of powers. This is what I was referring to. These people who were playing 'Paladins' needed structure that they didn't have when the restrictions were stripped away.
This hasn't happened with my groups, because I tend towards players who take their character stories and identities very seriously. As GM I take a very proactive position to help my players build not only avatars with which to interact with the world- but individual people to experience the world through.
In my mind Paladin is an excellent title, a fantastic organization or perhaps loners upholding Justice and Honor and the Golarion Way.
But that's a roleplaying choice, and I would never impose a specific roleplaying choice [though I strive to inspire hundreds upon hundreds of roleplaying choices for the player to make themselves over the course of a campaign] upon a player. As a player I find such a heavy hand quite offensive personally.
TL;DR the basic flavor is good, but please allow players who show a sincere interest in the game and their characters to alter the recipe. Kurt, you aren't seeing the potential repurcussions of your actions.
Let's strip it down to mechanics:
If I'm able to use poison, fight dirty, and I don't suffer repurcussions for those actions then in a difficult situation, if I'm pragmatic, and I do not then I'm a fool.
I get NO BENEFIT from fighting "fair"
OK, true story, I used to be BIG into martial arts. How big? Big. Beyond casual fan. I studied under the Xian school for Bok Hak Pai.
7 years. (8-15)
Bhp has some "flaws" so later I specifically learned some other techniques, with totally different methods, to cover them.
The reason is BHP doesn't really work so well against getting pulled to the ground. There was nothing stopping me from doing this.
If I could teach it, I'd teach those extra skills in with my BHP because there is no benefit to not guarding against it. That, however, isn't how they teach it.
If I was in a fight for my life I would NOT let my opponent get up to be fair.
A truly honorable fighter WOULD and it WOULD be tactically unsound.
Why? Because in the modern day even hardcore practitioners admit anyone who would is stupid.
Unless there is a reason. If your powers REQUIRE it then you're not stupid. You're smart.
You see where not having world flavor becomes a problem?
If you use poison and fight dirty, you aren't really being a Paladin.
You might be a Chaotic Good Champion if your actions are for good reasons, you might have PF's paladin classes' ability [save anything law-based shifted to chaos] but you're no Paladin.
Paladins- as we've defined them here for the world in question- are Shining True Blue Heroes of Justice and Honor. Someone who doesn't do that isn't playing a Paladin, someone who does that is a Paladin and will be recognized as such.
EDIT: as a note, there's nothing stopping a Paladin from beating an enemy into the ground in my mind. Once they're unconscious they can be bound and given the opportunity to repent.
In fact, one of the Paladins I played didn't believe in any sort of repentance in battle. His philosophy was to take prisoners if they surrendered, and if they didn't then the gods would sort them out.
However, this one was True Blue Shining Paladin to the core in his beliefs and his ethics. He was just a battlefield pragmatist.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
HWalsh wrote: Actually it wouldn't and historically DOESN'T work. That has actually IN REAL LIFE been the cause of majorly bloody wars.
There were massive wars between the two Crane schools. Northern Crane (White Crane) and Southern Crane. Both were named Crane.
One was Fujian the other Tibet.
Eventually they both changed their name specifically to not be associated with the other school.
Ok? They are still martial artists, just ones who decided it would be good to slap fight over a name. That doesn't invalidate other paladins from existing and following other codes.
Just because you aren't Lawful Good doesn't mean that you suddenly are a cheating poisoning lying scumbag.
|
4 people marked this as a favorite.
|
HWalsh wrote: Lawful because a Paladin MUST believe that there is a natural order to things. Good trimphs over evil. They must believe that ends DO NOT justify the means. It is this rigid way of thinking that gives a Paladin their power.
Why is a Paladin immune to fear? Gods aren't. Why is the Paladin?
Why does it go away if they fall?
The Paladin is immune to fear because they know that they cannot be defeated because good will win. Even if they fall, good will win. That belief is part of the package.
You can't do all of that as Chaotic Good.
I disagree. Faith that goodness is the natural state of things and that goodness will ultimately win is not a Lawful trait.
From Champions of Purity: “Deeply inherent in the chaotic good character's philosophy is the belief that most individuals are good and will do good if given the freedom to act as they please. In this regard, these benevolent, kind-hearted individuals can be viewed as the most idealistic of the good alignments.”
HWalsh wrote: As to the example someone gave about the military person. A LG Paladin could take action. LG doesn't mean you follow corrupt laws and never did. I never said that. I said that this particular character saw a corruption of the law and decided that laws in general are a Bad Idea. That's what made the character non-Lawful.
Notably, said individual as far as I can recall never did a single thing against the paladin's code, including the Sarenrae-specific code and an additional restriction against dealing lethal damage to an enemy that could be redeemed.
HWalsh wrote: Ever studied a real martial art? I don't mean a McDojo, I mean a REAL school. You'll notice in the hardcore ones they have a similar world view, philosophy, and traits. Yes, and I've noticed that while there are dramatic differences in personality across different dojos within our style, we all end up learning the same techniques. And in fact there's quite a lot of overlap in technique between our style and Judo, which tends to have an even more divergent philosophy (eg much more competitive). Members of our style can train with Judoka, and vice versa.
HWalsh wrote: knightnday wrote: Regardless of their desire to smack you around, the truth is they are both martial artists. And two individuals that uphold tenets of their gods/ethos/whatever could both have the title "paladin".
I've done it. It's worked. It worked 20 years ago, it works today.
Actually it wouldn't and historically DOESN'T work. That has actually IN REAL LIFE been the cause of majorly bloody wars.
There were massive wars between the two Crane schools. Northern Crane (White Crane) and Southern Crane. Both were named Crane.
One was Fujian the other Tibet.
Eventually they both changed their name specifically to not be associated with the other school. So how do paladins of Torag and paladins of Shelyn manage to coexist?
knightnday wrote: HWalsh wrote: Actually it wouldn't and historically DOESN'T work. That has actually IN REAL LIFE been the cause of majorly bloody wars.
There were massive wars between the two Crane schools. Northern Crane (White Crane) and Southern Crane. Both were named Crane.
One was Fujian the other Tibet.
Eventually they both changed their name specifically to not be associated with the other school.
Ok? They are still martial artists, just ones who decided it would be good to slap fight over a name. That doesn't invalidate other paladins from existing and following other codes.
Just because you aren't Lawful Good doesn't mean that you suddenly are a cheating poisoning lying scumbag. OK. Let's look at it this way:
Let's assume the LG pure as the driven snow Paladin is the official Paladin. It's the thing every kid has grown up hearing about. It's the thing talked about in war stories when soldiers say, "Then I saw him, standing and staring down the demon. He was bloody and ragged but he was unafraid. I could feel calming energy coming off of him and that was when my fear left me. I would have followed that man into a Dragon's maw."
Now you're a sheriff in a small town.
A man was found standing over the body of another man. He's covered in the other man's blood. He swears that he didn't do it, that he came across the man fighting another man, he drew his sword and attacked the other man (which is why there is blood on his sword) but he vanished. He's covered in blood because he tried to heal the downed man but it was too late.
You feel the courage coming off of the man, you saw him heal his wounds with his hands, he claims to be a Paladin and as near as you can tell, he is.
However another man, who also seems to be telling the truth, claims he saw the whole thing and saw the warrior kill the victim.
There were no other witnesses and even a truth spell didn't change either story. The victim was well loved and, based on evidence, the man you have in custody is guilty. He'll be put to death.
Paladins cannot lie. Thus the Paladin IS innocent. You let him go.
-----
Now... What happens when two groups call themselves Paladins and some indeed are known to lie... Do you let him go or execute him?
Weirdo wrote: So how do paladins of Torag and paladins of Shelyn manage to coexist? Shelyn doesn't break the core tenets of the base code that Paladins follow. Torag, I image, has a lot of friction with non-dwarven Paladins.
At the end of the day they're all still Lawful Good and fall if they ever perform an evil act.
That situation would never come up in my games because I don't run games where anybody is KNOWN that they cannot lie. Someone might take an oath, but oaths only last so long as one's will to keep it does.
Well, except that one game where I borrowed Aes Sedai from Wheel of Time, they're known for not being able to lie... but being incredibly deceptive and manipulative while speaking the technical truth.
kyrt-ryder wrote: That situation would never come up in my games because I don't run games where anybody is KNOWN that they cannot lie. Someone might take an oath, but oaths only last so long as one's will to keep it does.
Well, except that one game where I borrowed Aes Sedai from Wheel of Time, they're known for not being able to lie... but being incredibly deceptive and manipulative while speaking the technical truth.
Kurt - The base code specifically says they can't lie. It also calls out the inability to use poison.
|
