Playing a Paladin? Think Steve rodgers, not Superman.

[Nohwear]

Hopefully this will stay civil long enough to get some interesting discussions going.

I think that Steve Rodgers is a great example of how to play a Paladin, while Superman is a bad one. Steve Rodgers is the nicest guy you will ever meet. That is, you can imagine actually meet someone like him. Superman is, usually, such a goody goody that he is more of a parody of himself. Steve Rodgers is still down to Earth. He has high and low moments. He has his flaws. Players and GMs alike, when it comes to Paladins, think Steve Rodgers, not Superman.

Thoughts?

[Claxon]

I think Steve Rogers is a good example of how a paladin can be.

But Superman is equally valid.

In fact, there can be many different types of paladins while still adhering to the paladin code.

If you try to shoehorn them into only 1 type of character they become very uninteresting to play I think.

[Crag_Irons]

I know a lot of people think of Steve Rodgers as a paladin type, but I think he is more Neutral Good. He does good for the sake of good, even if he must brake the law to do so. In the comics he believes in the goodness of the American dream/ideal, but spends a lot of time fighting the system that wants to take away the American people's freedoms.

Andoran is a reflection of the United States, and it is notably not Lawful Good.

Some paladins are focused on the lawful side of good, and others are on the good side of law. It makes a difference when playing one.

Core wrote:

Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, self-righteousness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

The heart behind why a paladin makes decisions is what side of alignment they are bent towards.

A good focused paladin heart chooses to sacrifice for others because of a deep respect/concern/love. A law focused paladin heart chooses to sacrifice for others because of a deep sense of honor/obedience/duty.

Good is concerned for others, and law is concerned for the system.

The end result often looks the same, but they are different. At least that is my take on it.

[Saldiven]

I prefer playing a Paladin with a really low Wisdom and modeling him after Dudley Doorite.

[Rub-Eta]

Nohwear wrote:

Thoughts?

Who's Steve Rogers? Thanks all I'm thinking...

[David knott 242]

Rub-Eta wrote:

Nohwear wrote:

Thoughts?

Who's Steve Rogers? Thanks all I'm thinking...

Captain America

[Isonaroc]

Nohwear wrote:

Hopefully this will stay civil long enough to get some interesting discussions going.

I think that Steve Rodgers is a great example of how to play a Paladin, while Superman is a bad one. Steve Rodgers is the nicest guy you will ever meet. That is, you can imagine actually meet someone like him. Superman is, usually, such a goody goody that he is more of a parody of himself. Steve Rodgers is still down to Earth. He has high and low moments. He has his flaws. Players and GMs alike, when it comes to Paladins, think Steve Rodgers, not Superman.

Thoughts?

There's no right or wrong way to play a Paladin (ok, that's not strictly true, but there are such a variance of possible Paladins that it makes the generalization useful). Some are certainly more interesting than others, but there's no single standard. You can be the Sir Galahad impossibly perfect white knight, you can be a flawed but good hero, you can be a fundamentalist zealot, you can be the shining example, and you can even be a gigantic p***k who treats people largely like garbage. Outside of the "no evil acts" and Paladin code, there is nothing that requires a Paladin to be anything like any other Paladin.

EDUT: As an addition, my favorite Paladin is the one who expects the best out of himself and serves as a living example of good. Atticus Finch with a sword, if you will. Though I also like the misanthropic Paladin who resents essentially everyone but still does what is right.

[FangDragon]

I prefer Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files personally or if we want to bring out the big guns Paksenarrion Dorthansdotter.

[Isonaroc]

FangDragon wrote:

I prefer Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files personally or if we want to bring out the big guns Paksenarrion Dorthansdotter.

Carpenter is a bit more proactive than Atticus, but he's of a kind. The exemplar.

Skin Game wrote:

The angel held up his hand. “If you do this, I can take no action to protect you,” he said. “And this creature will be free to inflict upon you such pain as even you could not imagine.”

A sudden, sunny smile lit Michael’s face. “My friend . . . thank you,” Michael continued. “But I’m not the Carpenter who set the standard.”

I've never read the Deed of Paksenarrion, so I've no idea what kind of Paladin she is.

[PK the Dragon]

One thing that draws me towards a more imperfect hero than a Superman is skill ranks.

A paladin excels at fighting evil, healing, even using a bit of divine magic... but for day to day activities, the paladin is significantly weaker due to only having 2 + INT skill ranks. Paladins end up, in my experience, either with only a few really good skills, or a decent amount of mediocre skills.

So the mechanics of the Paladin seem to pull towards a character that excels in specific situations (places where the awesome paladin abilities are helpful, like combat), but then has trouble outside of those specific situations. Which seems like a great fit for a troubled hero who is only human but trying to be the best person he can be, less great for trying to be a superman who is awesome at everything.

[Ventnor]

FangDragon wrote:

I prefer Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files personally or if we want to bring out the big guns Paksenarrion Dorthansdotter.

Any of the Knights of the Cross from the Dresden Files are a good fit. Sanya's my personal favorite.

[Isonaroc]

Ventnor wrote:

FangDragon wrote:

I prefer Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files personally or if we want to bring out the big guns Paksenarrion Dorthansdotter.

Any of the Knights of the Cross from the Dresden Files are a good fit. Sanya's my personal favorite.

He's probably the most admirable of the lot, as he doesn't even need faith to justify being good. He's good purely because it's the right thing to do. Plus there's that who redemption angle.

[Alric, Paladin of Hunger]

Steve Rogers is a perfect Tyrant Antipaladin. I didn't like him before, but now I am one of his greatest fans. Hail Hydra!

[Isonaroc]

Alric, Paladin of Hunger wrote:

Steve Rogers is a perfect Tyrant Antipaladin. I didn't like him before, but now I am one of his greatest fans. Hail Hydra!

I dunno, does that count as magical compulsion? I don't know if you can become an antipaladin if you are magically compelled to be evil.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Alric, Paladin of Hunger wrote:

Steve Rogers is a perfect Tyrant Antipaladin. I didn't like him before, but now I am one of his greatest fans. Hail Hydra!

Well, it depends on WHICH Steve Rogers we're talking about.

If we're talking 616-Comic, then... that might be your cuppa.

If we're talking MCU, then I think this thread hews closer to that, and the idea that law is not always the 'right' law, and sometimes there's a need to make sure one's 'own' laws are being upheld.

My grandmother paladin would be a lot closer to Steve Rogers than Kal-El.

[Zelgadas Greyward]

Nohwear wrote:

Players and GMs alike, when it comes to Paladins, think Steve Rodgers, not Superman.

Thoughts?

Actually, my first thought was another recent thread involving paladins where someone was claiming that paladins could never lie.

Both of your examples lie at times. Hell, Superman lies every second he plays the part of Clark Kent. For that matter, so do several of the Knights of the Cross in Dresden Files (also mentioned up thread).

The fact that all of these people are "archetypal" paladins - and the fact that all of them lie when necessary for the mission - is a beautiful example of what I was trying to say in that other thread.

So thanks! ^^ I may want to bookmark this thread as a go-to example of that in the future.

[GinoA]

To my thinking, most of the big name Marvel heroes have paladin-like attributes.

Peter Parker starts out very self-centered. After he realizes he could have prevented Uncle <mumble> from dying, he swears an oath to never let evil go unabated. This code is solid paladin material.

However, my favorite Marvel paladin is most-often considered somewhere around chaotic-good. Logan lives by a very strict code, has developed self-sacrifice almost to a fetish and *never* stops while there is evil to fight. Wolverine is a fine loner, I'm-not-worthy paladin template.

Pick any Marvel character. There is almost inevitably some aspect of the paladin code intermixed with an imperfect vessel. It's the formula that Stan Lee used to make Marvel into a powerhouse.

One of Marvel's clearest 'paladins' is one of their biggest villains. Dr Doom has absolute faith in his destiny as mankind's salvation. He puts that faith before anything else. Although, to be fair, he's probably a better example of what I call a Black Paladin. I've always been annoyed with Paizo's anti-paladin. What a boring premise. I want a Lawful Evil character with an iron-clad oath. Hellknight can be used to get there, but it's got a very restrictive fluff.

[Nitro~Nina]

Well this is a fascinating topic, though I agree with some of the others here that there's no truly "wrong" way to play a Paladin, so long as you stay Lawful Good. For instance, I've got a medic in the works who isn't dedicated to any Laws of the Land, but to the Hippocratic Oath (or setting equivalent). He is, of course, primarily dedicated to GOOD, though as a set of actions rather than as an ideal.

But there're many ways to be an excellent Paladin...

Isonaroc wrote:

EDUT: As an addition, my favorite Paladin is the one who expects the best out of himself and serves as a living example of good. Atticus Finch with a sword, if you will. Though I also like the misanthropic Paladin who resents essentially everyone but still does what is right.

*SAM VIMES INTENSIFIES*

Captain Carrot obviously qualifies too, as the more objectively heroic sort. Still...

"If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat. They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar. So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word."
~Sir Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms

[Daw]

Of course Superman lies, he is a Vigilante with a pushover GM.

[Kelli Watson 240]

I'm currently playing a paladin/knight of the chalice in a 3.5 game. I've based his behavior after Sir Sparhawk, a David Eddings character.

[Arbane the Terrible]

Nohwear wrote:

Superman is, usually, such a goody goody that he is more of a parody of himself.

Spoken like someone who's never read a Silver Age Superman story - about half of them were Superman mercilessly trolling his friends, enemies, and random hapless would-be alien invaders.

Nitro~Nina wrote:

Well this is a fascinating topic, though I agree with some of the others here that there's no truly "wrong" way to play a Paladin, so long as you stay Lawful Good.

I can think of at least one....

[My Self]

Superman is a varied and inconsistent character. For the sake of this, let's say Bronze + Pre New-52 Modern Age Superman ('75 to '11). We've got our Christopher Reeves Superman movies + Superman Returns in there. This drops the vigilante-style Golden Age (40s), campy serial Silver Age (50s-60s), and younger-and-darker New 52+Man of Steel version. (2011-now) For those less familiar with weird comic book terms, this is basically "regular" Superman.

This is a character who respects legitimate authority, but keeps a watchful eye (as a reporter) to ensure that it is not abused. Superman only forcefully removes authority figures if they have overstepped their bounds and endangered others, otherwise, he acts in his capacity as a member of the press to expose their misdeeds. He never deliberately targets innocents, and goes out of his way to assist or save them. Superman has a dual identity, and frequently uses elaborate lies to maintain it. However, he uses his dual identity to ensure those he loves are not endangered, and so he may have rest when he is not busy saving the world. Superman is not above using duplicity to defeat enemies that have an advantage on him. He is also willing to use Kryptonite (which is basically poison) to nonlethally defeat other Kryptonians, but he always applies it directly (not secretly), and never uses an equivalent on humans. He is willing to indefinitely incarcerate similarly powerful enemies, but he never executes prisoners, and avoids doing this to humans. He is at a much higher power level than the vast majority of his enemies. This means that it is almost always a practical possibility to defeat enemies without killing or maiming them.

That's pretty Lawful Good, if you ask me. The points when he would violate a regular Paladin code, he uses it to either protect his personal life and his friends, or to nonlethally incapacitate powerful opponents, instead of killing them or attempting a less practical, more dangerous method to subdue them. The divergence between what Superman does and what your typical Paladin should do probably has something to do with how powerful Superman is compared to his enemies, and how forgiving his writers are (As compared to most Paladins vs. their CR-appropriate enemies, and their GMs).

[CORE Grumio]

MY MODEL

[Isonaroc]

Arbane the Terrible wrote:

I can think of at least one....

Unpopular opinion: that's not a wrong way. Granted, it's not I way I would like to play, but there is a place for the paranoid borderline psychotic Paladin as well. Though they would make a better antagonist than a PC.

[Nitro~Nina]

Arbane the Terrible wrote:

Nitro~Nina wrote:

Well this is a fascinating topic, though I agree with some of the others here that there's no truly "wrong" way to play a Paladin, so long as you stay Lawful Good.

I can think of at least one....

Aha, nice. Although, I'd say that very much violates both the Lawful and Good sides to the alignment.

[Vidmaster7]

Nitro~Nina wrote:

Arbane the Terrible wrote:

Nitro~Nina wrote:

Well this is a fascinating topic, though I agree with some of the others here that there's no truly "wrong" way to play a Paladin, so long as you stay Lawful Good.

I can think of at least one....

Aha, nice. Although, I'd say that very much violates both the Lawful and Good sides to the alignment.

Yeah Miko F'ed up and is the sole reason (for me) you can't always go with perspective of the players actions to justify their alignment.

[Steelfiredragon]

capt. america??

unless they put him back, he is Capt. Nazi Germany......

thats right I said it

HEil Hydra

[Envall]

Comping Atticus Finch as the role model for Lawful Good and Paladins
Not only in his personality and charisma, but his methods.
I think court ought to be one of Paladin's strongest weapons.

No CE can survive it unless they get some MAJOR help from their LE buddy.

[Sah]

Steelfiredragon wrote:

capt. america??

unless they put him back, he is Capt. Nazi Germany......

thats right I said it

HEil Hydra

I think they put him back in like, the next issue.

[Isonaroc]

Sah wrote:

Steelfiredragon wrote:

capt. america??

unless they put him back, he is Capt. Nazi Germany......

thats right I said it

HEil Hydra

I think they put him back in like, the next issue.

Pretty sure he's still Hydra

*checks Wiki*

Yep, still Hydra. Though he's trying to "restore Hydra's lost honor"

[Arbane the Terrible]

Sah wrote:

I think they put him back in like, the next issue.

I wish. Back in the Silver Age, plotlines like this tended to be one issue and done, now they stick around for a year and a half to fill up the trade paperbacks.

They had to literally erase Iron Man's brain to get the stench of Civil War off of him, what are they going to have to do to Cap to fix this mess?

[Sah]

I worded it poorly, it's not that they put him back, they just revealed that this wasn't how it had always been, it was due to a person magically rewriting history.

[dannyboy477]

My Self wrote:

Superman is a varied and inconsistent character. For the sake of this, let's say Bronze + Pre New-52 Modern Age Superman ('75 to '11). We've got our Christopher Reeves Superman movies + Superman Returns in there. This drops the vigilante-style Golden Age (40s), campy serial Silver Age (50s-60s), and younger-and-darker New 52+Man of Steel version. (2011-now) For those less familiar with weird comic book terms, this is basically "regular" Superman.

This is a character who respects legitimate authority, but keeps a watchful eye (as a reporter) to ensure that it is not abused. Superman only forcefully removes authority figures if they have overstepped their bounds and endangered others, otherwise, he acts in his capacity as a member of the press to expose their misdeeds. He never deliberately targets innocents, and goes out of his way to assist or save them. Superman has a dual identity, and frequently uses elaborate lies to maintain it. However, he uses his dual identity to ensure those he loves are not endangered, and so he may have rest when he is not busy saving the world. Superman is not above using duplicity to defeat enemies that have an advantage on him. He is also willing to use Kryptonite (which is basically poison) to nonlethally defeat other Kryptonians, but he always applies it directly (not secretly), and never uses an equivalent on humans. He is willing to indefinitely incarcerate similarly powerful enemies, but he never executes prisoners, and avoids doing this to humans. He is at a much higher power level than the vast majority of his enemies. This means that it is almost always a practical possibility to defeat enemies without killing or maiming them.

That's pretty Lawful Good, if you ask me. The points when he would violate a regular Paladin code, he uses it to either protect his personal life and his friends, or to nonlethally incapacitate powerful opponents, instead of killing them or attempting a less practical, more dangerous method to subdue them. The divergence between what Superman...

Mayfair Games DC roleplaying game did quotes on other superheroes, Batman said of Superman parphrasing here, "Superman is the finest man I know, his sense of loyalty, justice and civil rights makes him paramount to any other hero. But at the same time, he is blinded by his sense of righteousness, that all evil can eventually be turned to good.His stubborness to cling to the very values that allow his enemies to take advantage of this has been his downfall"

To me Superman is a lost paladin, trying to do right in his mind, but not really sure if it is 100% the right thing after he has done something in response to a villian, like heat vision a number of times on Lex Luthor, and feeling guilty about it.
In RL, I can compare my gf's son who was a sniper in the Marines, an young kid (27 still a kid to me) and ever since he got out, he has it in his mind he is doing good, but in reality he is very condescending, know it all, very rude, try to rule the roost, tell everybody what to do, try to cuss you out person. (He doesn't tell me what to do because I will put him in his place). He claims the he was a donkey's butt before he went in and the Marines made him a bigger donkey's butt. His mom told me he wasn't this way until he got out. (I'm told he barely made honorable discharge, but nothing more). I said to him, "No the Marines are a fairly honorable outfit as I think all the services are, the Marines molded you into a man or tried too, but you held a vengeance against them for some reason from the stories you told me, and that turned you into a punk!"
Of course that set off fireworks, but held my ground. so to me he is like a lost paladin, tried to do the right thing, but stubbornly thinks that everything should be run like in the Marines, refusal to acknowledge he is a civilian now, that his sense of right is the only way and that he has to apply his own code of justice to the situation whether it fits or not. Superman does the same thing, runs things from a Krypton perspective, Steve Rodger does too, but Cap is more down to earth and more upfront about things. How many times have you seen in the comics of Supes asking Batman for advice, yet he he is supposed to have genius level intelligence. You sometime wonder if the man in red throws his common sense out the window.
You do not have to play a paladin as one rigid to Lawful Good that is a sexy tavern girl throws herself at the paladin, he absolutely runs to the nearest temple to amend his sins, though in my mind, he did nothing sinful. Your paladin can have faults,drawbacks, one that is constantly toeing the line of Lawful Good. I have a 7th level variant paladin that is more like a wandering knight attending fairs to see what evil lurks there, entering contest to win fair ladies hearts and occasion point out to the ruler he is evil and needs to be taken down. He doesn't necessary stop the two bullies fighting in a tavern or tries to ruffle the feathers of the two obvious thieves casing their suspects. He has a laisse <sp> faire attitude. Sorry post is so long.