| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would personally maintain that the PF2 Paladin code, by virtue of its tiered nature, is considerably *less* restrictive than a Cleric's anathema. A PF2 paladin is completely free to be utterly underhanded so long as its in service of protecting the innocent and he doesn't outright commit evil. A Cleric of Shelyn's anathema against denying surrender, striking first, or allowing art to be destroyed, meanwhile, is rather speciific and unqualified.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except..it isn't, in RAW it is not, CE Anti-Paladins manage just fine with a code, as do C(whatever) Cavaliers, you can head canon chaotic being gibbering lunacy, but RAW it isn't, another nail in the coffin of the endless LG best G arguments.Yes, it is very true. But Paladins have an anathema AND and a Code. Anathemas are general guidelines that are generic enough to be not too restrictive on the individual. The traditional Code (by its very nature) pushes it much farther and is too restrictive on the Chaotic individual.Chaotic gods (good, neutral, or evil) having anathema and chaotic clerics (good, neutral, or evil) abding by those anathema says you totally can.Except you can't mandate CG and manage a behaviorally restrictive code that holds any meaning at all.You CAN make an army of LN drizzt clone fighter drow too. It doesn't mean it fits as a major portion of the setting.and we run into that wall again: is the Paladin the blessed warrior with a code and a patron, or is it a beefed up cavalier order of LG knights? If you see it (as I do) as the blessed warrior class, then yes, Cayden sure would have them, tgey might fight differently, but equipment is props, at least imho.
Except that the CE anti-paladin code sums up to "be CE" It has VERY little in the way of restrictive behaviors by comparsion. Which is the problem generic Chaotic codes always sum up to "do what you would have based on your alignment anyway" The cavalier codes are all very specific things, a subset of a larger class, they don't fit for crap as a generic all X follow this code, and even then most of them aren't remotely near the behavior restrictions of a paladin code. They are not on the same level.
I liked Iron_Matt's suggestion for the Chaotic Code having several possibilities being put together by the one that follows it/their God. That helps with some of the "Chaotic Individuality" notion. Very clever.
Lawful Paladins wondering why they can't choose their Code could be an issue, I guess, maybe that balances to Lawful being an assumed 'Default' state while Chaotic is the one that requires the GM permission. If that were to happen. Or maybe the GM can decide the order of importance for the Chaotic Code tends to shift around, or the bottom tenet switches between three different ideas at unusual times. The Player gets told whenever there's a switch, but they then have to follow it. But it'd still be from a list they agreed on with the GM.
Probably not workable, but an interesting idea, for Chaotic Paladins to have their rules changing on them for reasons they aren't exactly aware of. (But hopefully are intended by the GM/Forces of Chaotic Good to enact the best possible outcome.)
the CE codes set the precedent, they are apparently restrictive eniugh to grant power(and are more so than the tiered 2e code)Except that the CE anti-paladin code sums up to "be CE" It has VERY little in the way of restrictive behaviors by comparsion. Which is the problem generic Chaotic codes always sum up to "do what you would have based on your alignment anyway" The cavalier codes are all very specific things, a subset of a larger class, they don't fit for crap as a generic all X follow this code, and even then most of them aren't remotely near the behavior restrictions of a paladin code. They are not on the same level.Except..it isn't, in RAW it is not, CE Anti-Paladins manage just fine with a code, as do C(whatever) Cavaliers, you can head canon chaotic being gibbering lunacy, but RAW it isn't, another nail in the coffin of the endless LG best G arguments.Yes, it is very true. But Paladins have an anathema AND and a Code. Anathemas are general guidelines that are generic enough to be not too restrictive on the individual. The traditional Code (by its very nature) pushes it much farther and is too restrictive on the Chaotic individual.Chaotic gods (good, neutral, or evil) having anathema and chaotic clerics (good, neutral, or evil) abding by those anathema says you totally can.Except you can't mandate CG and manage a behaviorally restrictive code that holds any meaning at all.You CAN make an army of LN drizzt clone fighter drow too. It doesn't mean it fits as a major portion of the setting.and we run into that wall again: is the Paladin the blessed warrior with a code and a patron, or is it a beefed up cavalier order of LG knights? If you see it (as I do) as the blessed warrior class, then yes, Cayden sure would have them, tgey might fight differently, but equipment is props, at least imho.
There are a few of us who believe that the Anti-Paladin Code is not a good Code in general. That's one of the reasons I proposed the idea of an individually tailored code for Chaotics. And it would be kinda cool if the GM could change the code randomly, but that could be subject to major abuse and would need absolute trust between the parties involved...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would personally maintain that the PF2 Paladin code, by virtue of its tiered nature, is considerably *less* restrictive than a Cleric's anathema. A PF2 paladin is completely free to be utterly underhanded so long as its in service of protecting the innocent and he doesn't outright commit evil. A Cleric of Shelyn's anathema against denying surrender, striking first, or allowing art to be destroyed, meanwhile, is rather speciific and unqualified.Thats a good point. I suspect in PF2 we are going to get a lot more complaints about anathema than codes. Its very easy for a Shelyn follower to get in a no win scenario.
But also remember that Paladins get the Code AND the Anathema. So if that's the case, then the Paladin has it much worse. But I see your point, perhaps a tiered version of the Anathemas are in order?... May get complicated tho.
as per the twitch stream Anathema come before the code, at tier 1, so they win any conflictBut also remember that Paladins get the Code AND the Anathema. So if that's the case, then the Paladin has it much worse. But I see your point, perhaps a tiered version of the Anathemas are in order?... May get complicated tho.I would personally maintain that the PF2 Paladin code, by virtue of its tiered nature, is considerably *less* restrictive than a Cleric's anathema. A PF2 paladin is completely free to be utterly underhanded so long as its in service of protecting the innocent and he doesn't outright commit evil. A Cleric of Shelyn's anathema against denying surrender, striking first, or allowing art to be destroyed, meanwhile, is rather speciific and unqualified.Thats a good point. I suspect in PF2 we are going to get a lot more complaints about anathema than codes. Its very easy for a Shelyn follower to get in a no win scenario.
True. Right up there with being Good. But then the Pal has to worry about Tiers 2-4 as well...
Also, I just remembered something that Logan mentioned in the Cleric twitch stream. Something along the lines of Clerics losing their abilities is a lot more gregarious/nebulous then: "bam! you broke the anathema? Powers gone..." Paladins seem to get a lot more hard lined stance in that regard.
I forgot to mention the fictional character I see as the paragon of CG : Gregory HouseSanya from the Dresden Files, Knight of the Cross, weilder of Esperacchius, atheist, rocks a sword made from one of the nails of the True Cross, fights demons, talks to angels, still doesn't believe in them (or rather refuses to take them at face value, for all he knows they are really weird aliens).. Anyway, read the books, a guy with a holy sword and an AK is par for the (awesome) course.
I think you could make a decently cogent argument that the three Knights of the Cross actually represent all three good alignments--Shiro LG, Sanya CG, and Michael, the one we spend the most time with, is NG.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^Now why does Stupid have to be exclusive to Lawful Good? You can certainly have Neutral Good Stupid and Chaotic Good Stupid . . . .
Edit: Hey, at least I'm consistent . . . .
|
They are bound by an oath...which Sanya stretches as far as it will go, while ignoring everything else the Angels want him to do which isn't directly related to not making his sword go poof. Sounds pretty CG to me, also remember why they don't hunt the fallen: It is to allow the fallen to use their free will to choose to do evil (or not), exactly the opposite of LGs 'detect evil....PUUURRGGGEEEE' approach.I forgot to mention the fictional character I see as the paragon of CG : Gregory HouseSanya from the Dresden Files, Knight of the Cross, weilder of Esperacchius, atheist, rocks a sword made from one of the nails of the True Cross, fights demons, talks to angels, still doesn't believe in them (or rather refuses to take them at face value, for all he knows they are really weird aliens).. Anyway, read the books, a guy with a holy sword and an AK is par for the (awesome) course.Knight of the Cross are hardcore Lawful Good. They have very strict rules on killing(like having to accept fake surrenders) and even refuse to proactively hunt the fallen, instead waiting for them to actively do harm before getting involved. It works because Divine Providence sets things up for them so long as they stick to the code.
In normal Pathfinder, their code would be considered Lawful Stupid.
That last part happens when players or GMs conveniently forget the Lawful in LG. Due process and evidence are essential to the LG mindset
Doing otherwise is a caricature and neither Lawful nor Good (many non-Evil creatures can have an Evil aura)