Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 11:01 AM	This is a new thread for all things Paladins. You can discuss about the rules of Paladins, what Paladins are required to do, what is expected from them, 3.5 edition Paladins, saving the core Paladin etc. And you can share your own Paladin characters, stories of Paladins etc. But remember that this place is not meant for Paladin variants. This place is only for the core Paladin class presented in either 3rd edition or in 3.5 edition (excluding the stories of different Paladins). So this thread has basically the same idea as Save the Core Paladin Foundation, but now there's no membership number and this is for more general discussion. Feel free to post all things Paladins. Here are the rules we all should agree with (credits goes to Erlann-Starr who wrote these rules): Paladins Anonymous: VIII Step Program of Paladins Anonymous I. We admit we are powerless over the fact that the Paladin is a "Core Class" as dictated by WoTC. II. We have come to believe that a Power greater than ourselves (WoTC) will not fail us and keep it that way. III. We have made a decision to accept that no amount of whining/complaining and/or pleading will change this unalterable fact. IV. We accept that all Paladins will be Lawful and Good. V. We accept that all other classes be they "Homebrew" and/or official PrC's that do not accept Step IV shall not be considered a Paladin. VI. We are entirely ready to protect the status of the "Paladin" to our utmost. But all defense must be of a noble nature. Personal Insults and/or Flames go counter to the Paladins CoC, thus prohibited.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-18-03, 11:20 AM	Good idea. My 14th level Paladin had to fight a LE 16th level Fighter over the weekend. Between the weapon the BG was carying and the Improved crit feat, He almost dropped my character. When I finally killed him, I only had 15 HP left. Weapon: Greatsword with unholy, and fire damage. 5d6 +(at least 15) crit on 17-20.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 11:29 AM	Sir Ferdinand: If you wish to "cut" & "paste" the CoC and add it to your "founding" Post. feel free. I look forward to some very stimulating discussions in the future. :) Erlan-Starr
Andorax 06-18-03, 11:32 AM	My pardon if I wander a *bit* afield of your stated parameters, but I've an interesting story to share on the topic. About five or six years back, I ran a campaign (obviously 2nd edition) set in the Birthright campaign setting. Nobody was playing a regent or ruler of any sort, however...it was fairly low level. What made the campaign somewhat unique though was that the entire party, all eight of them, consisted solely of Paladins. It was set on the boarders between Anurean and Khinasi lands, and had Paladins of just about every deity that was allowed to have them between the two cultures. I also came up with unique quirks to their various backgrounds and histories (two of them had dual-classed, one from Thief, one from Wizard). The "theme" of the campaign was one of a group of gifted young men (and women) who had been gathered together to complete their training in preparation for Knighthood, and to pledge service to a good and righteous king establishing a new land. All in all, though, I was absolutley astounded by the variety and ingenuity that could be exhibited by a group of Paladins. They weren't "all the same" by any stretch of the imagination, and the campaign was quite fun and interesting, helped along in no small amount by the considerable capabilities of such a group. All able to heal, all with solid saves and good fighting capability. I've thought about trying this again sometime in 3E (well, likely 3.5 before I get 'round to it). What with the new Feats and Skills, and with allowing them to have previous multiclass levels in their history if desired, a new campaign would be great fun. If I had it to do over, I'd probably allow Holy Liberators as well (2E Paladins of Curaecen were CG), but either way I think it would be enjoyable. DMs, you might consider giving this a go. I think you'd be pleasently surprised.
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 11:43 AM	If you wish to "cut" & "paste" the CoC and add it to your "founding" Post. feel free. I look forward to some very stimulating discussions in the future. :) Done that now, but I also noticed some problems. What will we do with parts VII and VIII? Who will be these the High Council of Paladins and the Master of the Roll, and will we use some numbers after all, or should we just keep some register but without membership numbers? Any suggestions are welcome.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 11:48 AM	I always had the belief that paladins were the true champions of law and good, and that their code goes much. This is my ten commandments of paladins. Note that although atonement normally comes in the form of the spell, sometimes just fixing that wrong can be grounds for atonement (if the paladin wants it), but is purely situational and only if the god would do it (since it is the god, not the cleric, who gives atonement). 1. Must abide by all laws. The only time they can go against the law, ANY law, is if they have absolute proof of the laws evil or corruptness. 2. Lying is not allowed, and they must take an oath against it. In the most dire of times, when a lie is the difference between the death of hundreds of innocents or other devastating events, the paladin is encouraged to lie. But this circumstance is still breaking the paladin oath, and he must obtain atonement. 3. The only creature a paladin can kill without proof or due-process is one of irrevocable evil (demons, devils, etc.). Other creatures, even the most foul of them, can be turned to good. At the very least, they have a right to a FAIR and BALANCED trial (a paladin that wittingly takes one to a rigged trail breaks the oath). If the creature refuses to allow itself to be judged by a court, then it may be offered a dual to the death, the gods then judge who lives or dies. 4. The paladin must always give fair punishment. The only crime worth of death is the murder of others. 5. The paladin must go with honor. This means that the paladin must not use guile, trickery, misinformation, and other tools of evil to finish their goal. Do not fight an enemy that is helpless, or is not aware of you, if you are right in your quest, then the gods shall sustain you. This also includes other minor honors, such as being cordial to members of the opposite sex, and respecting titles and honors such as lords and knights. 6. The paladin must do good. The paladin may never intentionally do an evil act. The paladin must be on a constant quest to end evil for the good of all. 7. The paladin must not sow chaos. The paladin must maintain order, and never intentionally do actions that may lead to panic or the breakdown of command structures or hierarchy unless that system is inherently evil. In which case the paladin must have found a suitable system to replace it, this protects those innocents from the evils of lawlessness. 8. The paladin must not associate himself with evil. The paladin may never deal or associate with evil creatures. 9. The paladin must protect the innocent, those that cannot adequately protect themselves. Even if the innocent is evil, they must survive to be brought to proper justice. 10. The paladin must remember that the ends does not justify the means. No oath may be broken, no evil done, even if it is the most minor of things and even if it is too bring the greatest of good. If you fall to this temptation, even for the greater good, then you are no better then the evil you wish to suppress.
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 11:52 AM	Andorax, you can keep'em coming. That was a story of Paladins, so it's just fine by the parameters. All in all, though, I was absolutley astounded by the variety and ingenuity that could be exhibited by a group of Paladins. They weren't "all the same" by any stretch of the imagination, and the campaign was quite fun and interesting, helped along in no small amount by the considerable capabilities of such a group. All able to heal, all with solid saves and good fighting capability. Although I'm not a DM myself, I can imagine that game. And I've always keep telling that not all Paladins must be the Knights in a shining armor. The next Paladin which I'll create will most probably be a Paladin of Kelemvor (maybe) and he'll wield a Scythe and maybe Chain shirt so that he'll be mobile. That's also far from stereotype Paladins. I've thought about trying this again sometime in 3E (well, likely 3.5 before I get 'round to it). What with the new Feats and Skills, and with allowing them to have previous multiclass levels in their history if desired, a new campaign would be great fun. If I had it to do over, I'd probably allow Holy Liberators as well (2E Paladins of Curaecen were CG), but either way I think it would be enjoyable. Sounds like a good idea, but may I suggest that you'd use deities from FRCS, so that those CG Paladins could be Paladins of Sune (which is Chaotic Good deity). The Paladins would still be LG, but they'd follow CG deity. Of course if you don't have FRCS or you want to use the exact same deities and Paladins, then it would probably be better to do as you said.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 11:55 AM	I must say, I do belive that paladins in the FRCS have the most variety. This is because they follow gods with personalitys and individual goals of their own. I also like FRCS because a paladin is forced to follow a god instead of having the option of getting their power from "good" which I have always thought is a cop out anyway.
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 12:09 PM	Kevmann, I agree (or partially agree) with most of those commandments, but here's some parts I don't agree with: 1. Must abide by all laws. The only time they can go against the law, ANY law, is if they have absolute proof of the laws corruptness. The Paladin must obey only Good laws, but of course they can't go against neutral or evil laws without a very good reason. And that's why Paladins should try to avoid cities which are run by evil laws or which are corrupted. And if the Paladin must go in such a city, then as I said, he can't just go against the government unless it serves a higher good (usually if the king or some other high authority asks you to help them to change the laws in such a city in their kingdom area or something like that). The other thing: Do not fight an enemy that has no weapon, or is not aware of you, if you are right in your quest, then the gods shall sustain you. This also includes other minor honors, such as being cordal to members of the opposite sex, and respecting titles and honors such as lords and knights. An enemy with no weapon, if he still threatens you or you allies or those in need, is still an enemy. So you're allowed to handle such an enemy. And in the case of enemy which is not aware of the Paladin, I'd still allow to use subdual damage attacks first to get their attention. It doesn't do permanent harm, and after that the enemy is avare of the Paladin. And one more thing, what does that word "cordal" means? I couldn't find it from a dictionary (Finnish-English dictionary). * * * Other than that I agree with most of that stuff you wrote. There may be some minor things but these are the biggest things I disagree with your commandments.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 12:28 PM	I think an evil law could go under the "corrupted" section of the commandment. And when I said an enemy with a weapon, I ment natural weapons, spells, etc. But if he poses no immediate threat, then you can not attack him! Oh, and I normaly do not allow subdual damage, an attack is an attack. And I think I mis-spelled it and ment cordual, or be polite.
LaegolasGreenleaf 06-18-03, 12:41 PM	I just wanted to make a contribution to the realm of paladin-dom. What the paladin stood for centuries ago has been lost to modern times. Some people have forgotten what these heroes did in their time. I still believe that the spirit of that great warrior of virtue lies within all of us. We just have to discover that spirit inside. I'm not on any religious soapbox. I just believe that there isn't a lot of good in this world that inspires us. I'll leave you with this snippet of the true definition of a paladin. pal·a·din n. 1. A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion. 2. A strong supporter or defender of a cause: “the paladin of plain speaking” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.). 3. Any of the 12 peers of Charlemagne's court.
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 12:51 PM	I think an evil law could go under the "corrupted" section of the commandment. Hmmm... yes it could. But still you said that Paladins must abide by all laws which is not true. At least I read your statement that the Paladin must obey evil laws, but he can go against those laws, but I think you didn't meant that. And when I said an enemy with a weapon, I ment natural weapons, spells, etc. But if he poses no immediate threat, then you can not attack him! You mean without, not with? But anyway, if its known that the enemy can be very dangerous although he wouldn't pose any immediate threat at that specific moment, I'd still probably allow a surprise attack just because that enemy can be very dangerous and any help is needed. Oh, and I normaly do not allow subdual damage, an attack is an attack. So you don't allow Sap which normally deals subdual damage, or you don't allow attacks with -4 penalty to deal subdual damage instead of normal damage (both can be found in PHB)? And I think I mis-spelled it and ment cordual, or be polite. Of course it depends on the situation, but I agree that it's a common way to be polite towards opposite sex, especially if the Paladin is male.
Sensei Gith 06-18-03, 12:53 PM	In FR, paladins of Yondala can multi freely as rogues. Isn't it hilarious to imagine a 3-foot tall paladin suddenly jumping out from behind you and dealing smite damage, plus 3d6 SA? And on the subject of always and unquestioningly obeying just laws-- There is a law against jaywalking. It is a good and just law. The paladin sees someone being mugged on the other side of the street, and the nearest legal crossing location is fifty feet away. What will he do? Pallys are dedicated to good first and foremost. They will obey the laws of their order, but in doing good, a paladin must have the wisdom to know when to follow laws and when to break them. It is also the responsibility of the paladin to be held accountable for their actions, so he may be prosecuted for jaywalking, but in all likelihood, he will be let off. Laws are there to prevent people from comitting evil acts, and to protect citizens. The paladin comitted no evil in breaking the law, endangered no one but himself, and protected someone in doing so. However, if he breaks the code of his order, then the paladin will likely lose his powers.
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 12:54 PM	I'll leave you with this snippet of the true definition of a paladin. pal·a·din n. 1. A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion. 2. A strong supporter or defender of a cause: “the paladin of plain speaking” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.). 3. Any of the 12 peers of Charlemagne's court. Remember that D&D shouldn't related to real world. So those definations are only some examples of a Paladin. But good ones that is.
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 12:57 PM	In FR, paladins of Yondala can multi freely as rogues. Isn't it hilarious to imagine a 3-foot tall paladin suddenly jumping out from behind you and dealing smite damage, plus 3d6 SA? No. Well it's kind of hilarious, but as long as the Paladin goes by the Code everything is just fine. There is a law against jaywalking. It is a good and just law. The paladin sees someone being mugged on the other side of the street, and the nearest legal crossing location is fifty feet away. What will he do? In this example we must remember that Paladins follow good laws. So although the Paladin would break the law of that city by crossing the street right there, it wouldn't be against what Paladins code says, especially considering there's much higher good to be done.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 12:58 PM	quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Must abide by all laws. The only time they can go against the law, ANY law, is if they have absolute proof of the laws corruptness. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Paladin must obey only Good laws, but of course they can't go against neutral or evil laws without a very good reason. And that's why Paladins should try to avoid cities which are run by evil laws or which are corrupted. And if the Paladin must go in such a city, then as I said, he can't just go against the government unless it serves a higher good (usually if the king or some other high authority asks you to help them to change the laws in such a city in their kingdom area or something like that). Actually...I cannot think of an example of a "Good" law. by definition any law is a means to proscribe certain actions. You can have "Just" laws, but there is a difference between "just" and "good". You cannot force people to do "good" acts. the very fact you need to coherce people would infact make such a law "evil". i.e. the old the ends do not justify the means. The best laws are by definition "neutral" they apply to everyone equally and the punishment as set down by the law is infact not excessive. . Of course there are plenty of examples of "evil" laws throughout history, legal slavery in the U.S.//Nazi Racial Purity Laws//Thought Crimes in the old USSR. the list can go on. I think the entire concept of paladins following the "law" can best be summed up by a certain religious leader who about 2000 years ago said it best....it is the spirit of the law that is most important, not the letter of the law. Any law that cannot be tempered by "justice" is not a law that should be upheld by a paladin. Of course thats just my opinion...if my dm disagrees with me and i lose my "paladinhood"...i will let you guys know! ;)
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 01:08 PM	Actually...I cannot think of an example of a "Good" law. by definition any law is a means to proscribe certain actions. The best laws are by definition "neutral" they apply to everyone equally and the punishment as set down by the law is infact not excessive. . Well, you're right that it's kind of difficult to say which law can be said to be good, neutral or evil. But basically most of the laws are somewhat good IMO. At least those laws which helps common people to have a good life. So different aid/support by government are IMO quite good acts and since they're written in the law, they're basically good laws.
Luminous Crayon 06-18-03, 01:17 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand (Italics added by The Crayon) The Paladin must obey only Good laws, but of course they can't go against neutral or evil laws without a very good reason. And that's why Paladins should try to avoid cities which are run by evil laws or which are corrupted. And if the Paladin must go in such a city, then as I said, he can't just go against the government unless it serves a higher good (usually if the king or some other high authority asks you to help them to change the laws in such a city in their kingdom area or something like that). It seems to me that cities with evil or corrupt rulers would be among the places where the justice and valor embodied by the Paladin would be needed the most. I can't imagine a Paladin carrying around a copy of the local legal system to study because she's afraid of breaking Section XXVI Paragraph B Subsection c on the minimum distance from the city hall where a horse can be tied up. There are plenty of laws, like the Jaywalking law, that have nothing to do with the essence of paladinhood: the spreading of justice, mercy, and occasional holy smackdown. If a Paladin has to run across a busy street to stop a mugging, so be it. Paladins are not subservient to governmental bodies; they are subservient to the ideals and deities they represent. The "Laws" they should be most concerned about upholding are the laws of decency, justice, mercy, holiness, and compassion, not the trivial and worldly restrictions devised by petty human governments. If you were Heironeous (or any similar LG deity who might be in charge of Paladins) which one of your holy followers would you be more disappointed in: Paladin A, who jaywalked across the street to protect Joe Citizen from violent crime, or Paladin B, who abandoned Joe Citizen to his fate because he was afraid of jaywalking?
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 01:20 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand Done that now, but I also noticed some problems. What will we do with parts VII and VIII? Who will be these the High Council of Paladins and the Master of the Roll, and will we use some numbers after all, or should we just keep some register but without membership numbers? Any suggestions are welcome. Here is an Idea feel free to use/abuse/or disregard as you see fit.... the Council of Paladins should consist of 12 peers (to reflect our Charlemagne heritage). who those will be, will be left to you since you are the "founder" of the thread but here are some suggestions... you could ask for volunteers. take the 1st 12 members of the "original" board. appoint people you feel would best serve the "cause". as far as the Master of the Roll...from the 12 peers one will assume that duty. The Master of the Roll should post the entire membership roll once a month, and perhaps bi-weekly he/she will update the current membership (perhaps we should forgo giving actual numbers to members...after all are we not all equals within the order?) and if there is no change in the membership that fortnight then no post is required. as far as enforcing the CoC, i would suggest that if anyone makes a complaint against any member, then the council will look at the offending post, take a vote to see if the post in question actually violates the CoC of the Order. (9 peers must agree that the Code was violated) if 9 out of 12 agree that there was a violation they would request that the offending party offer an appology. of course these are just suggestions...i
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 01:30 PM	Originally posted by Luminous Crayon It seems to me that cities with evil or corrupt rulers would be among the places where the justice and valor embodied by the Paladin would be needed the most. I can't imagine a Paladin carrying around a copy of the local legal system to study because she's afraid of breaking Section XXVI Paragraph B Subsection c on the minimum distance from the city hall where a horse can be tied up. There are plenty of laws, like the Jaywalking law, that have nothing to do with the essence of paladinhood: the spreading of justice, mercy, and occasional holy smackdown. If a Paladin has to run across a busy street to stop a mugging, so be it. Paladins are not subservient to governmental bodies; they are subservient to the ideals and deities they represent. The "Laws" they should be most concerned about upholding are the laws of decency, justice, mercy, holiness, and compassion, not the trivial and worldly restrictions devised by petty human governments. If you were Heironeous (or any similar LG deity who might be in charge of Paladins) which one of your holy followers would you be more disappointed in: Paladin A, who jaywalked across the street to protect Joe Citizen from violent crime, or Paladin B, who abandoned Joe Citizen to his fate because he was afraid of jaywalking? well said...i concur...as a matter of fact...why bother giving a paladin the spell undetectable alignment if they should not go into "evil" cities! of course going "undercover" poses its own risks to our paladin. but the danger of "going undercover" for a paladin i will leave for another thread! ;)
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 01:40 PM	Luminous Crayon, first that text you quoted was by me, not by Erlan-Starr (he quoted me in his post, but I think he forgot to add the /quote] to the end of the post). Now to the point. It seems to me that cities with evil or corrupt rulers would be among the places where the justice and valor embodied by the Paladin would be needed the most. Of course those places needs the most "help", but the problem is that the Paladin is not allowed to against the government of that city, unless some higher authority gives authorization. Or there should be at least some good reason to go against such government, not just "It's evil, so I must go and strike the government down." That wouldn't be enough reason. Another example is evil creatures. You can't just beat orcs or other evil creatures, because they're evil. There must be some reason to do so. * * * Erlan-Starr, those suggestions are very good IMO. the Council of Paladins should consist of 12 peers (to reflect our Charlemagne heritage). who those will be, will be left to you since you are the "founder" of the thread but here are some suggestions... you could ask for volunteers. take the 1st 12 members of the "original" board. appoint people you feel would best serve the "cause". I think I'll take the first 20 people (at least 20) and see how many actually are still here. I haven't seen some for a while, so it wouldn't be a good idea to choose those are have left. Here's the first 20 members: Sir Ferdinand Blackcourt79 Sir Neil Thunder Dragonbane Paladin Charger THRASHER Despaxas Grizpapa Adahn Tzor GreenKnight Haradim AvatarLightbringer Doktor Cornelius Slavick3000 Ol' Vengeful SapphireKnight Master Of Combat The Deceiver Tynian So those who still are on these boards, could leave their name here, so that we could choose those 12 peers.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 01:58 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand Luminous Crayon, first that text you quoted was by me, not by Erlan-Starr (he quoted me in his post, but I think he forgot to add the /quote] to the end of the post). Now to the point. Of course those places needs the most "help", but the problem is that the Paladin is not allowed to against the government of that city, unless some higher authority gives authorization. Or there should be at least some good reason to go against such government, not just "It's evil, so I must go and strike the government down." That wouldn't be enough reason. Another example is evil creatures. You can't just beat orcs or other evil creatures, because they're evil. There must be some reason to do so. * * * Unfortunatly, players have a tendency of making their paladin characters the guardians of everyone. it would seem to me that a paladin who went to a drow city [B]and attempted to right every wrong he saw, would infact be harming the "cause" he/she is fighting for. It would be impossible for a paladin to intervene in every case of injustice. a dead paladin by definition can help no one! if a paladin were to go into such a evil setting, it is obvious he/she is not there as a tourist to see the sights. he/she is there to further some greater good. and if the paladin sees great evil and injustice done to inoccents and intervenes and is slain, it is possible that the BBEG he was sent to stop would infact triumph, which would infact be a greater evil than stopping the flogging of a "slave" in a drow slave mart. again playing "undercover" paladin is an extremly risky thing...the paladin would literally have to walk the enge of a razor most of the time, one miss step and ooooooops...it can be quite nerve wracking!
Kevmann 06-18-03, 01:59 PM	Just call me old fashon, but to me playing a paladin is difficult and special, that is why I wanted it prc, but that is not for this board:smirk:
Sir Ferdinand 06-18-03, 02:08 PM	By Erlann_Starr: Unfortunatly, players have a tendency of making their paladin characters the guardians of everyone. Yeah, and here's a quote from Defenders of the Faith which other players should read: Fortunately, you aren't personally obligated to right every wrong, no matter how small. That way lies madness. * * * By Kevmann: Just call me old fashon, but to me playing a paladin is difficult and special, that is why I wanted it prc, but that is not for this board :smirk: To me playing a Paladin is difficult and special (and I mean even more than with other classes) as well, but it's not a reason to make it a PrC.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 02:13 PM	I should have said that that is ONE of the reasons, but that is it, not talking about this any more:smirk:
Luminous Crayon 06-18-03, 02:15 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand Luminous Crayon, first that text you quoted was by me, not by Erlan-Starr (he quoted me in his post, but I think he forgot to add the /quote] to the end of the post). Fixed. Of course those places needs the most "help", but the problem is that the Paladin is not allowed to against the government of that city, unless some higher authority gives authorization. Or there should be at least some good reason to go against such government, not just "It's evil, so I must go and strike the government down." That wouldn't be enough reason. Another example is evil creatures. You can't just beat orcs or other evil creatures, because they're evil. There must be some reason to do so. Not allowed? Not allowed by whom? Certainly not by the evil government in question. By their very nature, and the nature of their duty, Paladins have constant authorization to put a stop to Evil. Standing orders from the highest of high authorities: the very source of their holy might. Evil wouldn't be evil unless it created victims; that's the accompaning reason for a Paladin's interference. As Paladins, we have to consider those whom we protect. If the govenmnent is "evil", what makes it evil? To use Hitler's Germany as an example, the Third Reich of the Nazi regime was evil because of the genocide they used as a tool to create a "perfect" race. Millions of innocents were unjustly killed. A small group of Paladins and their companions might be able to save a fraction of these innocents without openly opposing the government, by somehow smuggling them out of the area. This does nothing to help the 98% of victims they can't save. By making other choices, this same small group of Paladins and their companions could potentially oust the government, ending the system of oppression and genocide and protecting a much larger percentage of the innocent victims whose plight compels them to act. Evil is not evil without victims, and victimization is all the license a Paladin requires to do what must be done.
Finarin Panjoro 06-18-03, 03:23 PM	This is an interesting thread, but let me say that this is some of the most rigid interpretation of lawfulness I've ever seen. So let me make a statement which is sure to stir you guys up. Lawfulness has nothing WHATSOEVER to do with what is LEGAL. Here's the definition of lawful from the SRD: Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. "Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, and a lack of adaptability. Note that nowhere in these terms is obeying the law ever mentioned. There is a big difference between obeying the law and respecting and being obiedient to authority. Lawfulness implies that the paladin respects a code of behavior which he, his diety, or his principles, impose upon him. This code is the authority which he respects and obeys. He cannot diverge from this code without suffering the consequences and his code is the same regardless of who rules the land in which he stands. He effectively carries his body of laws with him wherever he goes. The important thing is the interaction of being lawful AND good. The code is defined by being good, the strict adherence to the code is lawful. That is why paladins must be both lawful and good. The lawful part makes it clear that he will never abandon the good. The Paladin code itself states that the paladin must only respect LEGITIMATE authority. Any evil authority is going to be illegimate in the eyes of a paladin. Further submitting to an evil authority would be a violation of his good code and therefore an UNLAWFUL act. Paladins are also warriors. There are rules of engagement and accepted strategies which honorable warriors adhere too. Sneak attacks and attacking with an advantage are among these. A paladin's rules of engagements would include things like not slaughtering non-combatants, protecting the weak, accepting surrenders, giving the option to surrender, etc. Against an implacable or honorless foe they would use every tactical advantage they could find including strategic deception, ambushes, flanking attacks (ie sneak attacks), etc. because this is how battles are TRADITIONALLY fought and won (note the honoring of tradition part of being lawful). No offense intended but a lot of you guys are making paladins into the very personification of lawful stupid.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 03:26 PM	what do you think "respect authority mean" And your right! Lawfullness does not mean you follow the law, but for paladins it does.
Andorax 06-18-03, 03:32 PM	Another Paladin bit then...a variant rule I introduced into my games. Opinions welcome. A player may, if they so wish, choose at first level to play an Apprentice Cleric/Paladin. Thereafter, so long as their Paladin level remains equal to or greater than their Cleric level, they may choose to freely multiclass between Cleric and Paladin.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 03:36 PM	Originally posted by Luminous Crayon Fixed. Not allowed? Not allowed by whom? Certainly not by the evil government in question. By their very nature, and the nature of their duty, Paladins have constant authorization to put a stop to Evil. Standing orders from the highest of high authorities: the very source of their holy might. Evil wouldn't be evil unless it created victims; that's the accompaning reason for a Paladin's interference. As Paladins, we have to consider those whom we protect. If the govenmnent is "evil", what makes it evil? To use Hitler's Germany as an example, the Third Reich of the Nazi regime was evil because of the genocide they used as a tool to create a "perfect" race. Millions of innocents were unjustly killed. A small group of Paladins and their companions might be able to save a fraction of these innocents without openly opposing the government, by somehow smuggling them out of the area. This does nothing to help the 98% of victims they can't save. By making other choices, this same small group of Paladins and their companions could potentially oust the government, ending the system of oppression and genocide and protecting a much larger percentage of the innocent victims whose plight compels them to act. Evil is not evil without victims, and victimization is all the license a Paladin requires to do what must be done. excellent post! hear, hear! (of course im biased since i agree with you assessment!)
Kevmann 06-18-03, 03:38 PM	I completely agree as well as long as the paladin has PROOF that said government is evil or corrupt.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 03:41 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann what do you think "respect authority mean" And your right! Lawfullness does not mean you follow the law, but for paladins it does. im afraid not Kevmann, just because a society legalized slavery would not mean a paladin would become a "bounty" hunter and try to bring these slaves back to their masters. If a law is "evil" the paladin has the absolute right to ignore it and if at all possible attempt to revoke it. again, the only law a paladin would be beholden too follow would be a "just" law. remember...its the "spirit" of the law that counts not the "letter" .
Kevmann 06-18-03, 03:51 PM	Erlan-Starr, if you read my ten commandments, I say that paladins must follow the law unless they have proof of its corruptness or evil. Therefore since slavery is evil, he may go against it.
Finarin Panjoro 06-18-03, 04:01 PM	Gotta disagree with you Kev, Paladins are under no obligation to obey the law. The paladin code itself states that they must RESPECT LEGITIMATE authority. Respect does not mean OBEY. A paladin can still disobey a legitimate authority (a just law, for example) if the furtherance of good requires it as long as he submits himself for judgement afterward. In this way he respects the legitimate authority, but does not obey it. Any evil government has no legitimate authority over a paladin because the paladin would not acknowledge their authority. I repeat that a paladin's lawfulness means that he will not abandon his code. His code is good. So submitting to an evil authority is an UNLAWFUL act for a paladin (as well as being evil). Note that a paladin cannot lose his abilities for commiting a CHAOTIC act, only an evil one. That is because only an evil act is a violation of the paladin code. To be lawful with regard to his paladin code he may have to disobey worldy authorities on a regular basis, even good aligned ones. But he must always respect those good aligned authorities which requires submitting to their process and judgement after he has done what his code demands.
Luminous Crayon 06-18-03, 04:04 PM	Originally posted by Finarin Panjoro Lawfulness has nothing WHATSOEVER to do with what is LEGAL. Thank you very much for saying this. It can't be said too many times. Paladins are Lawful Good, but that doesn't mean they have to be chumps. Paladins protect. Sometimes that even means protecting people from their own evil government. A government can commit all kinds of atrocities and suddenly, just because some beaurocrat wrote it down in a book somewhere as law, a Paladin can't do anything about it? When did Paladins become legal-minded, loophole-seeking lawyer-knights? Let's not make this ridiculous.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 04:21 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Erlan-Starr, if you read my ten commandments, I say that paladins must follow the law unless they have proof of its corruptness or evil. Therefore since slavery is evil, he may go against it. I believe your "Ten Commandments" are an excellent idea for a particular Order you may have in your campaign. However, I do not think that it should apply to every paladin in every situation. just recently my paladin was forced into a moral dilemma. there were some pilgrims who were granted permission to pray at a "holy" pool that was set in a "hidden" kingdom, but as a condition of seeking this pool, all pilgrims were required at the end of their pilgrimage, to have their tongues removed as too not to have them reveal the location of the hidden kingdom... the problem i faced was my general distate for the "law" itself. it seemed rather cruel. However, no one forced the pilgrims to go the hidden kingdom and in a certain sense the ruler of the hidden kingdom was rather magnanimous to allow strangers into his hidden realm when he could have closed all access to it, in addition all pilgrims were aware of the law, so they went there with open eyes. when my character came across them, having just completed their pilgrimage, some where hesitant to have their tongues removed. things were getting rather nasty, when i came to a solution that satisfied the "law" and made the pilgrims happy. my solution was to have the pilgrims stay at the site and aid other pilgrims in the future. since they (the pilgrims) would not reveal the location of the kingdom by staying put they would not need to have their tongues removed and they would be aiding people in the future as they came to their holy site. of course since everyone was aware of the law, if the pilgrims decided to leave they would still have abide by the law however it was a nice compromise that kept all parties "happy". of course we could all come up with examples or tales of the typical "catch 22" scenario that paladins always seem to get into...(thanx to sadistic dm's....lol) but that IMHO is why I enjoy playing them so much. the line they straddle is very very fine which is why i find them such a challenge to play! ;)
Kevmann 06-18-03, 04:25 PM	You said the law said they must have their tongues cut off to not tell others of its location. They could not tell others of their location because they did not leave, therefore the first part of the law was not needed. So I don't see how your paladin broke my commandments.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 04:29 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann You said the law said they must have their tongues cut off to not tell others of its location. They could not tell others of their location because they did not leave, therefore the first part of the law was not needed. So I don't see how your paladin broke my commandments. welcome back kevmann....good 2 see you again :)
Finarin Panjoro 06-18-03, 04:47 PM	Kevmann, Let's try this as an example: From Kevmann's Commandments: 1. Must abide by all laws. The only time they can go against the law, ANY law, is if they have absolute proof of the laws corruptness. A paladin in the court of a good and just king witnesses a murder, but is unable to apprehend the killer. Shortly thereafter an innocent person is found guilty of the crime. The evidence against them is very heavy, but the paladin knows that he is innocent and even his testimony and eye witness account is unable to sway the courts or the king. Should the paladin allow the innocent person to be executed or break the law and free them until such time as he can find the true guilty party? According to your commandments he must allow the man to die. The law is not corrupt. He has no proof of innocence. According to the paladin code he MUST free the man as the code requires him to aid those who need help and punish those who threaten the innocent. This however requires disobeying a legitimate authority, the just king. It is not however a violation of the paladin code if after freeing the man, seeing to his safety, and tracking down the actual killer, the paladin then submits himself for punishment for breaking the law. He is still respecting the authority by submitting to it. An even better example is him submitting himself for punishment if he has been unable to find the true killer and has exhausted all means of doing so. He must then go and face the very likely event that the king may justly decide to execute him in the innocent man's place.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 04:51 PM	I don't understand, if the paladin witnessed the event occuring, why would they convict the innocent person?
Kevmann 06-18-03, 04:56 PM	Also, if this king was so good/just, the paladin can ask for a delay in the execution to find the real killer and the king will proably allow it.
Finarin Panjoro 06-18-03, 05:44 PM	Okay, I'll add some more details to the situation. The paladin's word alone is not enough to get the man off the hook, there is other evidence that points to this innocent man as being guilty (he has a strong motive, murder weapon found in his home, he was seen in the area at the time of the murder, and another witness believes they saw the man commit the crime but the witness is mistaken). The king grants the delay, but they find no evidence (other than the word of the paladin) of another suspect. Eventually the law process must proceed. But the paladin KNOWS the man is innocent. He just can't prove it. Everyone involved (except the actual murderer) is acting justly, lawfully, and without corruption.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 05:45 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann I don't understand, if the paladin witnessed the event occuring, why would they convict the innocent person? Also, if this king was so good/just, the paladin can ask for a delay in the execution to find the real killer and the king will proably allow it. Ok...perhaps the example was flawed...lets try this. the paladin in question does not witness the actual murder. However a suspect is apprehended by the paladin, based on the description given by various witnessess. when questioned the suspect cannot provide a alibi for his whereabouts on the night of the murder in addition several eyewitnesses do place the suspect at the scene of the crime at an earlier time. Based on that evidence the suspect is going to be tried for murder. however during the night the paladin recieves a message from his/her diety. the diety insists the accused is not guilty of the crime in question. obviously the paladin cannot gainsay his/her diety, and also obviously he has no proof as to the innocence of the accused. the law states (since this is a "good" realm) everyone is entitled to a fair and speedy trial being judged by a jury of ones peers. as far as requesting a stay of the proceedings, without any evidence or cause (besides the paladins word) there is no reason in the courts estimation not to continue the proceedings. Thus i believe the scenario that Finarin Panjoro proposed would come into play...if i am mistaking Finarin my appologies...
Finarin Panjoro 06-18-03, 05:56 PM	Erlan-Starr, No problem, I just didn't use the diety thing because that makes the decision too easy for the paladin. He's basically been ordered to do something in your example. Trust me there's no problem with my scenario. Mistaken identity happens all the time in real life. By witnessing the crime the paladin KNOWS he is not guilty and is the only one who knows it. However in your example, perhaps the testimony of a god is not admissable in court since the god won't appear to give it to the king directly. Or perhaps it must be verified by a high cleric who is out of favor with the diety and thus cannot verify. Kevmann, anyway I think you can see my point. Just imagine that, under whatever circumstances, a paladin knows that an innocent man is about to be executed under just and proper laws. Should he allow the execution or break the law and intervene?
Kevmann 06-18-03, 06:05 PM	Finarin is correct, if he has been given direct word from his diety, I think it goes over my commandments. Finarin, couldn't they just get a high level cleric of the local church to use divination to prove the guy didn't do it? But I do understand what you are trying to say, and I am not going to sit here and make you think of the perfect situation :). If the king grants such a delay, then the paladin goes and seeks for the real killer. If he does not find the killer in time, then the paladin has failed, and the courts go through. I am sorry, but some situations are out of the paladins controll like that. It is the same situation with lieing, if he is forced to lie to save hundreds of innocent lives, he is encouraged to. But unfortunantly, he still must atone for his sin. A paladin can not just pick and choose which laws and whatnot he likes at the time, then he is just destroying the system of law.
Narethkraag 06-18-03, 06:45 PM	I don't play paladins usually but we had this paladin of Heironeus in our party as an NPC, we found him chained in a cave since 2e and he was level 5......... he remained with us through a lot of hard fought adventures. Always generous, noble, brave, wise and terrific healer and fierce fighter. We started to like him little by little, he did something good for every member in our party. He was carried over to 3e and he became very important for us .... he was like an older brother. Always setting great examples of justice, mercy and always humble. Finally at level 15th a lousy saving throw and he was desintegrated by a beholder, we were shocked. All the players decided to search for a cleric of enough level to bring him back, our DM prepared sort of an almost epic quest to grant this petition. After months of gruelling action, I think we wore down or probably moved our DM with our sheer determination and will to do whatever was necessary to get him back and finally found him recovering from a terrible journey back to life in a monastery hidden in a little shire. I have a very soft and big spot for paladins in my heart. I just can't deny that fact. Good paladin players can create tremendous emotional situations in the game and can be rewarding in play action.:D P.S. Since we use minis in our campaign, the golden and silver figurine with a blue crest, bright holy avenger sword and a golden dragon and blue lightning bolt on its shield with a white warhorse.... does not hurt his image either......
Finarin Panjoro 06-18-03, 06:46 PM	Kev, As always I respect you for sticking to your guns. You'd make a pretty good paladin yourself. I disagree with you though because I believe the paladin's responsibility to uphold the good overrules his responsibility to uphold the law. That is why he can only lose his abilities for commiting an evil act, not a chaotic one. If I were the DM and a paladin let an innocent man be executed, even by a just court, his powers would vanish. A paladin must carry his code with him wherever he goes because his code is what makes him who he is. The law of the land cannot be allowed to prevent the fulfillment of his duty, whether that law is just or not. The paladin's lawfulness is reflected in his adherence to this code, his willingness to do what is right regardless of the law, society, or the consequences to himself. That is why after seeing to the safety of the innocent man he would submit himself to the just King for judgement and accept whatever punishment the King decided to level upon him. Imagine the scene, the paladin has just freed the innocent man and, without killing anyone, delivered him to safety outside of the king's domain. He then rides back to the king and submits himself for punishment under the law. What a dramatic scene this could be! There is no disrespect of authority here. The paladin acknowledges that he has committed a crime, albeit a good intentioned one, and is prepared to suffer his just punishment. The paladin must uphold good above all else and this will sometimes bring him into conflict with the law, even just ones. Atleast, that's how I see it. I love paladins. I have a friend playing one in my campaign currently and he's about to run into a problem very similar to the one I've laid out above. I can't wait to see how he decides to handle it.
Kevmann 06-18-03, 06:52 PM	You are probably right Finarin, in extream situations, good probably does go over law. And I think you are correct, he would set the person free and then turn himself over to justice. I still would probably make him atone for breaking a legitamit law (although a simple prayer outloud can serve as atonement in extreme cases). Oh, and thanks for the complement, I remember us arguing over the new ranger build :) But the funny thing is, I have never played a paladin. Played a holy liberator once though.
Sir Neil 06-18-03, 07:08 PM	The paladin. This class has soooo much baggage from previous editions. Some people feel she's a holy warrior dedicated to her religion. Others insist that paladins must obey the laws, even when they conflict with doing good, or her code. The first is a cleric, the second is just playing lawful stupid. I feel a paladin is simply the Hero. A virtuous warrior, who draws her magic from faith that good will triumph over evil. Every ability is a reflection of that confidence. I originally wrote this piece to explain to my players how I interpret the paladin's code. (Now I use it to counter 2nd Edition thinking. :smirk: ) From the SRD: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all abilities if she willingly commits an act of evil. Additionally, a paladin is required to respect legitimate authority, act with honor, help those who need help, and punish those who threaten innocent beings. Below, I'll expand on each sentence. A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all abilities if she willingly commits an act of evil. Lawful has nothing to do with laws. It is about duty, honor, and responsibility. Notice it doesn't say she loses her abilities if she commits a chaotic act? Paladins aren't expected to blindly follow the laws or even their code! What good is honor if it comes at the cost of innocent lives? Do not make the mistake the Solamnic Knights did and believe honor comes before doing good. Willingness to sacrifice her honor for the greater good serves only to prove her honor. Respect Legitimate Authority Not obey, necessarily, but respect them, as you do fellow paladins. Authority figures/organizations who commit evil acts are utterly illegitimate. Only just rulers deserve your respect. Act With Honor (Don't lie, cheat, or use poison.) Unless the alternative results in the death of innocent people! Lawful neutrals can act blind to the moral effects of their actions, a paladin does not have that luxury. Help Those Who Need Help (Unless they abuse that help and twist it to the service of evil.) This sentence is cautioning paladins against being too proud to help "undesirables". Good characters embody the belief that all people are inherently deserving of dignity, and so they treat every person with respect. Punish Those Who Threaten Innocent Beings Make sure the punishment fits the circumstances and the offense. As I said earlier, the greatest virtue of a paladin, the source of their magic, is faith. Faith that Good is stronger than Evil; that even in death, Good will prevail; faith that no matter what, Right will triumph over Wrong. That complete trust is what gives paladins their power. Detect Evil In Die Hard, Bill Clay was running an incredibly skilled Bluff on John McClain. Did John fall for it? He must have, he handed Bill a gun! An empty one. Paladins don't have Sense Motive (yet :D), but they hardly need it when they can size up your soul in under half a minute. Lay on hands, remove disease "I won't let you die." She simply denies evil's power to harm her or anyone else. Aura of Courage Experienced paladins aren't paralyzed by fear. Sure, some things are scary, but that isn't enough to stop them. Remember when you were a kid watching a movie, and things were bleak for the heroes when out of nowhere the cavalry arrived? Do you remember that triumphant feeling soaring through you? That's what it feels like fighting beside a paladin. ---------------------------- Paladin Foundation Member #3
Luminous Crayon 06-18-03, 07:29 PM	*applauds Sir Neil*
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 07:50 PM	Originally posted by Luminous Crayon *applauds Sir Neil* ditto...it seems the "Paladin" mafia still lives! :rofl:
Kevmann 06-18-03, 08:00 PM	Well, that is your opinon Sir Niel, but I belive that the commandments are the best way to keep a pure heart when it comes to paladins. And trust me, it isn't "lawful stupid" as you put it.
Riggoras_44 06-18-03, 08:26 PM	Roleplaying a Paladin making right in front of an illegitimate/evil regime or law isn't that hard if we definite that regime. **A bit of theory from law school** The purpose of the "right" State is to make the greater good for its populace, to ensure to give them their constitutional rights (mmh... might ax that. There wasn't such thing as constitutional law in the feudal State, only the will of the ruler), but instead we might say the right State is fair and good for all of its citizens. The State goes wrong when it fails to/cannot do/doesn't even try to abide this great rule. As was stated before, when citizens start being victims of the State's functional corruption, there is evil in that state (there is evil where there is an innocent victim), altough "evil" properly is a flavory word used in the fantasy settings. **Here we start flavoring with the RPing implications** Is the wrong, corrupted State lawful? No, because it strays from the right path, the function that corresponds to it. The Paladin isn't forced in the least to respect this regime. In fact, he would look up to end it, because the suffering it produces corresponds pretty well to evil. **Here it gets harder** But what happens when a rightful, correct government makes a mistake? In truth it happen everyday. Oh, but well, this was explained a lot better than I could. The definition on righteousness was really all I wanted to say.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 08:31 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Well, that is your opinon Sir Niel, but I belive that the commandments are the best way to keep a pure heart when it comes to paladins. And trust me, it isn't "lawful stupid" as you put it. I am slightly confused about something...did you not state that you personally have never played a paladin, only dm'd one? not that its not ok to have "commandments" but to emphatically state... but I belive that the commandments are the best way to keep a pure heart when it comes to paladins. seems rather questionable if in fact your "hands on" knowledge is limited to dm'ing. the perspectives are quite different on the other side of the screen. but again, thats just my take...i may be wrong...
Kevmann 06-18-03, 08:32 PM	Erlan, its not that hard to see what is right and wrong, no matter what side you look at it from. Its no that hard to see how the paladin should act, whether I have played one or not.
Sir Neil 06-18-03, 08:39 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann ...it isn't "lawful stupid" as you put it. I'm sorry, the "lawful stupid" wasn't directed against you. I skimmed your 10 commandments at Enworld, and it seems too...legalistic, and restrictive. Playing a paladin should be straight-forward and easy, which is why it's called "playing". ;) My wife'll be home soon, but I'll take another look at your commandments later.
Erlan-Starr 06-18-03, 09:59 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Erlan, its not that hard to see what is right and wrong, no matter what side you look at it from. Its no that hard to see how the paladin should act, whether I have played one or not. actually, its not quite as straight forward as you would think! the world (real and imagined) is all sorts of shades of grey...trying to keep your "paladinhood" in a "grey" world is tough (and very enjoyable IMHO). How a "paladin" should/would act is somewhat like pornography...you cant really define it...but when it happens you can tell if its right or not. ;)
Haradim 06-18-03, 10:46 PM	I really have to agree with this, for the most part: Playing a paladin should be straight-forward and easy, which is why it's called "playing". Moral challenges (the Paladin's weakness, like the Wizard's spells per day and so forth) are basically required, but too many restrictions just make the Paladin look worse than they already usually do in people's eyes. As it is, in the book, people claim it's far too restrictive and incompatible with most parties. And there's hardly anything in the book. As it is, many already see it as a doomed class; they expect to Fall, believing it to be a horribly grueling and tortuous experience. They expect that not brushing their teeth is grounds for Falling, and unfortuately, they are right in all too many games. This just makes players paranoid and fearful, and many will avoid the class altogether, believing what people say about what it takes. I've heard more than a few say that only a certain rare kind of gamer can play a Paladin...and frankly, it saddens me that one of the best classes in the game is essentially closed off, by either player or DM. Challenge the Paladin, but don't make him so hard to use that people simply find something better to do the same thing, without massive red tape. Been a while since a post on Paladins :) Feels....virtuous :P :P
Erlan-Starr 06-19-03, 12:09 AM	This just makes players paranoid and fearful, and many will avoid the class altogether, believing what people say about what it takes. I've heard more than a few say that only a certain rare kind of gamer can play a Paladin...and frankly, it saddens me that one of the best classes in the game is essentially closed off, by either player or DM. but make it too easy then you defeat the purpose of the class. playing a paladin "should" be tough...they have some of the "best" powers in the game. but the price to be paid is high . which is why people are squeemish about the class and howl about being "hamstrung" by the CoC and alignment restrictions. most people IRL and in gaming terms would prefer to have their cake and eat it too. which is why the CoC and alignment restrictions should not be weakened. the crux of a good experience at playing a paladin lies not so much in the player...but the DM. any 2 bit dm can come up with "gotcha" scenarios for a paladin where he has a choice of saving the drowning baby or the maid trapped in the burning tower, thats a cheap way out. the real test is to have "moral" tests of a more oblique nature. where the paladin must weigh his actions and how they would effect the "greater" good. now having said that, i agree. we should not "scare" away prospective paladin players. infact the more we get people to play the class the less we will hear the howls of agony about how the paladin is nothing more than a glorified PrC. or in the alternate having the dreaded "Paladin of Every Alignment" zealots, that in their perfect world would allow their (add you non lawful good alignment) "paladins" to shake down the village elders terrorized by a troll because he needs more money for that nice suit of armor in the next city. It is my hope that in the future "newbees" will come to this thread and ask for our collective experiences and hopefully enjoy their gaming experience to their fullest. but again...behind every "good" paladin lies a "good" DM...and that is the real secret in playing a "paladin"
Thunder Dragonbane 06-19-03, 12:17 AM	[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand Here's the first 20 members:........... ________________________________________ ____________ Personally I would rather decline any sort of governing body on our actions. We are supposed to be adults, we know what is right by the COC. We do not need the "Spanish Inqusition" sitting on these boards. Becides this is what the moderators are for, let them do their jobs.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-19-03, 12:21 AM	[i]Originally posted by Erlan-Starr but again...behind every "good" paladin lies a "good" DM...and that is the real secret in playing a "paladin" [/B] ________________________________________ ____________ These statements are exactly correct. I would submit that many of these "Paladin of any allignment" threads are started by people with poor GM's. Otherwise they would see that they are simply wrong.
Haradim 06-19-03, 03:12 AM	Originally posted by Erlan-Starr most people IRL and in gaming terms would prefer to have their cake and eat it too. which is why the CoC and alignment restrictions should not be weakened Which is why weakening isn't the issue. Making the restrictions too *potent* is. As it stands, a Paladin is easily tempted and challenged, while remaining only somewhat problematic in a group. Throwing on more and more limitations (or just making existing ones harsher and harsher) just bogs the character down to unplayability (unless you are that special uber-gamer who is actually 'qualified' to play a Paladin), and tends to make them disliked and difficult to use in any standard PC party. Making a difficult class harder tends to accomplish little more than ensuring few, if any, people ever bother to use it. Keep the rules for being a Paladin simple...make the challenge in living up to them. My mind is wandering, so I'll leave it there for now :p
Sir Ferdinand 06-19-03, 09:03 AM	By Luminous Crayon: Not allowed? Not allowed by whom? That is a very difficult question. What I meant that is that if the Paladin just goes into such an evil city and strikes down the evil government, the Paladin didn't actually do a good act, although it may first look like so. The Paladin needs some reason to go against such a government and also some proof that it'll help innocent people to get a better life, and also actions to make the city a better place to live. It's not enough to say "When evil is gone, good will take its place." What will happen to the city when the government is gone? There's no one leading the city anymore, and things would be like in Iraq for the first couple of weeks. Anarchy and chaos takes place, although the Paladin thought that the city and the people would be saved after the Paladin strikes down the evil government. It just doesn't work like that. * * * By Thunder Dragonbane: Personally I would rather decline any sort of governing body on our actions. We are supposed to be adults, we know what is right by the COC. We do not need the "Spanish Inqusition" sitting on these boards. Becides this is what the moderators are for, let them do their jobs. OK, we can take that part away. Those are just suggestions. However what do you think of the membership thing? Could that work?
Finarin Panjoro 06-19-03, 10:50 AM	Kevmann, Glad you can see where I'm coming from. I should probably mention that I don't see your commandments as being wrong for all paladins. Some would be more lawful than others and there's no reason your commandments couldn't work or be the code for those with a stricter interpretation of their code. I just don't feel that something that strict should be applied to all paladins. There is room for a lot of variation within being lawful good and within the paladin's code of conduct. There was a thread on the d20 boards recently that argued that both Batman and Superman would be considered lawful good. I agree with this. Batman doesn't care about the law, but he follows a strict personal code (he won't kill), is methodical and precise in his methods (very lawful), and respects legitimate authority (Commisioner Gordon). Superman obeys the law and believes in working within the system. But both of them could be paladins.
Erlan-Starr 06-19-03, 11:21 AM	Posted by Sir Ferdinand: That is a very difficult question. What I meant that is that if the Paladin just goes into such an evil city and strikes down the evil government, the Paladin didn't actually do a good act, although it may first look like so. The Paladin needs some reason to go against such a government and also some proof that it'll help innocent people to get a better life, and also actions to make the city a better place to live. It's not enough to say "When evil is gone, good will take its place." What will happen to the city when the government is gone? There's no one leading the city anymore, and things would be like in Iraq for the first couple of weeks. Anarchy and chaos takes place, although the Paladin thought that the city and the people would be saved after the Paladin strikes down the evil government. It just doesn't work like that. I disagree. the very fact the the government is evil is all the reason he needs. if he does nothing he infact is tacitly abetting evil. you cannot expect a paladin to solve every problem or contingency prior to acting. the one thing a paladin would know is that the "regime" in question is evil. what would happen after the government is gone?? who is to say...but one thing is for sure... by inaction more death and injustice will be meeted out. would things improve?? again...unknown...however could things get any worse?? possibly...but they could also get better. if given a choice of not acting against a evil regime where he knows people with suffer death and torture vs. a possible future where people may or may not be killed...i believe the paladin would choose to act. and if things broke down...then he would try to rectify that. One problem at a time is my motto. ;)
Riggoras_44 06-19-03, 12:04 PM	In my post, I stated that a government that provoques the suffering of its citizens through cruelty or inaction IS wrong. That kind of government should be changed. It is the Paladin's duty to look forward upon it. What would be your excuse for letting such thing go unattended, as a Paladin? There is no reason to tolerate evil in a government.
Kevmann 06-19-03, 01:06 PM	Unfortunantly, I belive that the paladin does not have strict enough restrictions in the book. But you see, that works out in my world because the paladin prc is a badass prestege class that is more powerful then most prcs, if you can keep it :)
Erlan-Starr 06-19-03, 01:11 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Unfortunantly, I belive that the paladin does not have strict enough restrictions in the book. But you see, that works out in my world because the paladin prc is a badass prestege class that is more powerful then most prcs, if you can keep it :) Kevmann: you state that the paladin does not have strict enough restrictions in the book. would you care to tell us why you believe that?? im truly interested.
Kevmann 06-19-03, 01:16 PM	Very well, I am not ashamed to think of myself as christian. And to me, the paladin should be the embodyment of all that is good, lawful, and holy! Now, all I have to think about is what a person who embodied the best aspects of good, lawfulness, and holyness would and should act (WWPD, What Would Paladin Do?). And when I think of this, I see a person who does not fear, who does not resort to trickery, guile, or anything else. A person who belives that one should never misdirect others, should show themslelves plainly for all to see. Now, as much as I would like a paladin to be perfect, I know that no human being is. So I tuned down my perfect person into more reasonable rules, and therefore my commandments were created.
Tzor 06-19-03, 02:36 PM	OK I have a few comments based on a very quick scan of everything so far. I should point out that for organizations that use a July-June year, June is election month. Given that the thought that I might be on another nominating committee's list is kind of scarey. :rolleyes: Anyway, I tend to agree more with Finarin Panjoro as and less with Sir Neil, although my differences with Sir Neil are minor. Paladins and deities: First of all, a paladin should be faithful to his deity, but he is not per se a cleric of the deity. Non Lawful Good deities know that their paladins are ... well paladins, and they have to accept that if they want them, which they obviously seem to do. The requirements that a deity expects his clerics, paladins and followers aren't always the same. And they shouldn't be. Paladins and authority: Paladins need to respect all lawful authority, not only "just" authority. Paladins probably should not pledge fealty to any non just authority, but that is a seperate issue. Good always comes before law, but the paladin must assume the consequences of any action he takes. Paladins are not "Lawful Sutpid," but likewise the term "Lawful Good" is backwards for a paladin, they are first and foremost Good, secondly Lawful, and thirdly a follow of the goals of their deity and the authority to which they have pledged fealty. More importantly, while paladins are Lawful Good, not all Lawful Good are paladins, the paladinic code is a higher level of lawful good.
Kevmann 06-19-03, 02:40 PM	I agree with the term they are good first, lawfull second, and followers of their diety third. But I also belive that they should keep all of these three things equil as possible, and only in dire situations make the more important point better then one of the other points.
Riggoras_44 06-19-03, 03:25 PM	I think there is no possibility to make universal rules for a Paladin to follow. What would you do if the Paladin broke your code of conduct out of necessity? Penalize him? What is the point of this code if otherwise? How can a Paladin be rightful by following a code of conduct that would penalize him unfairly, thus not being rightful in itself? I see such a code just bringing us more fallen becoming Blackguards :p
Erlan-Starr 06-19-03, 06:59 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Very well, I am not ashamed to think of myself as christian. And to me, the paladin should be the embodyment of all that is good, lawful, and holy! Now, all I have to think about is what a person who embodied the best aspects of good, lawfulness, and holyness would and should act (WWPD, What Would Paladin Do?). And when I think of this, I see a person who does not fear, who does not resort to trickery, guile, or anything else. A person who belives that one should never misdirect others, should show themslelves plainly for all to see. Now, as much as I would like a paladin to be perfect, I know that no human being is. So I tuned down my perfect person into more reasonable rules, and therefore my commandments were created. well the "booK" does say a paladin does not lie, cheat, or steal, so im confused where you believe it isnt stringent enough. as far as not using trickery, guile or anything else, im a bit confused by that...the paladin does not lie, but that does not preclude him from with holding information if he feels it necessary, ommission of information IMHO is not lying. another possibility, by using his "diplomacy skill", a paladin can answer truthfully, however by being sarcastic/dimissive/arrogant and/or patronizing, the paladin can infact tell the truth...but who would believe it? besides...if a paladin was forbidden to use "trickery" or "guile" why have the spell "hide alignment"? it would seem by insisting that the paladin must have a neon sign around his neck saying..."Hey Look! I am a Paladin! I am "lawful good" now come and get some..." is more than "restrictive...its almost tantamount to suicide.
Kevmann 06-19-03, 08:04 PM	Well, you have seen my commandments. I belive that diplomacy is of course something a paladin without resorting to lieing or anything like that, and that is fine. I also belive hide alignment should be taken out of his class list (if indeed it is one). The commandments are what I go by, and that is that. Also, when I said guile, that ment sneaking up to people, even ommiting or saying half truths is taken out.
Erlan-Starr 06-19-03, 08:13 PM	Originally Posted by Kevmann ...I also belive hide alignment should be taken out of his class list (if indeed it is one). its a 2nd level spell..fyi PS: what is the concensus of the new "summon mount" ability that is coming out in 3.5?? personally i dont like it...i think i might just "home-brew" a rule...where the paladin gets a spell on his spell list "summon mount" which would do the same thing...but personally keep the flavor of the "old" mount. i myself do not like the almost "Drizzt"ish feel to the new rule. but thats just me.
Sir Neil 06-19-03, 09:41 PM	Well, I had a chance to organize my thoughts about your commandments. 1. Isn't too bad, until the second sentence. If a corrupt law needn't be abided, than the first sentence isn't true. 2. Again, you have an absolute requirement, and immediately thereafter, you have exceptions. 3. I have a lot of issues with this one. Proof: Why would a paladin need more proof than detect evil? Due Process/Fair Trials: The paladin's sworn word is all the proof a court should need, especially in a world where commandment two is applicable. Also, why would any nation give monsters a trial? Duel: If "surrender or die" counts as a duel when they're caught red-handed, I have no further objections to this aspect of the commandment. 4. Again, the second sentence spoils the first. Back in Anglo-Saxon England, one faced execution for numerous crimes, including arson, house-breaking, open theft, obvious murder, and treachery to one's lord. The only other punishments were fines and mutilation. They simply didn't have the resources to support prisoners. 5. Yet again. Guile, trickery, and misinformation are neither tools of evil, nor prohibited by DotF. You already corrected the statement to read "helpless opponents", as opposed to "weapon-less". 6. Yet again. According to PH 43, atonement is NOT required for unwilling or unwitting evil. All the bad guys'd have to do is command each paladin to lie and the paladins would have to atone. 1 wand of command: 750 gp. 50 atonements: 22,500 gp. Good loses so fast it's ugly. Uglier than an ugly man falling head-first out of the ugly tree into a big ol' pile of ugly! 7. So when I kill the Drow matron mother, I have to replace their theocracy with a more equitable system, so as not to disrupt the drow military machine? 8. Not bad. 9. Starts out good, but the second sentence has no basis in reality. There is no such thing as "innocent evil". They are incompatible concepts. 10. Breaking an oath to acheive goodness is chaotic, not evil. (As an aside, keep in mind that atoning or atonement is a precise technical term for a process that requires 5th magnitude divine magic, not simply a role-played request for forgiveness.) Why are you so harsh to paladins? Are they gods who can see every possible impact their actions may have? In more than one commandment you require them to see the future. [Edit: Oh, I see you explained why. Well, I hope my nitpicking will help you clarify your commandments. After all, if it works for your group, more power to you.]
Sir Neil 06-19-03, 09:56 PM	I agree with Thunder Dragonbane, Sir Ferdinand. When it comes to membership, well, I think we were doing fine with the system on the old boards. Any poster could join the Foundation by receiving a number from a...Peer. The Paladin Foundation's 113 (+) Peers. How's that sound? Originally posted by Tzor Anyway, I tend to agree more with Finarin Panjoro... Me too. :D Paladins and authority: Paladins need to respect all lawful authority, not only "just" authority. I might agree with that. Would you consider the Nazis to be a lawful or legitimate authority in WWII Germany, for the purposes of the Code? I don't; but I couldn't think of a better adjective than "just" to make clear what is and is not "legitimate authority".
Erlan-Starr 06-19-03, 10:26 PM	Posted by Sir Neil: Why are you so harsh to paladins? Are they gods who can see every possible impact their actions may have? In more than one commandment you require them to see the future. very good point sir neil. after reading your post i went back and took a closer look at the "10" commandments. if such a code were "codified" in the PhB...i could see quite a few people complaining about being pigeoned holed. Such a Code to apply to all paladins would be almost impossible to role play. (after every encounter... Paul Paladin: "Hold up boys...we must take these goblins back to town to stand justice! Wizo the Wizard: " WTF are you talking about...we are almost 10 days away from the nearest town and that little hamlet didnt even have anything more secure than a pig sty!" Paul Paladin: "Good point Sir Wizo...we must then head back to the capital...that is only a fortnight away...if you stay put, i shall return within the month!" Wizo the Wizard: "Ok...we promise not to go up to many levels till you get back ok?? " :)
Sir Neil 06-19-03, 10:45 PM	Your applause warms me, Luminous Crayon & Erlan-Starr*. If Kevmann's 10 Commandments serve as the code for rank-and-file paladins, it would be one thing. If it was the code of a powerful prestige class with enough magic powers to make the PrC playable while so burdened it would be another thing altogether. I critiqued it believing the former, Erlan-Starr, since I was off-line when I wrote it and didn't see his explanation. (Hence my edit.) It might serve as the code for an epic PrC. *(Although, I must confess the "paladin mafia" part of your response went right over my head.)
Kevmann 06-19-03, 11:12 PM	1. Isn't too bad, until the second sentence. If a corrupt law needn't be abided, than the first sentence isn't true. Corrupt or aparently evil laws, such as slavery etc. Laws are not inherntly corrupt or evil, sometimes the polotitions that try and run them are, but that does not mean the law is. The paladin should try and find proof to put said polotician to court, but that does not give him lead to break a law. 2. Again, you have an absolute requirement, and immediately thereafter, you have exceptions. No, there is no exception. Read down tword the bottom, even if you do lie out of neccesity, you still require atonement. Proof: Why would a paladin need more proof than detect evil? Due Process/Fair Trials: The paladin's sworn word is all the proof a court should need, especially in a world where commandment two is applicable. Also, why would any nation give monsters a trial? Wrong, a famous man once said "absolute power corrupts absolutly" The paladin is not god, he is not even the mouth of god, he is a person, just like anyone else. People who are allowed to do anything as if they were the mouth of god are tyrants, and you allowing them to be would create more blackguards then my commandments would. Paladins are immune to fear, not corruption. Oh yes, and I belive that detect evil is just a thing to help the paladin know who he can not trust or who he must investigate further, it is such a weak spell and is so easy to misdirect that it could never be used as proof. Duel: If "surrender or die" counts as a duel when they're caught red-handed, I have no further objections to this aspect of the commandment. Basically, yes, but only if the crime warrents death. Again, the second sentence spoils the first. Back in Anglo-Saxon England, one faced execution for numerous crimes, including arson, house-breaking, open theft, obvious murder, and treachery to one's lord. The only other punishments were fines and mutilation. They simply didn't have the resources to support prisoners. Perhaps they did kill for those things back then. But a paladin is just and fair, and if you look in the grand scope of things, the only crime worthy of death is murdering another person. Yet again. Guile, trickery, and misinformation are neither tools of evil, nor prohibited by DotF. I admit, this is a touchy subject. But I stick to my guns that a paladin would not fear nor belive in using guile and trickery, which ARE the tools of evil. People do evil things by misconstruing information and misleading others, not by being honist and true. And what makes a person evil? A persons actions make them evil, and if you do evil actions, you are no better then the evil you wish to destroy. Yet again. According to PH 43, atonement is NOT required for unwilling or unwitting evil. I do belive you are correct, this should be taken out. A paladin may feel guilt or whatnot, but should not be forfeit their powers for something they could not help. So when I kill the Drow matron mother, I have to replace their theocracy with a more equitable system, so as not to disrupt the drow military machine? No, because you are not destroying their government. If you take out one corrupted official of a government, even the head official, you are still not destroying that government. This portains to if you are seaking the total or majority destruction of a current government. And is mostly made to protect innocent people from lawlessness, which intices mass rape, plundering, and all all other crimes. There is no such thing as "innocent evil". They are incompatible concepts. What I ment to say is that he must protect this person if he is helpless or is out of his league. EVEN if the person is doomed to die anyway, the paladin must protect him long enough to have a duel and allow the gods to determine who is right or wrong. Why are you so harsh to paladins? Are they gods who can see every possible impact their actions may have? In more than one commandment you require them to see the future. No, a paladin is a person, and can not see all ends. If a paladin does an action that he unwittingly causes an evil or chaotic reaction, then he did not mean to, and therefore is not forfiet his powers. If you want the best way to run my commandments, I try to maintain equil shares of intent of the paladin, and the ends does not justify the means. Murge those two ideas, and you have it. (As an aside, keep in mind that atoning or atonement is a precise technical term for a process that requires 5th magnitude divine magic, not simply a role-played request for forgiveness.) Yes, I understand. And although in most cases an atonement is required, sometimes (and this is just me) if the paladin fixes the problem that he causes, it may be enough atonement to get his powers back (on a situation to situation basis). I allow this because the paladin is watched, and the god is the acctual person who attones a paladin, not a cleric. Also remember that none of my commandments are grounds for a permanent removal of their powers. Only by willingly and wittingly commiting a evil or purely chaotic act can do this, because it goes against EVERYTHING my paladin stands for. Well, I hope I cleared up any misconseptions.
Sir Neil 06-20-03, 12:41 AM	...if you look in the grand scope of things, the only crime worthy of death is murdering another person. I disagree. I think rape and similar tortures are worse than a measly little murder. Once you're dead, the discomfort is over. I have more than a few friends still dealing with the aftermath of being molested as children. Heck, my group is still dealing with the kidnapping and murder of a player's aunt. The paladin is not god, he is not even the mouth of god, he is a person, just like anyone else. He's not like anyone else. He has an array of magic powers, all of which he loses if he breaks his code, which bars him from lying. Elaine Cunningham has an interesting series of novels, Councilors and Kings, which explores the judicial system of Halruaa. Their system stinks, because corrupt mage-hounds don't automatically lose their magic. Paladins do. ...the best way to run my commandments, I try to maintain equil shares of intent of the paladin, and the ends does not justify the means. Murge those two ideas, and you have it. What vexed me is that your commandments are written so as to deny the role of intent in the paladin's actions. I understand them much better now.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 12:42 AM	Originally posted by Sir Neil [*(Although, I must confess the "paladin mafia" part of your response went right over my head.) [/B] i was using it as a play on words....the mafia (at least according to hollywood) has their own twisted CoC...so since we agree on many issues regarding the class....i thought to use the term Paladin Mafia to represent that fact. of coures in hindsight...it was probably much to obtuse of a reference...and i should have forwarned you! ;)
Thunder Dragonbane 06-20-03, 01:12 AM	[i]Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand OK, we can take that part away. Those are just suggestions. However what do you think of the membership thing? Could that work? [/B] ________________________________________ ____________ I am sorry, I do not quite understand the question. It has been a long day and I can't seem to think straight.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 11:16 AM	I disagree. I think rape and similar tortures are worse than a measly little murder. Once you're dead, the discomfort is over. I have more than a few friends still dealing with the aftermath of being molested as children. Heck, my group is still dealing with the kidnapping and murder of a player's aunt. I disagree, rape, and all of those other crimes you listed are recoverable. Sure they may have sevear problems for a long time in their life, but they have the ability to recover later from it. Death is death, it is never recoverable, you end that persons life and that is that. And killing the offender is the end, he can not recover, that is that. But that is my opinion, and you have your opinion, if we can not agree then lets stop argueing about it. And your also forgetting that although my commandment says that is what you can do, alot of paladins may try to make him good and atone for his evils. He's not like anyone else. No, he is not like everyone else, but he is a person just like everyone else, with no more power or word of say then they do. If a specific kingdom has alot of paladins and they listen to them more, fine, that is good for them. But if a government belives that paladins are no more better then anyone else, that does not give the paladin the right to superseed all of their laws because "they are the mouth of god" because they arn't. What vexed me is that your commandments are written so as to deny the role of intent in the paladin's actions. I understand them much better now. No, my commandments just set a foundation on how the pladin should act. By that, I ment that no paladin should intend to break a commandment, and that the ends does not justifiy the means, which means that even if a bad act now brings about great good, the paladin should still not to it. Evil actions make a person evil, if the paladin resorts to doing these acts, then he is no better then the evil he wishes to supress. My qoute was in reference to how they should be run because a paladin can not see the future, you have taken my qoute out of context.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 11:44 AM	Posted by Kevmann: No, my commandments just set a foundation on how the pladin should act. By that, I ment that no paladin should intend to break a commandment, and that the ends does not justifiy the means, which means that even if a bad act now brings about great good, the paladin should still not to it. Evil actions make a person evil, if the paladin resorts to doing these acts, then he is no better then the evil he wishes to supress. My qoute was in reference to how they should be run because a paladin can not see the future, you have taken my qoute out of context. Kevmann: Your strident defense of your system on how "Paladins should" be played is commendable. Having said that however, for the life if me i do not understand how you do not see that this "solution" you have devised is not superior, and frankly from a players standpoint IMHO quite inferior. On the one hand you insist that "paladins" are no better and no worse than anyone else, yet you set such conditions upon him/her that from a game playing stand point a players paladin would be spending 1/2 time dragging misc. creatures back to town to face "justice" and the other 1/2 making atonements for some misc. infraction. With the restrictions you have placed upon a player it is small wonder that you insist the "paladin" should be a PrC and not a "core" class. Again, if you had a particular Order of Paladins that you as a player had to abide if you wanted to join, that might be one thing...but to insist that all paladins must follow such a rigid code seems to me as unduly handicapping a class that from a players standpoint is already difficult enough to play.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 11:54 AM	On the one hand you insist that "paladins" are no better and no worse than anyone else, Correct, I hate to use this but it is just and EXAMPLE... when jesus was alive and traveling the world, he was just a man, yet he lived by strict rules of his own. Only after his death did he become something greater. yet you set such conditions upon him/her that from a game playing stand point a players paladin would be spending 1/2 time dragging misc. creatures back to town to face "justice" and the other 1/2 making atonements for some misc. infraction. Ok, first off, most creatures are not willing to be brought back and would rather die then go to the courts. And alot of creatures a paladin meets (especially on his quests) are those creatures of infallable evil that he can kill right out. And it is not that hard to keep by my rules, it realy is not that bad, in fact more fun to find out how to do things a different way then lieing, etc. Also, as I said in my begining post, somtimes atonement can come just from makeing a wrong right (and a little more) but this is purely on a situation basis. And yes, I do like the paladin prc, difficul requirements always make the prc more powerful, and that is no different in my game.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 12:39 PM	Posted by Kevmann: Ok, first off, most creatures are not willing to be brought back and would rather die then go to the courts intersting point...however that appears to contradict what you previously posted: Posted by Kevmann: ... the only crime worthy of death is murdering another person. Now it would seem to me that the average orc/goblin/hobgoblin etc. would take his chances back in town with the courts, since murder is the only crime that they can be put to death for. why on earth would they rather die than go back to court? it seems to me unless they were caught redhanded committing murder, the worst that can happen to them is to do some jail time then go on their merry way. (which sure as heck beats death any day!) and the argument that: ... alot of creatures a paladin meets (especially on his quests) are those creatures of infallable evil that he can kill right out. well lets hope from a players standpoint those "infallable evil" creatures he meets dont show up between level 1-6! A majority of early levels is used grunting around w/the typical low CR creatures, and most of those (except undead) fall under your catagory of creatures that can be turned to good etc. as i said...talk about dragging the flow of a game. if at every encounter the party had to stop and "go back to town, in order to bring the creatures to justice". lord knows how long it would take to clear out the first level of your average dungeon. Lastly, your example of Jesus as a paladin type of character is rather interesting. and i think actually proves my point about your commandmants more than defending yours. Was not the main point about the story of Mary Magdeline, that it is the spritit of the Law and not the letter of the Law that counts? The Law stated she must be Stoned. and yet Jesus rebuked them for their shortsightedness. Enforcing laws/rules/commandments blindly is wrong. circumstances must dictate ones action in enforcing the law.
Riggoras_44 06-20-03, 12:47 PM	I think a Paladin can atone for any crime, to the eyes of his order (now, if that crime involved the complete slaughtering of the order...). But regaining his credibility in society would require much more than that. Redemption is a thorny path...
Kevmann 06-20-03, 01:48 PM	Erlan-Starr, remember that a paladin always has the right to defend himself, if the goblin attacks him, then he can defend himself. And I don't understand how a reference to Jesus about ONE of your points proves your corretness rather than mine. that it is the spritit of the Law and not the letter of the Law that counts? Of course, but if it is left to a paladin to decided what law is right or wrong (beyond the obvious, slaver is wrong, stoning for anything less then death is wrong) then he has too much power. As I said, a paladin is a person, not a dictator.
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 02:11 PM	By Erlan-Starr: I disagree. the very fact the the government is evil is all the reason he needs. if he does nothing he infact is tacitly abetting evil. And I must disagree with this. If your Paladin beats evil just because they're evil, the Paladin isn't any better. you cannot expect a paladin to solve every problem or contingency prior to acting. the one thing a paladin would know is that the "regime" in question is evil. And as I said, that's not enough reason to go strike it down. what would happen after the government is gone?? who is to say...but one thing is for sure... by inaction more death and injustice will be meeted out. would things improve?? again...unknown...however could things get any worse?? possibly...but they could also get better. I added that Iraq part there with purpose. What happened in Iraq when the government was stroke down? Of course it was a releaf for most of the people, but it also caused all that chaos there. People started to rob stores, other people etc. Also only few public stations worked after that, and power plants, water delivery etc. didn't work at all. The whole country was nothing but chaos after that. Even now things don't work very well, although evil leader/government was struck down. Something like that surely has consequence, and rarely they're only good. So in a case of a Paladin who just strikes down an evil government, he also knows that he causes chaos in that city, and at least I wouldn't allow such a Paladin to keep his powers. That's why a Paladin needs some higher authority to give him a reason/acceptance to strike down such a government. And that authority will deal with the problems, because they gave that permission to that Paladin. if given a choice of not acting against a evil regime where he knows people with suffer death and torture vs. a possible future where people may or may not be killed...i believe the paladin would choose to act. and if things broke down...then he would try to rectify that. One problem at a time is my motto. ;) Yes, the Paladin could act, but not like you said. My Paladin would most probably get some more info of such a city, and when he has enough proof of all those evil things, he'd most likely would go and ask some higher authority to give the Paladin a permission to deal with that evil city. * * * By Thunder Dragonbane: I am sorry, I do not quite understand the question. It has been a long day and I can't seem to think straight. What I meant was that should we have a membership number to Board Order of Paladins like we have a membership number in Save the Core Paladin Foundation? See my 1st post to check the rules.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 02:16 PM	Something like that surely has consequence, and rarely they're only good. So in a case of a Paladin who just strikes down an evil government, he also knows that he causes chaos in that city, and at least I wouldn't allow such a Paladin to keep his powers. That's why a Paladin needs some higher authority to give him a reason/acceptance to strike down such a government. And that authority will deal with the problems, because they gave that permission to that Paladin. Sir Ferdinand, I completely agree. If a paladin followed my commandments, he would make sure that a more good and just government would take over right after he topeled the bad one. Then the people never have to suffer lawlessness and he has not done a choatic act!
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 02:16 PM	By Riggoras_44: I think a Paladin can atone for any crime, to the eyes of his order (now, if that crime involved the complete slaughtering of the order...). But regaining his credibility in society would require much more than that. Redemption is a thorny path... By the rules that's not possible, and I agree with that rule. From PHB page 176: Atonement A paladin who willingly and deliberately commits an evil act can never regain her paladinhood.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 02:17 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Erlan-Starr, remember that a paladin always has the right to defend himself, if the goblin attacks him, then he can defend himself. And I don't understand how a reference to Jesus about ONE of your points proves your corretness rather than mine. Of course, but if it is left to a paladin to decided what law is right or wrong (beyond the obvious, slaver is wrong, stoning for anything less then death is wrong) then he has too much power. As I said, a paladin is a person, not a dictator. Kevmann, of cours a paladin can defend himself, i never argued he couldn't. but unless all the foes you fought managed to get down to -10 HP, they would still technically be "alive". so by your code they would have to be dragged into town to have justice meeted out to them. (unless you propose its ok to put them out of their "misery" by giving them the coupe de grass after combat) and your last point about letting the paladin decide what law is right or wrong is the point of my illustration. Law is worthless unless it can be tempered by justice and mercy. the law we were discussing "stoning" for infidelity was not just a "law" that the town elders came it with..it was "THE LAW OF MOSES" basically Gods law. in those "commandments" it was specified exactly what the crimes was and what the punishment should be. there were no exceptions. however Jesus did point out the problem with a strict interpretation of the law without regard to the spirit behind it.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 02:22 PM	Kevmann, of cours a paladin can defend himself, i never argued he couldn't. but unless all the foes you fought managed to get down to -10 HP, they would still technically be "alive". so by your code they would have to be dragged into town to have justice meeted out to them. (unless you propose its ok to put them out of their "misery" by giving them the coupe de grass after combat) How long does it take to wrap a rope around said goblin or put on some manicles and saying "I will be back for you" then, when the quest is completed, taking them back to pay for their crime then, or getting the local authroities to help you bring them back. and your last point about letting the paladin decide what law is right or wrong is the point of my illustration. Law is worthless unless it can be tempered by justice and mercy. the law we were discussing "stoning" for infidelity was not just a "law" that the town elders came it with..it was "THE LAW OF MOSES" basically Gods law. in those "commandments" it was specified exactly what the crimes was and what the punishment should be. there were no exceptions. however Jesus did point out the problem with a strict interpretation of the law without regard to the spirit behind it. As I said in the first commandment, he does not have to follow a law that is of obvious evil or he has proof of its corruptness. That is exactly why I put in that second line of the commandment, because good must be tempered with law.
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 02:30 PM	By Kevmann: Sir Ferdinand, I completely agree. It's good to see that you agree with this, but I unfortunately can't say the same with most of your commendments. I mean I really think that your commendments are too strict for a Paladin. Those rules of yours could suit for an extreme example of a Paladin, but by reading PHB Paladin description, Paladin's code really isn't as strict. And I must say I'm more with Sir Neil and Erlan-Starr on that (Code) one.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 02:32 PM	That is of course fine, I belive that my commandments are probably too stricked for a core class anyway (unless it was a realy badass core class, which the paladin is not). But that is why it is a badass prc in my game :D
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 02:33 PM	Posted by Sir Ferdinand: And I must disagree with this. If your Paladin beats evil just because they're evil, the Paladin isn't any better. This confuses me? how can be bringing down an evil regime/leader not be justified? we are talking about mass murdereres/torturers and otherwise "not nice" guys right? how can bringing down such thing not be "good"? I added that Iraq part there with purpose. What happened in Iraq when the government was stroke down? Of course it was a releaf for most of the people, but it also caused all that chaos there. People started to rob stores, other people etc. Also only few public stations worked after that, and power plants, water delivery etc. didn't work at all. The whole country was nothing but chaos after that. Even now things don't work very well, although evil leader/government was struck down. look regardless of the looting and general sense of "lawlessness" there is no way that things are not better for the "average" Iraqi than before. come now....midnight raids by secret police, tens of thousands of people rounded up from various ethnic minorities killed and buried in mass graves. all this wouldnt be good enough reason to dispose of such a regime? Good lord man...by that theory even Stalin/Hitler would be immune to from a paladins wrath. even the worst day that the average Iraqi now faces is infinitly better than the best of the good days under Hussein. personally the single mistake we made with Iraq was that we didnt put that evil regime on the ashcan of history 13 yrs ago when we had a chance to do it the first time. be that as it may, the thought mass murder/torture would not be a good enough reason for the paladin to intervine leaves me frankly incredulous. but then again...thats just me ;)
Kevmann 06-20-03, 02:37 PM	look regardless of the looting and general sense of "lawlessness" there is no way that things are not better for the "average" Iraqi than before. come now.... That is right, but the paladins quest is not to choose the lesser of evils, it is to abolish evil alltogether. I belive that a paladin would have set up a good and just government to take over right after the bad one fell, that way there is no lesser of evils, it is abolished all together. And in the world of D&D, I belive lawlessness is alot worse back then then now. Especially since we had a "mock police" with the army in Iraq, the paladin is only one man, what happens to a countrey with abosulty no police?
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 02:42 PM	By Kevmann: That is of course fine, I belive that my commandments are probably too stricked for a core class anyway (unless it was a realy badass core class, which the paladin is not). But that is why it is a badass prc in my game :D That's exactly why IMO you shouldn't have make it such a big thing in this thread. This thread was meant for core Paladins, not Paladin variants as I said in my first post. So I hope we can end this discussion here, unless it has more to deal with core Paladins. How long does it take to wrap a rope around said goblin or put on some manicles and saying "I will be back for you" then, when the quest is completed, taking them back to pay for their crime then, or getting the local authroities to help you bring them back. But in Erlan-Starr's example I think he meant that those Goblins would still be bleeding, and therefore the Paladin should heal them so that they wouldn't bleed anymore. And that's way too much for a Paladin to handle. In our games, if my (or anyone else's) Paladin beats an enemy, he's not required to help the enemy to survive. So the Paladin really doesn't need to chain his enemies and bring them to justice. The enemies did justice by dying in a fair battle. However if the Paladin (or some other party member) would've wanted some information from the beaten enemy, then he could've get that enemy healed, and he could ask the questions. After that the Paladin is still not required to bring the enemy to justice, so we handle it by releasing that enemy without any gear. That's IMO a right way to deal with it. Of course it depends on the enemy, and I'm talking about some weaker enemies here. We haven't dealt with any real thread we would've let alive. (The highest level character I've ever had was a 7th level Paladin, so we haven't met very tough opponents yet.)
Kevmann 06-20-03, 02:47 PM	That's exactly why IMO you shouldn't have make it such a big thing in this thread. This thread was meant for core Paladins, not Paladin variants as I said in my first post. So I hope we can end this discussion here, unless it has more to deal with core Paladins. What I ment to say is that they are so strict that Wizards would ever make them the rules. But I still belive they should be any paladins, wether core or prc's, commandments. But in Erlan-Starr's example I think he meant that those Goblins would still be bleeding, and therefore the Paladin should heal them so that they wouldn't bleed anymore. And that's way too much for a Paladin to handle. Not realy, just put a few points into the healing skill (which is a class skill) and you have it, you can stabalize them all you want! A goblin is never inherently evil, he is a product of how he has been brought up by other goblins. Since they have taught him to be evil, he can turn away from that with anothers help, and be a beakon of good and a triumph of how even the most foul of creatures can be brought to the good side. THAT is the paladins goal more then abolishing evil, but to change that evil so that ther is more good. And the first step to becoming good is to pay for your sins (brought to justice), and then from there the way is open.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 02:49 PM	Posted by Kevmann: How long does it take to wrap a rope around said goblin or put on some manicles and saying "I will be back for you" then, when the quest is completed, taking them back to pay for their crime then, or getting the local authroities to help you bring them back. good question...how long would it take. consider there is no guarentee you will be successful in your quest. so now you have them bound and shackled with no way for them to fend for themselves and since your dead they die also...but most horribly by starvation and or dehydration. or consider an alternative: you bind and shackle them, as your example, and for one reason or another your delayed...when you come back to the spot you left them...they have died due to neglect or perhaps they were mauled by a wondering monster. so by the code you developed who is respnosible for their deaths? it would seem the paladin is responsible. so is he guilty of "murder"? how about "manslaughter"? if so, would the fact the he was following your commandment mitigate that fact? if so why? remember "killing" is "killing" regardless on how it happens and by your terms punishiable by death. so by having the paladin following your "commandment" he actually breaks it, thus a classic catch 22 scenario.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 02:54 PM	good question...how long would it take. consider there is no guarentee you will be successful in your quest. so now you have them bound and shackled with no way for them to fend for themselves and since your dead they die also...but most horribly by starvation and or dehydration. or consider an alternative: you bind and shackle them, as your example, and for one reason or another your delayed...when you come back to the spot you left them...they have died due to neglect or perhaps they were mauled by a wondering monster. so by the code you developed who is respnosible for their deaths? it would seem the paladin is responsible. Good point, then your right, perhaps the paladin would have to bring the captured people to a safe place, and then if he is away for mor then a day or two, and has still not completed his quest, must either let them go or bring them to a court before going off again. I never said being a paladin is easy. Why murder them if they have never murdered?
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 03:00 PM	By Erlan-Starr: This confuses me? how can be bringing down an evil regime/leader not be justified? we are talking about mass murdereres/torturers and otherwise "not nice" guys right? how can bringing down such thing not be "good"? I'm not sure if I understood your previous post correct when I made mine, but what I tried to say is that it is of course justified to bring down such a leader. Of course. But the Paladin must have proof that the leader does more harm than good to the people (even the worst cities have some good thanks to their leaders), and the Paladin must be able to fix what he'll break. So in the case of an evil government, the Paladin must be able to take responsibility of what he does. If he just kills an evil leader which itself is a good act, and the city's economy crumbles down because of that act, it's not only a good act. So every act affects some other thing (be it good or evil), and the Paladin must be able to balance those things. (Sorry, but I can't explain it better with my English skills, so I hope this helped even a bit.) look regardless of the looting and general sense of "lawlessness" there is no way that things are not better for the "average" Iraqi than before. But remember that in the case of Iraq, it was not just one person who defeated the Iraqi government, and it was not just a hastily act to bring it down, although Iraqi government was indeed evil. And you must remember that USA does have helped Iraq after the war ended, and that's why it's getting better there. What would have happened if USA would've just left? The country would eventually die, because it wouldn't have leader of any kind, nor anyone to take care of everyday's acts. So it's different from our Paladin example.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 03:02 PM	:bow: Sir Ferdinand, I of course, agree whole heartedly :bow:
ShadeGirl 06-20-03, 03:06 PM	It is definatley best we do not bring the Iraq war and reasons for that war into this thread. I strongly suggest that it is no longer mentioned.
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 03:09 PM	By Kevmann: Not realy, just put a few points into the healing skill (which is a class skill) and you have it, you can stabalize them all you want! And if he doesn't have ranks in a Heal skill? Of course he could try to succeed in DC 15 without ranks in Heal, but that way you could save only a few enemies, and that wouldn't be fair to the other enemies, now would it? Paladin's policy shouldn't be that others survive, other don't, tough luck. A goblin is never inherently evil, he is a product of how he has been brought up by other goblins. Since they have taught him to be evil, he can turn away from that with anothers help, and be a beakon of good and a triumph of how even the most foul of creatures can be brought to the good side. The same could be said about every creature of the whole Faerűn. And you make it sound way too easy. You can't just say that "Now you're good." it doesn't work like that. The Paladin should take a path where only those evil creatures who really regret, should be given a chance. Why bother to try to convert 100 evil creatures to good, when only some of them (at max) will turn. Why shouldn't the Paladin choose those who really want to turn good, and that way he'd be more sure that he'll succeed in his task? THAT is the paladins goal more then abolishing evil, but to change that evil so that ther is more good. And the first step to becoming good is to pay for your sins (brought to justice), and then from there the way is open. It really depends of the Paladin. Some Paladins are there to destroy evil, some are to help people, some are to do both.
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 03:12 PM	By ShadeGirl: It is definatley best we do not bring the Iraq war and reasons for that war into this thread. I strongly suggest that it is no longer mentioned. Of course these boards are not for real life politics, but it gave us (at least for me) a good example of what Paladins could and could not do. But if it bothers you so much, I can leave it to that. :)
Kevmann 06-20-03, 03:15 PM	And if he doesn't have ranks in a Heal skill? Oh come on, why wouldn't a paladin take ranks in heal? Especialy for the reason above. The same could be said about every creature of the whole Faerűn. Your right, I never discounted that. You can't just say that "Now you're good." it doesn't work like that. Your right again, but everyone should be given a chance (except infalliable evil, which can never be good). The Paladin should take a path where only those evil creatures who really regret If the kobold or goblin was brought up that way, how could he know any better, and how could they regret them? Why bother to try to convert 100 evil creatures to good, when only some of them (at max) will turn. Because those evil shall fall, and even a few going to good is worth it all, because not only have you saved some souls, but you have won one more victory for good. It really depends of the Paladin. Some Paladins are there to destroy evil, some are to help people, some are to do both. I think that every paladin should try and help people, and that every paladin should try and win vicotries for good. And one of the greatest vicotries is converting evil to good, because it takes one from the enemy and adds one to those who are good.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 03:25 PM	Sir Ferdinand: It is me who must give appologies! Sometimes i forget that your native language is infact not English, your arguments tend to be very sound and logical, so if there was a misunderstanding it was infact mine. (God knows you english skills far surpass my finnish ones, as a matter of fact i do not even know how to say hello in finnish...sigh) well...on with the debate...and again...my fault in the misunderstanding! :)
Grizpapa 06-20-03, 03:46 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand I think I'll take the first 20 people (at least 20) and see how many actually are still here. I haven't seen some for a while, so it wouldn't be a good idea to choose those are have left. Here's the first 20 members: Sir Ferdinand Blackcourt79 Sir Neil Thunder Dragonbane Paladin Charger THRASHER Despaxas Grizpapa Adahn Tzor GreenKnight Haradim AvatarLightbringer Doktor Cornelius Slavick3000 Ol' Vengeful SapphireKnight Master Of Combat The Deceiver Tynian So those who still are on these boards, could leave their name here, so that we could choose those 12 peers. [/B] I'm still here. Ever vigilant. I'm still in learning these new boards.
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 03:47 PM	By Kevmann: Oh come on, why wouldn't a paladin take ranks in heal? Especialy for the reason above. So are you saying that all Paladins must take Heal as one of their skills? What would those Paladins without Heal skill do? Would they lose their powers then? Your right again, but everyone should be given a chance (except infalliable evil, which can never be good). I don't think everyone should be given a chance. Those most evil creatures and those evil creatures who have murdered people for fun or done sothing as bad, shouldn't be allowed to be good. Otherwise soon it wouldn't matter how evil deeds evil creatures have done, because "he has a change to become good". That would disgrace the whole Goodness... If the kobold or goblin was brought up that way, how could he know any better, and how could they regret them? ...What I tried to say is that if the evil creature, say a Goblin, has done some evil deeds, but nothing too serious, and if that specific Goblin regrets what he's done, he should be given a chance to be change his ways... Because those evil shall fall, and even a few going to good is worth it all, because not only have you saved some souls, but you have won one more victory for good. ...But as I said, it'd be better to choose those who really want to change their ways. I think that every paladin should try and help people, and that every paladin should try and win vicotries for good. And one of the greatest vicotries is converting evil to good, because it takes one from the enemy and adds one to those who are good. Of course every Paladin should try and help others, but for some Paladins killing evil is more important than helping other. And for some helping others is more than killing evil. * * * By Erlan-Starr: It is me who must give appologies! Sometimes i forget that your native language is infact not English, your arguments tend to be very sound and logical, so if there was a misunderstanding it was infact mine. No problem here :) (God knows you english skills far surpass my finnish ones, as a matter of fact i do not even know how to say hello in finnish...sigh) Hello is "terve". :) well...on with the debate...and again...my fault in the misunderstanding![/quote]
Sir Ferdinand 06-20-03, 03:49 PM	Grizpapa, it's good to see you. But now I don't even know if we're going to use any new membership thing. But we still have that Save the Core Paladin Foundation here on these new boards as well, and you can use those numbers if you wish.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 05:29 PM	I am sorry Sir Ferdinand, but we just have moral differences. Looking at every single one of your rebutles, I found myself going against every single one of them. I do not think that we can find a middle ground, because when it comes to morality, there is no middle ground. I like discussing these points with you, but I think we have reached an empass. If I went through every one of your rebuttles, I would have some sort of moral counter, and the only way you would be able to rebuttle that is to actualy repeat your previous points, and then I would. So I think we should stop now, what do you think :), should we call a truce and just agree to disagree?
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 06:45 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann I am sorry Sir Ferdinand, but we just have moral differences. Looking at every single one of your rebutles, I found myself going against every single one of them. I do not think that we can find a middle ground, because when it comes to morality, there is no middle ground. I like discussing these points with you, but I think we have reached an empass. If I went through every one of your rebuttles, I would have some sort of moral counter, and the only way you would be able to rebuttle that is to actualy repeat your previous points, and then I would. So I think we should stop now, what do you think :), should we call a truce and just agree to disagree? Kevmann, i hope that doesnt apply to my also...after all...i thought we were making "progress"...after all you did say... Good point, then your right, perhaps the paladin would have to bring the captured people to a safe place, and then if he is away for mor then a day or two, and has still not completed his quest, must either let them go or bring them to a court before going off again. I never said being a paladin is easy. Why murder them if they have never murdered? I have "faith" that I may yet get you to the point of seeing my point...lol ;)
Kevmann 06-20-03, 06:49 PM	Well, I realy don't want to stop discussing my commandments with Ferdinand either, but I realized that we just started arguing moral differences. Like I belive that all evil should get a change, and he does not, that is not something we can discuss, it is just our belifs. I do not want to stop discussing with either of you, its just on some points we can not argue because it is our fundamental belifs on what good and lawfullness is.
ShadeGirl 06-20-03, 06:51 PM	Of course these boards are not for real life politics, but it gave us (at least for me) a good example of what Paladins could and could not do. But if it bothers you so much, I can leave it to that. You have my thanks. :)
Kevmann 06-20-03, 06:54 PM	So, I will continue or discussion Sir Firdinand So are you saying that all Paladins must take Heal as one of their skills? What would those Paladins without Heal skill do? Would they lose their powers then? Or just take the -4 penalty to hit with subdual damage (or get a merciful weapon, which I think all paladins should have, but that is just me). I don't think everyone should be given a chance. Those most evil creatures and those evil creatures who have murdered people for fun or done sothing as bad, shouldn't be allowed to be good. Otherwise soon it wouldn't matter how evil deeds evil creatures have done, because "he has a change to become good". That would disgrace the whole Goodness... Everyone should get a change, whether they take it or not. If this is just something we shall have to agree to disagree on, so be it. ...What I tried to say is that if the evil creature, say a Goblin, has done some evil deeds, but nothing too serious, and if that specific Goblin regrets what he's done, he should be given a chance to be change his ways... Well great, all the better, I still think that all evil should be given a change (if possible). Of course every Paladin should try and help others, but for some Paladins killing evil is more important than helping other. And for some helping others is more than killing evil. Of course, some paladins focus on different commandments as more important, the commandments are just a foundation for actions. But a paladin should also make sure that they give a little time for each of the commandments. I have "faith" that I may yet get you to the point of seeing my point...lol Then by all means, lets continue :)
Tzalice Minoladir 06-20-03, 07:04 PM	Hey, I've been lurking on this board for a few days. It got pretty massive so I was in soothe rather afraid to read it, but I finally did Anyway, the Commandments are a decent starting place but different orders espouse different causes. You have your paladins of Pelor who are all "undead grr, let's help people" and then you have your pallies of St. Cuthbert who rather espouse defending right and law. Then temper in your pallies of Yondalla and their codes, Heironeus and his more chivalric version of it all, Morradin has his little party for pallys and Corellon--best to just leave him alone. And that's just in Greyhawk. It gets even worse in the FRCS. Someone earlier mentioned that Faerunian dieties had their own personalities and that is why their paladins had more freedom, but why do the Greyhawk dieties not have their own personalities? They have a book on the dieties just like FR, it only takes a little roleplay and outside thought to develop such. A paladin of St. Cuthbert and a paladin of Yondalla are both LG, but the codes for the respective dieties will differ wildly as the churches themselves naturally would. A player should develop their own code for their paladin (I started on mine for my little Aeridyn a few nights ago, it's at 6 pages and I'm nowhere near done, but then again, it's the St. Cuthbertian church, so they'd be like that. Plus my job is really boring and they don't pay attention to me ^.^) It was mentioned on another board (possibly one of the mature boards. I forget). and it really made sense. A. You're going to know the boundaries of your character allowing you to roleplay better B. It gives you an incredible understanding of both the church of your paladin as well as allowing you to see what they have experienced and been indoctrinated with. C. If a dispute ever should arise, you have your code right there in front of you D. Imagine the fun when your paladin can quote pages upon pages upon pages and a line of "the big book o' paladin law" :bounce: Anyway, oh, I guess I'll join onto the thread. Hihi and (was it) "Terve" ^.^ and hey, what's wrong with "lawyer knights" :( (what else would they do in a temple of St. Cuthbert? ^.^) Anyway, oh, I guess I'll join onto the thread. Hihi and (was it) "Terve" ^.^
AvonRekaes 06-20-03, 07:09 PM	Hmm... Well this debate has been raging for a few pages already, and me putting my two cents in might just stir things up again... So instead, I shall relate the story of my paladin, Avon Rekaes ^_^ I'll start at the begining. (Warning, it's quite long ^_^;;) Avon is actually from Krynn, an orphen who grew up in a church of Paladine after the War of the Lance but before the Chaos War. He helped around the temple, learning to cook from the chef and even participated at mass as an altar boy. He did not hear the call to paladinhood until he was 15. One day, his church was approached by draconians (I assume everyone knows what they are, but for those who don't, imagine humanoid dragons). The head cleric of the church went out to meet them, and was stabbed for his attempt at diplomacy. Avon ran out toward the draconians, with no prior battle experience, and interposed himself between the cleric and the draconian that stabbed him. He held his ground, inherently believing that the rest of the clerics were brave enough to run out behind him and get the head cleric to saftey and to bar the doors. He didn't even think this consciously, he just assumed that all present were as brave as he was. Unfortunately they were not, and stayed behind weeping in horror. Avon resigned himself to his fate, ready to set his soul on its journey to meet the Platinum Dragon. As he saw the blade come sailing toward him, the strangest of things happened. Somehow his hands were holding the sword at bay, inches above his head. He doesn't remember much of what happened after that. In fact he blacked out. In truth, Paladine bestowed upon him great power that day, enough power to defend the church from all the draconians present, and to heal the head cleric from his wounds. Avon woke two days later, unsure of what happened, yet knowing exactly. Some of Paladine's power stayed behind, a lasting gift. Years later, Avon was a tall man, more beautiful than handsome, and had become a great defender. He continued his duties as a cook and still helped with mass, but the rest of his time was spend honing his martial prowess. Life continued as normal, until one evening. During his dreams, he was visited by a vision, a warrior donned in glowing full plate, holding a dragonwinded helmet in the crook of his arm. His face was old, yet strong, and also comforting. He told Avon that he was needed elsewhere and to not worry about the church while he was away. Avon awoke in a grassy field, the sun high in the sky. He sat up and immediately noticed that he was in his armor. Had he slept in it? Surely not, he felt completely rested as if he slept on a bed of feathers. A quick survey around revealed that his sword, an unremarkable steel bastard sword that was the first weapon he ever weilded, was at his side like a faithful friend. Avon is still journeying and does not know when he will reach home. His faith guides him, sometimes more specifically than others. He is currently in a land called "Fay-Rune" and searching for a lost kangonesti elf to return to Krynn.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 07:11 PM	Anyway, the Commandments are a decent starting place but different orders espouse different causes. You have your paladins of Pelor who are all "undead grr, let's help people" and then you have your pallies of St. Cuthbert who rather espouse defending right and law. Then temper in your pallies of Yondalla and their codes, Heironeus and his more chivalric version of it all, Morradin has his little party for pallys and Corellon--best to just leave him alone. And that's just in Greyhawk. Yes, I agree, I have always said my commandments are just a foundation. It gets even worse in the FRCS. Someone earlier mentioned that Faerunian dieties had their own personalities and that is why their paladins had more freedom, but why do the Greyhawk dieties not have their own personalities? They have a book on the dieties just like FR, it only takes a little roleplay and outside thought to develop such. Because, greyhawk is a passive god world. The gods don't realy do anything, they are just there. FRC is a active god world, the gods constantly do things, have their own plots, and therefore must have varied and different personalities. A player should develop their own code for their paladin Of course they can, but unfortuanntly I am under the belief that there should be a base universal code that spreads accross all paladins.
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 07:12 PM	So Kevmann, since you agree that perhaps "some" of your commandment are too strict, is it fair to say that as a whole you should modify them to make them less restrictive? again, one of the problems you will have when you have a set of "commandments" that all must follow is that their very simplicity is actually their downfall. the devil as they say is in the details.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 07:13 PM	Erlan-Starr, I promise you I will look through my commandments and see if I can make them simpler and try to make them less restrictive, but I promise nothing! But I will do that later, right now I am cleaning house :)
Erlan-Starr 06-20-03, 07:17 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Erlan-Starr, I promise you I will look through my commandments and see if I can make them simpler and try to make them less restrictive, but I promise nothing! But I will do that later, right now I am cleaning house :) just remember...what ever commandments you come up with...think them out logically, if you force everyone to do things a certain way every time, you are infact destroying the fun of "role" playing. and soon their characters and the players simply become "roll" players.
Tzalice Minoladir 06-20-03, 07:32 PM	naturally there are some parts that should be universal such as reverence for life or respect of legitimate authority, that sort of thing, but different paths will no doubt have certain nuances that differ because of simply the differences in priority of the respective dieties. I know what I'm trying to say and I'm hoping it's coming across. The paladin is a paladin of his (her) faith and different faiths have different beliefs. It's like the Batman and Superman are both LG thought, or using Jesus as an example. Sure, it's reasonable to compare Jesus to a Paladin, but he's more a paladin of Yondalla or Pelor. Superman's maybe a little more Cuthbertian. Batman... bah, I botch my knowledge religion check for a moment. Look at King Arthur's round table. Different knights espoused different virtues (ignoring obvious flaws :D) A church that favors law is going to have different paladins than one that espouses freedom and that will still have different ones from a church that promotes healing or is against mainly infernal/abyssal creatures, or one that despises undead. The code is essentially the same, but there are variations, some of which, being of vital importance in one faith may be minimal in a different church. Even those that universally are opposed may be opposed for varying reasons and a paladin should always know WHY something is a violation of her/his code. Corellon and Moradin (sp) would have vastly different stances on the treatment of nature. Pallies of Kelmevor (sp) would view the life and undeath differently than a pally of Pelor. A paladin's code will have similar points, but just as LG is not one specific set of codes universally, neither would the Paladinic code. LG is essentially the same, but one LG character is not the equivalent of another LG character. Two LG characters can both act within their alignment differently to the same situation just as two paladins could within their code. The CoC should be universal within one church, yes, but among all churches, it would be impossible ^.^ and Greyhawk can be an active divinity world too ^.^ but that's another mongoose to chase altogether.
Kevmann 06-20-03, 10:37 PM	Ok, here it is, I have tried to re-define my commandments into virtues. I tried to think of what virtues make a paladin a paladin and add them in. Unfortunantly my virtues are much more confusing then my commandments, well, here they are: The seven virtues of the paladin Good: The paladin must never to an evil act, even in hope of doing good. The paladin must always do what is morally good and right. He may never associate or deal with those of evil, and he may never stop his quest against evil and to do good in the world. To fail in these things would allow evil to spread to the ruin of all. Law: The paladin must always obey legitimate law, even against the paladins interests. The paladin may never follow a corrupt or evil law. The paladin must never do a chaotic or lawless act, even in the hope of spreading law. The paladin must vow to end all oppressive and evil governments and to change all laws who are corrupt or evil. The paladin must always bring corrupt officials and persons of power to justice. The paladin must insure that all peoples have a fair and just government to follow. The paladin must vow to bring all who break the law to justice. The paladin must make sure that he nor any governing body gives punishment that is worse then the crime. The paladin must always insure that those who are brought to justice get a fair and balanced trial, and at the least, enemies are allowed a duel so the gods may decide the outcome. The paladin must respect titles of power, such as lords and kings. To fail this is to spread chaos to the ruin of all. Honor: The paladin must always go with honor. The paladin may never use poison or similar forms of guile to kill or incapacitate an enemy. Those who the paladin faces must always be aware of the paladin before the paladin strikes, and the paladin may only attack those who are capable of defending themselves. The paladin must not lie or mislead others, and the paladin must always respect and be cordial to members of the opposite sex. To disobey these things is to lose respect and face in the eyes of your god and the world. Compassion: The paladin must always temper law and justice with mercy and compassion. The paladin must vow to always protect the weak, the poor, the innocent, the helpless, and those who can not defend themselves. The paladin must help others who need his help, and help lead others, even those of evil, to see the light of good. Always have mercy upon your enemies and spare them whenever they yield. Do not end another’s life if there is a way around it, and never harm another unless there is a way around it. The paladin must always heal those who deserve it and help ease others who are dieing. Never inflict unneeded pain or suffering upon any person. To fail in these things is to bring pain to the world and end the paladin’s glorious mission. Wisdom: The paladin must always use wisdom in his doings. The paladin must see situations from all angles, and must look to the future to try and see all ends of his actions. Always be sure of evil, and only act when you have proof of their corruption. And the paladin must always remember that the end does not justify the means, evil begets evil, and chaos begets chaos, even the wise can not see all ends. Combat: The paladin must be able and willing in combat. He must never fight an enemy that is beyond him, and must always make sure that he is capable of completely ending that evils influence. The paladin must always be ready for combat, and make sure his armor and weapons are always well oiled and able to be effective. The paladin has the right to defend his persons and fight back in self-defense. To fail this is to allow our enemies to overrun us to the ruin of all. Religion: The paladin must always believe in his god and follow his dogma. In times of doubt, the paladin must always remember his religious teachings. Respect and defend the clergy, and respect others beliefs and the clergy of their gods. Unity: But this is not enough, the paladin must learn to use all of these points in conjunction and equity, to temper all of the virtues in equal parts to form that which makes a paladin. To fail in this lesson is to slip from the glory of the paladin to the ruin of your soul.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-20-03, 10:53 PM	[i]Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand What I meant was that should we have a membership number to Board Order of Paladins like we have a membership number in Save the Core Paladin Foundation? See my 1st post to check the rules. [/B] ________________________________ I think that it would be a good idea.
Tzalice Minoladir 06-21-03, 12:18 AM	WTG Kevmann. The new codes are loads better. It's open enough to allow for variation but still expresses the basic intent. Hmm.. numbers could be fun, and then I'd be less than member 112 ^.^
Kevmann 06-21-03, 12:33 AM	they allow for variation, but not that much. Because all of the basic components of the origional commandments, they are just organized differently.
JosephKell 06-21-03, 01:50 AM	First off, Jaywalking is only against the law because it results in a safer environment for everyone. Example: -Joe jaywalks and a VW Bug swerves to avoid him, slamming into a bus, which drives into a fire hydrant. That sucks. But there aren't cars in D&D, so I don't think there are Jaywalking laws either. I think the only thing a Paladin has to follow is a Moral Code: --Ends do not justify the means. The means justify the end. --If any part of the Paladin says an act is wrong, the Paladin can not do it. (Looting an Evil dragon while he is out for my own gain?! Never, looting an Evil dragon to fund a food program to feed the poor... okay, but we won't take all of the dragon's stuff) (Also Looting the dead is beneath a Paladin, the next Paladin I see pulling the armor, and jewelery from a corpse gets a dice bag upside the head!)
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 02:27 AM	Originally posted by JosephKell First off, Jaywalking is only against the law because it results in a safer environment for everyone. Example: -Joe jaywalks and a VW Bug swerves to avoid him, slamming into a bus, which drives into a fire hydrant. That sucks. But there aren't cars in D&D, so I don't think there are Jaywalking laws either. I think the only thing a Paladin has to follow is a Moral Code: --Ends do not justify the means. The means justify the end. --If any part of the Paladin says an act is wrong, the Paladin can not do it. (Looting an Evil dragon while he is out for my own gain?! Never, looting an Evil dragon to fund a food program to feed the poor... okay, but we won't take all of the dragon's stuff) (Also Looting the dead is beneath a Paladin, the next Paladin I see pulling the armor, and jewelery from a corpse gets a dice bag upside the head!) Stealing from a Evil Dragons Hoard? I think its safe to say the "evil" dragon didnt get his "hoard" by working a 9-5 job. i think it would infact be safe to say that he got it the "old" fashioned way...namely he stole if from misc. dwarves and other kindly beings. for the sake of argument...what would happen if by chance a paladin came upon an unattended evil dragon hoard? and he chanced about a sword of "evil" dragon slaying. is it your contention that the paladin would not or should not use the very weapon that the dragon was guarding against him? i would put to you...that would be very, very foolish, and considering the paladins high wisdom score, out of character. again the hoard doesnt even "belong" to the dragon...he stole it, recovering stolen property and att to return it to the "rightful" owners would be the correct course of action. if the paladin used the sword against the wyrm and slew him he could then disperse the wealth to the proper owners (although normally hoards tend to be very very old and the original owners of the items/wealth have long since perished...but i digress) as far as "looting" the dead being beneath him? what difference does it make if the BBEG is wearing his +3 plate armor or if infact he has it tucked away in his armory? your still "looting" from the dead. it would seem that by right of arms the paladin smote his enemy and is entitled to augment his arms/armor by his victory. otherwise by this logic...the only items the paladin could ever use would be items he bought, which would all but force him to becoming a Gnome of Zurich...counting every copper piece so he can buy that magical sword/armor in the smithies window.
JosephKell 06-21-03, 03:10 AM	I meant looting the body... and even looting and pillaging is beneath a paladin... that is what rogues, fighters, wizards, nobles, and rangers... Paladins are still above it! :D And I remember in 2nd Ed that paladins were practically obligated to donate whatever they didn't need to others in need!
Sir Ferdinand 06-21-03, 09:41 AM	By Kevmann: Or just take the -4 penalty to hit with subdual damage (or get a merciful weapon, which I think all paladins should have, but that is just me). That subdual damage isn't a very wise thing to do. It just makes beating evil harder and that's not what Paladins should do. And you can't expect all Paladins to have "a merciful" weapon, especially not low level Paladins. So again, it's better to let the evil creature die if it doesn't have a purpose for helping good (for example if the party requires some info from that creature). Everyone should get a change, whether they take it or not. If this is just something we shall have to agree to disagree on, so be it. This is indeed something we can't agree with, so let us leave it to that. * * * By Tzalice Minoladir: Anyway, oh, I guess I'll join onto the thread. Hihi and (was it) "Terve" ^.^ Terve, yep yep. * * * AvonRekaes, that was a great story. And I know something about Dragonlance (I've read at least 10 DL books). * * * By Kevmann: Because, greyhawk is a passive god world. The gods don't realy do anything, they are just there. FRC is a active god world, the gods constantly do things, have their own plots, and therefore must have varied and different personalities. But it doesn't have to be that way. It's up to DM to decide how their world will work. And I don't think it says anywhere that in FR deities must take part in what's going on in the world. Of course they can, but unfortuanntly I am under the belief that there should be a base universal code that spreads accross all paladins. But there is a universal code for all Paladins. It can be found in PHB. Why couldn't you use it as a base code, although that's exactly what it is? * * * By Thunder Dragonbane and Tzalice Minoladir: I think that it would be a good idea. Hmm.. numbers could be fun, and then I'd be less than member 112 ^.^ OK, but do you have any suggestions how we're going to do it. Just the same way as in StCPF? It'd suit me just fine, but if you have any other system, I'd like to hear it.
Tenerus 06-21-03, 10:10 AM	There are many possible codes of conduct for a Paladin, it depends on the DM and the character in question. The "Old Code" from Dragonheart is great for a paladin. (No, sir Bowen was NOT a paladin) Many of the Words of King Arthur (might upholds the weak, ect.) The religious code of deities of the campaign (Torm in the FR for example, he even has paladins in his portfolio) Whatever code they follow, paladins are not content just to know that somthing is an ideal, but they feel a need to actually live up to that ideal and make it a reality. The concept of the Paladin is supposed to represent what is best in people, and paladins are supposed to be proof that it can be a reality, rather than just a dream. The following is a repost of what I listed on a "lawful characters suck" thread. Not word for word, but close enough. Lawful Good does not mean stupid. None of what a paladin believes in should be taken to a ridiculous extreme. Those orcs charging with axes out screaming "Kill the humans! are obviously threatening. There is no need to wait until they go first. That dark elf assasin on whom you have found 10 vials of poison, a holy symbol of Lolth, and a note saying "Bring sacrifices for the Matron Mother" does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. He just deserves a swift death in order to prevent him from making more innocents suffer. If by chance, you find the back door into a villian's lair, by all means use it. There is no need to always announce yourself. There is no requirement stating that honor demends you usethe front door and battle through all the minions first. Evil orginizations are easier to deal with when headless. Likewise, those angry, poorly armed peasants should be parleyed with. Do not just go in hacking. That street urchin who steals in order to be able to even eat, does deserve a second chance, rather than losing a hand. When honorable combat is called for, by all means stay honorable till the end. Don't boot in the door to the suspicious looking hut, as it may only contain a woodcutter. Lead by example, not be brow-beating. I can't stand it when a character with a 17 charisma is played in such a manner that everyone hates him. While Sir Percy from the Nodwick strips was amusing, any paladin played this way should find himself in deep trouble. Yes, Lawful Stupid is an alignment violation.
Sir Ferdinand 06-21-03, 10:11 AM	(Bold added by me.) By Kevmann: The seven virtues of the paladin Good: The paladin must never to an evil act, even in hope of doing good. Otherwise good, but I have to somewhat disagree with this. If the Paladin must choose to do an evil act to do greater good (and I mean something big), then the Paladin can do so. The Paladin also know that he'll lose his powers, but if that act really help to do some great good, then the Paladin could accept that. I'm not saying that the Paladin must do so, but he can do so. How to get his powers back? Either he can't, or the deity (read DM) could be generous enough to give the powers back through some epic quest or something similar. Law: The paladin must always obey legitimate law, even against the paladins interests. The paladin must never do a chaotic or lawless act, even in the hope of spreading law. No. The Paladin always follows his Code which determines what he can do and cannot do. And the same thing can be said about that non-lawful act to do a more lawful act as what I told about evil act to do good act. However to get his powers back (or to not even lose his powers) is much easier. The paladin must vow to end all oppressive and evil governments and to change all laws who are corrupt or evil. I already explained that Paladins are not required to do so, and if they do they need proof, authority etc. and at the least, enemies are allowed a duel so the gods may decide the outcome. If the quilty has been in a battle and that's why he's been brought to justice, then he shouldn't be allowed a duel to show which is the right punishment. The guilty has already been in a battle and has done wrong, so it's enough and again the death in such a battle is enough. But I'll leave it to that. Honor: Those who the paladin faces must always be aware of the paladin before the paladin strikes, and the paladin may only attack those who are capable of defending themselves. This is again a question of opinion, so I'll leave it to that. The paladin must not lie or mislead others As I showed before, the Paladin can use tactics in a battle, and if the best result will be get through a first attack, then it should be allowed even for Paladins. Otherwise you couldn't play as a Rogue/Paladin which is possible and in FRCS you're even allowed to multiclass with Rogue freely (with some deity [or deities?]). So this can't be as you said. Compassion: The paladin must help others who need his help, and help lead others, even those of evil, to see the light of good. About the evil...again opinion. Always have mercy upon your enemies and spare them whenever they yield. Do not end another’s life if there is a way around it, and never harm another unless there is a way around it. I'd allow many exceptions here. If the enemy falls in a fait battle, then the enemy falls. In self-defense the Paladin has full rights to kill anyone without a need to give mercy. So it's up to the Paladin to decide if he wants to spare the enemy's life or not. The paladin must always heal those who deserve it and help ease others who are dieing. But what the Paladin is to say who deserves to be healed and who're not? I thought that you said that all creatures are equal in the eyes of Paladins. Wisdom: Seems to be about right. Combat: The paladin must be able and willing in combat. No. Paladins are not required to be good in combat. However if the Paladin is good in combat, then he's required to be able and willing in it. He must never fight an enemy that is beyond him, and must always make sure that he is capable of completely ending that evils influence. But even the Paladins must have some experience of the enemies before he knows what is beyond his abilities. So you can't expect all Paladins to have a knowledge of all the enemies. That would be bad metagaming. Besides Defenders of the Faith explains what the Paladin can do in situations when he has encountered a too powerful enemy. The paladin must always be ready for combat, and make sure his armor and weapons are always well oiled and able to be effective. As I said before, only those Paladins which are able in combat should take care of his combat abilities. Religion: The paladin must always believe in his god and follow his dogma. If he has a god. Only in FRCS the Paladin must have a deity. Unity: Seems to be fine. * * * So again, you did way too strict and not universal code for some type pf Paladins. But it got little better from the previous version.
Tzalice Minoladir 06-21-03, 10:18 AM	okay. I'm tackling 1400 different topics and I'm not a big fan of quoting people, so :) the code I'm happy that this board is actually discussing it. Even if the eventual decision DOES rest with the PC and his/her DM, it's really good to debate and this is actually a lot more mature than some of the threads I've seen dealing with the same situation. The commandments were definitely a good starting place but perhaps a bit too rigid and the virtues are a big step. I didn't really see problems with them. I know I've been writing my little Aeri's code recently (8 pages and I'm not done yet ^.^) and it covers or will cover: authority, alcohol, privacy, drugs, st. cuthbert, Iuz, law, slavery, other classes, double jeopardy, property, murder, relationships, the opposite sex, equipment, magic items, cannibalism (hey, it had to come up and I looked to the BoVD for ideas), justice, outsiders, other races, tyranny, regimes, anarchy, vile gods, injury, justification, alternative action, thievery, contracts, duty as a judge, sacrifice, wealth, weapon choice, repentence, relation to the church, healing, charity, animals/nature, duty in the community, family, hierarchy of the church, other jobs, other callings, mounts, cohorts and armies, strategy, colleagues, rituals, those of other faiths, diet, prayer, one's word, holy days, honorable combat, magical beasts, priority, violence, intuition, other cultures, war, errant knighthood,the call, valour, overpowering circumstances, virtues, undead, liegedom, dedication, virtues, responding to the call, blackguards, necromancy, disease, knowledge, other planes, judicial process, casting lots, contact with one's Lord, deciet, divination and illusion, innocents, proselytization, training new paladins, sanctity of life, slippery slope, garb, mind influencing effects, bribery and corruption, followers... that's it for right now...wow I have too much free time. :bounce: but it's a good starting place, right? Its not always black and white in GREYhawk, but Paladins are made to see the black and the white, so it can sometimes be rather fortuitous to have in x situation I should do y. Maybe I overanalyse a little bit though.... Nah :angel: as far as making this a foundation We could renumber, but I mean, there's no real pressure or really anything like that. If we really wanted to I suppose we could just go by who posted when. If anyone wants to. or we could just stay with StCPF numbers, but I don't know how many people didn't transfer over and what if new people want to join. I mean, I guess this isn't a foundation, but yeah, anyhow. Look at the monkey subdual weapons a first level character can have subdual weapons. There are saps and whips and they're relatively cheap. Sure paladins may not be PROFICIENT with a whip, but what's a -4, right? *tries to convince herself* It's better than a wizard who's not proficient using one :razz: I know she needed it to subdue a controlled party member at one time. Ended up having to kill him, but *shrug* that's another gerbil with another toothbrush as for looting... There are times when its appropriate and times when it's not. If the treasure obviously doesn't belong to someone then a paladin is justified in taking it. However, then if the rogue is like "Oh, that's mine" and makes his bluff check, by all means then. Definitely if the paladin is reaping benefits from adventuring, some part should go to the church or charity, but they can take some. This shouldn't get in the way of their adventuring though. For instance, I don't think a paladin would embark on a journey simply because fred npc is paying mucho gp, but after slaying a white dragon, a paladin can clean out the hoarde. Someone else is just going to take this unattended cave of treasure otherwise. Right? As to looting the dead. Leave that for the rogues to do when you're in the other room. :angel: In truth though, it depends on the looting circumstances. also remember that DnD is a medievalesque rpg. The spoils of war are a benefit of winning it in the medieval (and to a degree modern) mindset. Also, while looting a corpse is rather disrespectful, if the paladin believes some item he or she needs is on that corpse, they would be justified. For instance. BBEG steals an item from the church and pcs ceremoniously slay BBEG. Now they can't find the item in the lair, but there's a chalice shaped bulge in the BBEG's pocket (all jokes aside..). A paladin could rightly take the chalice fromt he BBEG (and if he HAPPENED to find a nice swords while he was AT IT...) Think that's all. ^.^ It's now 10 am.
Sir Ferdinand 06-21-03, 10:24 AM	Tenerus, I fully agree with those examples of yours. * * * And now I'd like to say my thoughts about looting defeated enemies or a dragon cave. If the Paladin or the rest of the group has defeated enemies in a fair battle (not for example by looting a camp when enemies are sleeping), then the Paladin has full rights to take his portion of the defeated enemies. How else could the Paladin ever buy all his gear to fight evil, or to give money to church? It doesn't work in a normal job where you earn 10 GP per week. And about looting a dragon cave. First the Paladin must make sure that it's evil dragon's cave. Then the party could take as much treasure as possible, and the Paladin could IMO take a reasonable amount of threasure. For example previously mentioned dragon slaying sword, some shining armor and helmet, and a pocketful (sp?) of jewelry. But at least I wouldn't allow Paladins to take a Bag of Holding and fill it full of money etc. But even the Paladin could take much more jewelry if he'd share it away to poor people and such.
Sir Ferdinand 06-21-03, 10:27 AM	Tzalice Minoladir, my eyes!!!! Paladins are not immune to Blindness :D Now done reading it and all I can say is nice work, although that's a LOT more than what's really needed (I mean the first part). Now did you say 8 pages and it's not even finished yet? Wow.
Kevmann 06-21-03, 10:39 AM	First, Sir FIrdinand, the seven virtues are a enhanced version of the code in the phb. It includes everything in the phb and more, this IS my code. Otherwise good, but I have to somewhat disagree with this. If the Paladin must choose to do an evil act to do greater good (and I mean something big), then the Paladin can do so. The Paladin also know that he'll lose his powers, but if that act really help to do some great good, then the Paladin could accept that. I'm not saying that the Paladin must do so, but he can do so. How to get his powers back? Either he can't, or the deity (read DM) could be generous enough to give the powers back through some epic quest or something similar. Read down to the wisdom section. Evil begets evil, what makes a person evil? His actions, and if a paladin does an evil action, he is no better then the evil tha the wishes to supress. This is a fundamental thing Sir Ferdiand, I am suprrised that you would say a paladin could do an evil act. No. The Paladin always follows his Code which determines what he can do and cannot do. And the same thing can be said about that non-lawful act to do a more lawful act as what I told about evil act to do good act. However to get his powers back (or to not even lose his powers) is much easier. Again, chaos begets chaos. What makes a person chaotic, their actions. If a paladin does a chaotic act, they are no better then the chaos they wich to suppress. I already explained that Paladins are not required to do so, and if they do they need proof, authority etc. I stated they need proof in the wisdom section. If the quilty has been in a battle and that's why he's been brought to justice, then he shouldn't be allowed a duel to show which is the right punishment. The guilty has already been in a battle and has done wrong, so it's enough and again the death in such a battle is enough. But I'll leave it to that. This statment relates to if a accused calls for a trial by combat. As I showed before, the Paladin can use tactics in a battle, and if the best result will be get through a first attack, then it should be allowed even for Paladins. Otherwise you couldn't play as a Rogue/Paladin which is possible and in FRCS you're even allowed to multiclass with Rogue freely (with some deity [or deities?]). So this can't be as you said. This may be a matter of opinon, but... Of course a paldin can use tactics in battle, he just can't lie or mislead another. And the paladin can only get the first attack in self-defense if an opponent is obviously about to attack him (IE the charging orc example). I'd allow many exceptions here. If the enemy falls in a fait battle, then the enemy falls. In self-defense the Paladin has full rights to kill anyone without a need to give mercy. So it's up to the Paladin to decide if he wants to spare the enemy's life or not. No, self-defense is the preservation of ones life, it does not give you the right to kill another. If he has a god. Only in FRCS the Paladin must have a deity. Well, I only play in FRCS so that section is made for it.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-21-03, 11:33 AM	Now I fully understand why your PC's are all evil, you have shackled good with stupid. Paladin's are not and have naver been police. They are not the judge, the jury, or the excituoiner, either. They are somthing else. They should never be required a stupid penalty for being good, and the "merciful" weapon (whatever this is) is just pointless. It is from one of the splatbooks I take it? Paladin's live by their code, yes the one in the PHB is vague. (It was left so intentionaly.) Every player who writes a Paladin PC should be required to write their own code. What you have is even more extreme than mine is, and mine is rather harsh. However even as harsh as my code is, only one PC has failed to keep it, my 10 year old. If you want, I could re-post it again, but untill someone asks I will not as I have done it at least 7 times before. I see no reason to take up useless space on the board.
Kevmann 06-21-03, 11:44 AM	you have shackled good with stupid. Would you mind explaining this instead of just saying it?
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 12:07 PM	Originally posted by JosephKell I meant looting the body... and even looting and pillaging is beneath a paladin... that is what rogues, fighters, wizards, nobles, and rangers... Paladins are still above it! :D And I remember in 2nd Ed that paladins were practically obligated to donate whatever they didn't need to others in need! Looting the body is beneath him?? Are you serious? he wades his way through countless of orcs, covered in blood, guts and grime, faces off with BBEG, smites him down and its beneath him to take that armor off of him?? that ring of protection he was wearing?? my god man we are talking about a holy warrior here not some rich fop who wants to "slum" it for a weekend with his snobby friends! Please! no wonder your paladins are loathed by everyone... Rizzo the Rogue: "Oh mr. high and mighty. too good to get his hands dirty,well in that case mr. high and might, this lowly rogue will take all the armor/weapons/jewels and or rings off his body and sell them. I wouldnt want you to get your hands dirty now would I." a paladin should never think he is "above" anyone or anything else. humility is the watch word. after all isnt one of the 7 deadly sins "pride".
Kevmann 06-21-03, 12:14 PM	I agree, taking and sharing spoiles is one of the main ways temples get their money. Also, how is the paladin supposed to get gold and equipment to fund his quests if he does not take what the dead do not need?
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 12:25 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann I agree, taking and sharing spoiles is one of the main ways temples get their money. Also, how is the paladin supposed to get gold and equipment to fund his quests if he does not take what the dead do not need? Kevmann: mark this post down! WE AGREE! Sincerly: Erlan-Starr :)
Sir Ferdinand 06-21-03, 12:30 PM	By Kevmann: First, Sir FIrdinand, the seven virtues are a enhanced version of the code in the phb. It includes everything in the phb and more, this IS my code. But the "more" in those virtues are way too strict and only suit for some Paladins. That list couldn't be a code for all Paladins. Not even close. This is a fundamental thing Sir Ferdiand, I am suprrised that you would say a paladin could do an evil act. It has something to do with sacrifice. One thing that no other LG classes are required to do ever. Yes, Paladins could sacrifice their powers to serve higher good by doing an evil act, if there's no other way to do that. This may be a matter of opinon, but... Of course a paldin can use tactics in battle, he just can't lie or mislead another. And the paladin can only get the first attack in self-defense if an opponent is obviously about to attack him (IE the charging orc example). But what do you consider misleading? If someone asks a question and the Paladin doesn't answer, then it's basically misleading, but the Paladin didn't do anything against his code. Of course this is not a combat related, but it's an example of what normal Paladins can do, but your Paladins can't for some reason. No, self-defense is the preservation of ones life, it does not give you the right to kill another. The enemy decided to risk his life, and if it isn't fine by him, then no can do.
Kevmann 06-21-03, 12:38 PM	But the "more" in those virtues are way too strict and only suit for some Paladins. That list couldn't be a code for all Paladins. Not even close. That is still under debate :) It has something to do with sacrifice. One thing that no other LG classes are required to do ever. Yes, Paladins could sacrifice their powers to serve higher good by doing an evil act, if there's no other way to do that. Unfortunantly I belive that if a paladin does an evil act, he is forever relenquished of your power, you can not destroy evil with evil, you can only make it worse. But what do you consider misleading? If someone asks a question and the Paladin doesn't answer, then it's basically misleading, but the Paladin didn't do anything against his code. Of course this is not a combat related, but it's an example of what normal Paladins can do, but your Paladins can't for some reason. If the paladin does not answer, then he is not LEADING anyone to belive anything, they make there own decisions. Therefore, keeping silent is not misleading. The enemy decided to risk his life, and if it isn't fine by him, then no can do. We will just have to agree to disagree.
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 12:49 PM	Here is something I found on the web that may have some interest to everyone. Its the Ten Commandments of the Code of Chilvalry, from the book Chivalry by Leon Gautier. The Ten Commandments of the Code of Chivalry I. Thou shalt believe all that the Church teaches, and shalt observe all its directions. II. Thou shalt defend the Church. III. Thou shalt respect all weaknesses, and shalt constitute thyself the defender of them. IV. Thou shalt love the country in which thou wast born. V. Thou shalt not recoil before thine enemy. VI. Thou shalt make war against the Infidel without cessation and without mercy. VII. Thou shalt never lie, and shall remain faithful to thy pledged word. IX. Thou shalt be generous, and give largess to everyone. X. Thou shalt be everywhere and always the champion of the Right and the Good against Injustice and Evil. Now obviously, not all these Commandments are suitable for game play...however...is there any chance we could modify these in an attempt to get a "semi" Universal CoC for a Paladin? Talk about a Herculean task...but lets pick up the gauntlett and attempt to see if we can get Kevmann/Sir Ferdinand and the rest of the board to come to some sort of "standard". and perhaps other DM's and players can use it as a starting point for their individual campaigns>
Tenerus 06-21-03, 12:59 PM	Remember that the game is based on a mindset of that from the middle ages, not modern times. Killing, while never enjoyable, did not have the stigma then that it does now. This is a time when simple insults often lead to a duel to the death. Ever hear of Trial by Combat? An innocent is about to be killed on a trumped up charge (please don't bring up how magic can solve the mystery, as it can aslo make it harder to solve), and the Paladin takes it upon himself to defend the accused. The venue, trial by combat, with the paladin as the innocent's champion. The champion of the accusers may not be evil, so is the paladin suposed to handicap himself and let the innocent die? Or will he just have to make the hard choice and fight for justice at his full ability? I think the latter. Death can come at any time, that is what makes life so precious. Duty may force the paladin into combat against those that he would rather not fight against, but if the cause is just, he will do it anyways, to his full ability. Killing an opponent on the battlefield in such an age is not in and of itself an evil act. The soldiers oathsworn to the invading monarch may not be evil, they may even be good, but if the paladin is sworn to defend the invaded nation, even people of good alignment on the other side will face his steel. Killing the marauding orcs is not evil. Tracking them down and destroying their power base is not evil. Putting the children there to the sword IS. Good does not mean stupid. Being intelligent does not mean evil.
Kevmann 06-21-03, 01:03 PM	Killing, while never enjoyable, did not have the stigma then that it does now. You have convinced me, I think you are correct, but that does not mean that death should be doled out for any little thing, just for major crimes (to a paladin) like stealing a few gold pieces should not mean death. And yes, I am quite familiar with trial by combat, it was in fact mentioned in my virtues (duel for the gods to decided the outcome).
Tenerus 06-21-03, 01:54 PM	Well, the motive of the crime also has a whle lot to do with it. The guy who stole 30 gold from a rich man's purse in order to feed his family should not be punished anywhere near as hard as the person who almost kills someone for a few coppers. One I can empathize with, the other reminds me of modern day muggings where people are shot for 3 dollars..(which just sickens me).....
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 02:39 PM	Originally posted by Tenerus Well, the motive of the crime also has a whle lot to do with it. The guy who stole 30 gold from a rich man's purse in order to feed his family should not be punished anywhere near as hard as the person who almost kills someone for a few coppers. One I can empathize with, the other reminds me of modern day muggings where people are shot for 3 dollars..(which just sickens me)..... I disagree, motivation should not matter as to why a crime was committed. perhaps the punishment might be reduced due to circumstance, however the crime itself must be punished. logically every crime committed has some sort of motivation. in your example, what would happen if the "poor" guy who was trying to feed his family couldnt find a "rich" mark, and instead stole the 30 gold from a neighbor who also was "poor". should the fact that the motivation of feeding his family make him immune to prosecution? and what about the family he stole from that now faces starvation also? will they have to steal from someone else? as you can see, motivation to commit a crime would lead to anarchy. as far as you example of "modern day muggings" where people are shot for 3 dollars which sickens you...would it sicken you less if they were shot for 30 dollars?? 300 dollars or 300,000 dollars? where would a cut off be where a mugging doesnt sicken you? does it depend on the wealth of the victim? remember being rich is not a crime, and just because you are rich doesnt give every tom/dick and harry a license to rob from you since you "have" so much anyway. if you want to rob from the rich...raise taxes! ;)
Malfecto 06-21-03, 03:00 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann what do you think "respect authority mean" And your right! Lawfullness does not mean you follow the law, but for paladins it does. Respecting authority doesn't have to do with laws as we understand them in our society. That authority could very well be a superior with the ability and strength to destroy the paladin if he doesn't obey. And no, I disagree that a paladin would only do what is legal or written as law in some kingdom's court books. A law is based effectively on the social mores, whether that be "Thou Shalt Not Kill" or "Might Makes Right" or what have you. There need not be a God involved, a civil court, a higher authority. There need only be present a social code that the person feels compelled to uphold. What makes him different from a fighter is that that the paladin uses his might to enforce his code. What makes him different from a cleric is that he answers to no authority but the code. In effect, he answers to himself. That said, why is the paladin designed the way he is? Because D&D is based on the players taking an active role in a good society against evil opponents. The majority rules that the social norm is good and hence the mores followed by a paladin would by MAJORITY be that of good. Certainly evil has its champions, those that nurture a different set of laws and mores, but since they are not in the majority in the typical campaign setting, they were designed a place in the core classes. Most certainly I believe one of the mistakes in 3E was the creation of the Blackguard as a PrC to emulate a non-good paladin. In my campaign world, a paladin is a force for his cause. He could very well be evil as much as he could be good. So, to my point, if you take away the alignment restriction, but maintain the necessity to adhere to a code of conduct which is grand in scope, regardless of its origins, then no, you do not have a case to make the paladin a PrC. The powers granted to the paladin are balanced by the fact that he must adhere to the strictures of his code or, in the simplest terms, lose the motivation behind his ability. Yes, there are some PrCs which require adherence to a group ethic, but not all of them. To say that the paladin's alignment restriction and his typically belonging to a group defines his class as a PrC is not solid in the face that many other PrCs do NOT require you to stick to a code of ethics or follow a groups demands on character and action. If that were the case, then you can go ahead and make Druids a PrC as well as thieves. Druids belong to a druidic order that has a strict heirarchy and thieves, while not required, CAN technically follow the mores and values of a guild. How can you displace the logic for one argument and not for others? Technically YES, the paladin CAN adhere to a group mandate such as a church or a God, but he doesn't HAVE to in order to represent what he is: a champion for his cause, just as on the flip side we may have druids who are not followers of the heirarchy. Paladin's deserve their place as a core class as the character that believes in something and ultimately is willing to strive to see that it is protected and professed, be it good, evil or beer and pretzels on Friday night. Anything else is just stirring the chum bucket to examine the bits.
Haradim 06-21-03, 03:07 PM	Originally posted by Tenerus Well, the motive of the crime also has a whle lot to do with it. Motive will influence alignment matters; the guy who steals to feed his family/village/whatever isn't necessarily going to end up changing alignment (he might even end up Good as a result of it). Otherwise, motivation isn't really important. It might influence a character to be lenient...and it might not. It comes down to how much a given character (of any type) cares about the laws of the land as opposed to what might be better for the people involved.
Kevmann 06-21-03, 03:11 PM	I disagree, motivation should not matter as to why a crime was committed. perhaps the punishment might be reduced due to circumstance, however the crime itself must be punished. I completly agree with this Motive will influence alignment matters; the guy who steals to feed his family/village/whatever isn't necessarily going to end up changing alignment (he might even end up Good as a result of it). No, stealing is never "good", it can be a neutral act, but never good. If you get right down to it, you are taking from another who has earned the right to own the good.
Haradim 06-21-03, 03:15 PM	Stealing is typically only Chaotic under most interpretations. Such as the one I use.
Kevmann 06-21-03, 03:18 PM	Stealing is typcially only Chaotic under most interpretations. Yes, actually, I thik your right on the money. In any case it is not good and a paladin should punish anyone who does it.
Haradim 06-21-03, 03:31 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann In any case it is not good and a paladin should punish anyone who does it. Perhaps...but it's not necessarily that simple. It gets more complicated when the rest of the party wants to help the poor farmer (who may well have died from starvation (or whatever) anyway), and sees the Paladin as being little more than a heartless tyrant. In most cases, the rest of the party actually will go this route; most dont' care much about legality, and even other LG characters are probably going to let the farmer keep his gains, because in the end, it helps their fellow man. This ties back into the problem of making the class too restrictive. The other players usually outnumber the Paladin (and are often more powerful statistically), and are often not afraid to abandon or kill another character that is causing problems, or is too contrary to their own interests. This is one of the root problems with Paladins as a whole; they are often too unflexible (*without* harsher limits) to permit any cooperation with other PCs, who can be just as Good and heroic without having to worry about such limitations.
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 07:11 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann I completly agree with this No, stealing is never "good", it can be a neutral act, but never good. If you get right down to it, you are taking from another who has earned the right to own the good. Firstly Kevmann....stop agreeing with me what will people think! :rofl: Secondly...your again absolutly correct, taking property from someone else that doesnt belong to you is never good. however...if you "steal" something from someone who himself stole it from someone else and return it to the original owner...that could be considered a "good" act. but that comes down to your definition of "stealing". is it considered "stealing" if infact the item(s) are themselves taken from someone else?
Erlan-Starr 06-21-03, 07:30 PM	Originally posted by Haradim Perhaps...but it's not necessarily that simple. It gets more complicated when the rest of the party wants to help the poor farmer (who may well have died from starvation (or whatever) anyway), and sees the Paladin as being little more than a heartless tyrant. In most cases, the rest of the party actually will go this route; most dont' care much about legality, and even other LG characters are probably going to let the farmer keep his gains, because in the end, it helps their fellow man. This ties back into the problem of making the class too restrictive. The other players usually outnumber the Paladin (and are often more powerful statistically), and are often not afraid to abandon or kill another character that is causing problems, or is too contrary to their own interests. This is one of the root problems with Paladins as a whole; they are often too unflexible (*without* harsher limits) to permit any cooperation with other PCs, who can be just as Good and heroic without having to worry about such limitations. If you read my post on page 5, motivation should not mitigate actual punishment for the crime. in your example of the "poor farmer", what if what ever he stole cause the person he stole from to starve themselves? That is why "stealing" is considered "evil". there are always other options, and remember, if you cant do the time, dont do the crime. the farmer by his own volition decided he would "steal". thus he knew before hand what the repercussions would be if he would be caught. as far as the 2nd point of your post. the problem is not with paladins or their alignment, but DM's who continue to put extreme straight jackets on the class themselves or people who play paladins as some sort of **** retentive moral asses. (Like the poster who said it was "beneath" a paladin to "loot" the dead.)
Sir Neil 06-21-03, 08:28 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand It has something to do with sacrifice. One thing that no other LG classes are required to do ever. Yes, Paladins could sacrifice their powers to serve higher good by doing an evil act, if there's no other way to do that. Sir Ferdinand, do you recall our disagreement about chaotic actions on the 32nd page of the StCPF thread? You said here what I was trying to say there: "Paladins could sacrifice their powers to serve higher good by doing a chaotic act...."
Kevmann 06-21-03, 10:31 PM	motivation should not mitigate actual punishment for the crime. It just goes back to the ends does not justify the means.
Tzalice Minoladir 06-21-03, 10:55 PM	[QUOTE]Now did you say 8 pages and it's not even finished yet? Wow. QUOTE] well.. the 8 pages are the stuff on the relationship between the paladin and the church. The actual moral issues should be a little less.. long I guess. Wow.. this thread is getting too long in a day. My head explodes for the night and I'll play with you guys again in the morning. That and I'll look at the commandments of chivalry. They seem promising ^.^
Thunder Dragonbane 06-22-03, 12:12 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Would you mind explaining this instead of just saying it? ________________________________________ ____________ From what I have read, your games are run in such a way that it next to impossable to be a good character of any of the three alignments, w/o running the risk of changing allignment by doing what adventurers do. Kill things. Add this to the increadbly restrictive Paladin code that you have posted and it is obvious that evil is more powerful in your game. Newbies will always follow the path of least resistance. It is human nature. As I have said, my code is restrictive, yours is nearly impossable to follow.
Sir Ferdinand 06-22-03, 12:23 PM	By Kevmann: Unfortunantly I belive that if a paladin does an evil act, he is forever relenquished of your power, you can not destroy evil with evil, you can only make it worse. I know that Paladins lose their powers if they willingly do an evil act. And that's why I said "sacrifice". Isn't losing powers to do greater good a sacrifice in your opinion? If the paladin does not answer, then he is not LEADING anyone to belive anything, they make there own decisions. Therefore, keeping silent is not misleading. OK, let me give you another example. If someone asks the Paladin some question and the Paladin just smiles and raises his eyebrows, it could mean that the Paladin meant yes. However the Paladin could've meant just the opposite, and that way he had misled others to think he meant yes, although he didn't meant yes. And this isn't against the code either. * * * By Sir Neil: Sir Ferdinand, do you recall our disagreement about chaotic actions on the 32nd page of the StCPF thread? Yes. You said here what I was trying to say there: "Paladins could sacrifice their powers to serve higher good by doing a chaotic act...." Yep, and they could sacrifice their powers by doing an evil act as well as I said as well. However regaining powers is another thing. I could as a DM (if I ever will be a DM) allow Paladins to regain their powers by doing some epic quest, but it'd really depend of the situation.
Kevmann 06-22-03, 12:34 PM	From what I have read, your games are run in such a way that it next to impossable to be a good character of any of the three alignments, w/o running the risk of changing allignment by doing what adventurers do. Kill things I realize this was a weakness earlier in my post, but as I said to Erlan-Starr, I agree that murder for murder is not to strict for modern times, but too strict from way back then. Therefore I agreed that major crimes such as rape, etc. could be a crime worthy of death. Also, think of this... A bordering home around this small town was attacked in the night. The wife, husband, and their three daughters were all slaughtered in the attack. There were kobold feces and tracks all over the place, and tracks of no other. This is about all the proof you realy need. The paladin goes up to were the kobolds are, and all he has to do is yel, "Kobolds, I am here to bring you to justice for the crime you did against the blah family, bring yourself to the mercy of the court, or attack and we shall see who the gods think are innocent or guilty!" SO you see, the kobolds have the choice of laying down their weapons and going to court, or they can attack and do a duel to the death (basically trial by combat) to see if the kobolds were acctualy guilty (if the gods saw that the kobolds were innocent of the crime, they would win the battle against the paladin). So there you go, the paladin OFFERED to allow them to go to court, if they refuse, then he does trial by combat. This realy does not interfier with a parties ability to kill things, I hope that cleared it up for you :) OK, let me give you another example. If someone asks the Paladin some question and the Paladin just smiles and raises his eyebrows, it could mean that the Paladin meant yes. However the Paladin could've meant just the opposite, and that way he had misled others to think he meant yes, although he didn't meant yes. And this isn't against the code either. No, because raising the eyebrows could mean anything. Now, if he nodded his head in agreement, that WOULD be misleading, because nodding is the universal way of saying yes. Just raiseing your eyebrows could mean anything.
Sir Neil 06-22-03, 12:37 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand I could as a DM (if I ever will be a DM) allow Paladins to regain their powers by doing some epic quest, but it'd really depend of the situation. I'm glad we could reach agreement. :)
Sir Ferdinand 06-22-03, 12:50 PM	By Kevmann: No, because raising the eyebrows could mean anything. Now, if he nodded his head in agreement, that WOULD be misleading, because nodding is the universal way of saying yes. Just raiseing your eyebrows could mean anything. So here's another example. There's a friend of a Paladin somewhere but so that the Paladin can see him. Now someone ask the Paladin something (again), and the Paladin nods to his friend instead of the answer. That would be misleading for sure, and still it wouldn't be against his code. * * * By Sir Neil: I'm glad we could reach agreement. :) :)
The Deceiver 06-22-03, 01:03 PM	In my very, very humle opinion, a Paladin has every right to use his combat prowess against enemies of Good and Law, especially Evil and Chaotic outsiders and other "specifically evil" creatures (undead, chromatic dragons, beholders, evil breeds of giants, etc.), as well as priests of evil deities, corrupt wizards, and other servants of Evil. Look at the Solar -- he is lawful good, but he doesn't look like your typical cannot-kill pacifist. Good and Evil are forces that shape the universe; they are in permanent conflict that has no perceivable end. Being evil is a deliberate act; creatures of other alignments sometimes behave in an evil way, but it is intent combined with devotion and perseveration that makes someone truly evil. One good example is the myth of Oedipus. He, as you may know, killed his father and married his mother -- acts considered abominable by most moral standards. Does it make him evil? No. The reason behind his acts the lack of knowledge combined with dark curses and cryptic prophecies. If Oedipus had known the truth, he would have never committed these wrongs. Besides, Oedipus triumphed over the horrible Sphinx (a wholly evil creature) and became a just and caring ruler of Thebes -- which are obviously LG acts. If are unfriendly, or annoyed, or biased, or misguided, this does not make you evil. Adopting cruelty, bigotry, The Seven Sins and other heinous acts and outlooks as your way of life does.
Tzalice Minoladir 06-22-03, 01:09 PM	however, Oedipus did kill his father (unwittingly, yes) for no reason other than the man would not answer him or something (forget details, but it was an EXTREMELY petty reason)
Thunder Dragonbane 06-22-03, 01:12 PM	I repeat myself.... A Paladin is not the police, It is not his job to haul evil to the courts. It is his job to smite it, whare it stands, in a honorable fashion. _____________ You still haven't addressed the issue of the merciful weapon remark. You still haven't addressed the simple fact that playing evil is the path of least resistance, which your whole party has alignment changed to show this. You were the one that mentioned they started as good or neutral, and now every one of them is evil.
Erlan-Starr 06-22-03, 01:28 PM	Posted by Kevmann: A bordering home around this small town was attacked in the night. The wife, husband, and their three daughters were all slaughtered in the attack. There were kobold feces and tracks all over the place, and tracks of no other. This is about all the proof you realy need. The paladin goes up to were the kobolds are, and all he has to do is yel, "Kobolds, I am here to bring you to justice for the crime you did against the blah family, bring yourself to the mercy of the court, or attack and we shall see who the gods think are innocent or guilty!" SO you see, the kobolds have the choice of laying down their weapons and going to court, or they can attack and do a duel to the death (basically trial by combat) to see if the kobolds were acctualy guilty (if the gods saw that the kobolds were innocent of the crime, they would win the battle against the paladin). There is a slight problem with your scenario my friend. Although the evidence at the scene would have one believe that "kobolds" where infact responsible for the slaughter, do we know that for a fact? could the "evidence" as described been used as a ruse by some "orcs" to put the blame on the kobolds so they can remain at large? Alternately, let us say the paladin does come across a group of kobolds...how does he know for a fact that these are the kobolds responsible? could it have been another group in the area? so the paladin accuses them of the "crime" they tell him to bug off.h..he slaughters them (trail by combat) and then later he comes across another group of kobolds and they actually have some of the items from the farmers homestead. Now what...your Paladin was responsible for a chaotic act and now it comes to be shown an evil act. he executed a group of kobolds that were not responsible for the crime in question...guess what...you now have a "fighter". oops.... DM: "well look at it this way...at least you dont have to worry about following that stupid CoC anymore! ;) )
AvonRekaes 06-22-03, 05:42 PM	however, Oedipus did kill his father (unwittingly, yes) for no reason other than the man would not answer him or something (forget details, but it was an EXTREMELY petty reason) Actually it was the other way around. Oedipus's father tried to kill him for a petty reason (He wouldn't step anymore off the road than he already did, or something like that), and when he failed, Oedipus retaliated in self defense.
Tzalice Minoladir 06-22-03, 05:54 PM	oh, right. Sorry it's been a bit then. Thanks Avon :D
Maximus Faticus 06-22-03, 07:01 PM	Would a lawful good paladin use an evil sword?
Erlan-Starr 06-22-03, 08:22 PM	Originally posted by Maximus Faticus Would a lawful good paladin use an evil sword? better question...would he even be able to?
AvonRekaes 06-22-03, 11:08 PM	Sure he could. He'd just enjoy 2 permenant negative levels while doing so. :P
Erlan-Starr 06-22-03, 11:10 PM	Originally posted by AvonRekaes Sure he could. He'd just enjoy 2 permenant negative levels while doing so. :P lets hope he is at least 3rd level then ;)
Kevmann 06-22-03, 11:57 PM	So here's another example. There's a friend of a Paladin somewhere but so that the Paladin can see him. Now someone ask the Paladin something (again), and the Paladin nods to his friend instead of the answer. That would be misleading for sure, and still it wouldn't be against his code. Come on, you are just picking staws. If he saw his friend, he would have turned his head, looked at the friend, and nodded at him. If the guy thought he was nodding his head at him, he is crazy. Although the evidence at the scene would have one believe that "kobolds" where infact responsible for the slaughter, do we know that for a fact? could the "evidence" as described been used as a ruse by some "orcs" to put the blame on the kobolds so they can remain at large? I am sure there are several holes that I did not do. I was using it as an example of how the paladin could kill an enemy he meets without having to break the code or seriously disrupt gameplay.
Erlan-Starr 06-23-03, 12:35 AM	Posted by Kevmann: I am sure there are several holes that I did not do. I was using it as an example of how the paladin could kill an enemy he meets without having to break the code or seriously disrupt gameplay. sorry dude...my bad...but remember...anytime you deal out death as a punishment...remember my tag line...you just never know... ;)
Tenerus 06-23-03, 01:28 AM	So when Aragorn kills orcs, he is slipping down the path to evil?
Kevmann 06-23-03, 02:00 AM	So when Aragorn kills orcs, he is slipping down the path to evil? No, because killing is not always an evil act. I mean, if a party goes out and kills a group of orcs that have been rading nearby towns. That isn't evil, it isn't neccesarily good either, but it normaly does not contstitute and alignment change. But the difference is that paladins are supposed to be the apitomy of all that is good. And some acts that may be considered neutral may be something that is under a paladin. Of course, the details of such is still under debate.
Sir Ferdinand 06-23-03, 01:39 PM	Come on, you are just picking staws. It may be so, but considering how strict your rules are, why not respond with the same strictness? If he saw his friend, he would have turned his head, looked at the friend, and nodded at him. If the guy thought he was nodding his head at him, he is crazy. If the friend would be behind (not right behind, but little afar) the opponent, the Paladin wouldn't need to turn his head.
Kevmann 06-23-03, 01:58 PM	Ok, remember, intent is involved here. If we go with this silly little thing you are trying to explain and he is actualy nodding at his friend, he did not mean to nodd at the guy, and had no intent whastoever to mislead him, therefore he is not forfiet his power!
Sir Ferdinand 06-23-03, 02:35 PM	If we go with this silly little thing you are trying to explain and he is actualy nodding at his friend, he did not mean to nodd at the guy, and had no intent whastoever to mislead him, therefore he is not forfiet his power! But if the Paladin and his friend have agreed on that when the opponent asks some "yes"/"no" question, the Paladin then nods to his friend. So the Paladin would try to mislead the opponent, but since it was just a nod to his friend, it's just fine.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-23-03, 02:51 PM	Catch 22. I rather think you are nit-picking now. Just give up. It is getting old.
Sir Ferdinand 06-23-03, 02:55 PM	Catch 22. I rather think you are nit-picking now. Just give up. It is getting old. You're right. I can't change Kevmann's opinion, and he can't change mine, so it's again one of those opinion things.
Kevmann 06-23-03, 03:07 PM	But if the Paladin and his friend have agreed on that when the opponent asks some "yes"/"no" question, the Paladin then nods to his friend. So the Paladin would try to mislead the opponent, but since it was just a nod to his friend, it's just fine. NO, because he has the INTENT to mis-lead him if he does this!!!! If it is a accident that he nodds to his friend at the time the guy asks the question, then he did not intend to mislead him. If he tells his friend to stand there and he will nod at him so that he can mislead the guy, then he is obviously INTENDING to mislead the guy. If he intends to mislead him then he is forfiet his power!!!!!
Finarin Panjoro 06-23-03, 03:31 PM	A paladin does not forfeit his power for misleading some one even if he does so intentionally. His code requires him to act with honor which specifically mentions not lying. However he NEVER loses his powers for violating his code. He only loses his powers for commiting an EVIL act (like killing an innocent person). Lying is not evil so even if he spins one hell of a yarn, no loss of power will take place. Additionally if intentionally misleading someone were enough to cause him to lose his powers he would lose his powers every time he cast the spell 'conceal alignment'. That spell's sole purpose is to mislead someone as to the paladin's alignment. Paladins can mislead people all over the place. They cannot outright lie to them according to the code. But even that is not an absolute law because there is NO PENALTY for violating it (beyond the paladin's guilty conscience). A paladin may have to lie in the course of doing good or being merciful (such as telling a coward's mother that he died honorably to spare her feelings), but afterwards he must pray for forgiveness (which he is very likely to recieve if his cause was righteous).
Kevmann 06-23-03, 04:16 PM	If all the paladin had to do was not do an evil act, then why would he need a code. I think that this is a wrong statement, because it also states that if your alignment shifts then you also loose your powers. So your paladin must act lawful and good most of the time. Hey, if you want to just leave it at that, it is fine with me. Saves us alot of trouble trying to make a code for everyone :)
Finarin Panjoro 06-23-03, 05:01 PM	Kev, From the SRD: Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all special class abilities if she ever willingly commits an act of evil. Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, etc.), help those who need help (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those that harm or threaten innocents. The paladin only loses his class abilities if he willingly commits an act of evil. A violation of the code may be a chaotic act, but it is only evil if used to harm an innocent person or commit a sin/crime. You have to remember that within lawful there is a great deal of room for different choices. Being lawful is not a straight jacket which says "conform or die". A paladin must be lawful good because he must obey the "laws" of good behavior to ensure that he does not do evil and that he fights against evil. But even that leaves a great deal of room for interpretation. The paladin's code exists to provide him with clear guidelines for his behavior. But it is not a straight jacket, he may violate the code if necessity demands, as long as he understands that this is what he's doing and is willing to accept the consequences of his decision (losing his abilities is not one of these consequences). As an example, the paladin's code forbids him to lie, but what if telling the truth will needlessly harm the innocent? What if telling a distraught mother that her dead son turned and ran on the battlefield serves no purpose other than to hurt and shame her? The paladin can lie, knowing that he has done so, and ask his diety for forgiveness, which he will most likely receive. It should also be pointed out that putting one's own personal code above the good of others can be a selfish and possibly even an evil act. In the example I gave above, if the paladin told the mother the truth to preserve his precious integrity then he is a selfish and cruel person who has fallen to the cold-hearted side of being lawful. If the paladin says to the old woman, "your son died bravely defending his loved ones," the woman can take pride in him and feel that his death served a greater purpose. If a witness to his death says to the paladin, "You lied to her," his response would be ,"Yes, I did. Mercy and my heart forbade me to do otherwise. Her son must bear his shame in the after life, there is no need for her to bear it for him."
Thunder Dragonbane 06-23-03, 08:12 PM	Originally posted by Kevmann Hey, if you want to just leave it at that, it is fine with me. Saves us alot of trouble trying to make a code for everyone :) [/B] ________________________________________ ____________ There is already a basic code for everyone, it is in the PHB. It is up to each of us, The GM's, to change the things that do not fit from one campaign to another. There is no way that I would try to inforce "my code" on a first time player, it is to strict. I might not inforce it for some of the people that I am playing with currently, they would need somthing more lax. I wrote it for myself, as a challange. There is no way I would try to force it on you, as you are halfway accros the country from me. It would not make sense would it? In your continuing attempts at being usefull, you are becoming just as paranoid as that person on the "done with pally" thread. Just bacause you have detect evil, doesn't mean that you are not informed by your master that it is not infallable. It can be decieved, by a spell on your own spell list no less.
Erlan-Starr 06-23-03, 08:56 PM	is it my imagination...but isnt the "Paladin" thread becoming incredibly "chaotic"? talk about IRONY...my goodness... its become a internet version of the hydra: everytime a head is chopped off 2 take its place we need to reestablish some order...or we might as well change the title to "Rangers: how we plan on fixing them in 1000 easy steps! ;)
Kevmann 06-23-03, 09:22 PM	Don't worry this is a head that wont grow back. It has become plain to me that no COC can realy be created to count tword all persons who want to play the paladin, there are just too many different opinions on what is good and moral and what is not. This includes the PHB one, which I find can be misleading and woefully inadicuate when it comes to describing what it acctualy means. So I am giving up, see you later!
Tzalice Minoladir 06-24-03, 07:17 AM	heyhey.. no reason to pick up your shiny holy symbol and greatsword and go home. There are differing opinions and this thread just happens to lurk in very dangerous areas. It's probably the most open discussion of actual morals and not "If I have a +5 vorpal sword and a bag of holding, what happens if I crit against it?" (hehe, headless bag of holding.. hehe... open black hole *Knows it wouldn't work, but that's still amusing*) So I mean no one's going to find something they COMPLETELY agree too. I frankly like the opportunity to discuss. But isn't compromise good? I like the hydra analogy. and hmm.. as to ranger... I know! You could give them 2 domains and spellcasting at first level... um... all armours...shield... drop that favored enemy thing... martial and simple weapons... yep. maybe drop track too. :angel: Oh... or is that cleric? :invasion: Off topic, Is ranger with free TWF the Monte Cook Ranger? If you don't agree with what people say, don't play your pally that way. (I should take a level in bard!) Also, I like the point of the paladin and misleading. The point with the mother is a very good one. being brutally honest all the time is just... well... brutal. I understand not lying when its to save oneself, but if telling the truth will bring undue harm to someone else, the paladin should be mature enough to realise that in his duty to protect innocents, he must think not of himself and perhaps lie for them. It may cause some risk to powers, but were I the diety, I'd consider also the paladin who told the truth to the BBEG and stood by while the village was massacred. What if he told the grieving woman that her son was a coward and she killed herself? Sometimes the paladin gets in situations s/he doesn't really wanna be in (especially if the DM likes to mess with you). Sometimes it has to be the lesser of two evils unfortunately. Anyway, sorry about the randomness at some points, I either check these boards late at night or before work in the morning--both not my most coherent times.
AvonRekaes 06-24-03, 08:32 AM	I recently ran through a senario with a friend of mine, me playing a paladin. I was walking back to the tavern at night and heard a bloodcurdling scream. I immediately raced toward the origin of the deathcry and found a small one-room house. The time in which I heard the cry and arrived at the door left no window for anyone to have left. I entered and found a man and woman butchered in their sleep. There was a small girl, maybe 8 years old, in the corner covered in blood and crying. I Detected Evil in the room and felt it's presense. I determined it wasn't very strong, and then when I found out the source, it was the girl. I walked forward, keeping a safe distance. I knelt down to her level and cast Discern Lies. "Did you do this?" She said no, which revealed itself to be a lie. I wanted her to come with me peacefully to the guard tower, but I couldn't tell her "I don't believe you, I'm going to take you to the authorities." I did not want to provoke her into attacking me, where I might need to hurt her to defend myself. She is a child and probably was driven to this. I could not tell her I would take her to someplace safe either. She might be tried as an adult and if the court thinks its just, executed. She would not be "safe" in that sense, so I couldn't tell her that. Instead I merely said "Come with me, I'll take you away from this horrid sight." I don't think that was misleading, because I did exactly as stated. Later I testified in the court and pleaded for mercy on the court, saying that the road to redemption is long, but who has a longer road ahead of them than a child?
Tenerus 06-24-03, 08:44 AM	That's because many people disagree on what certian concepts such as honor and justice are, and by how much they relate to the class as a whole. Some see justice as an inflexible concept. Others think true justice is tempered with mercy. Still others think something else.........
Thunder Dragonbane 06-24-03, 10:31 AM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Erlan-Starr [B]is it my imagination...but isnt the "Paladin" thread becoming incredibly "chaotic"? Yes. It is deteriating quickly.
Erlan-Starr 06-25-03, 01:11 AM	Originally posted by Thunder Dragonbane [QUOTE]Originally posted by Erlan-Starr [B]is it my imagination...but isnt the "Paladin" thread becoming incredibly "chaotic"? Yes. It is deteriating quickly. any suggestion on how to "reign" the discussion to focus on perhaps 1 issue before we move onto another??? what would "lawful" be if not organized ;)
Sir Ferdinand 06-25-03, 03:53 AM	any suggestion on how to "reign" the discussion to focus on perhaps 1 issue before we move onto another??? what would "lawful" be if not organized ;) Remember that this is a thread to discuss all things Paladins. So as long as it is related to Paladins (like those nice stories I've seen), it's fine. At least I don't mind answering/giving opinions to different type of things.
Erlan-Starr 06-25-03, 08:02 AM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand Remember that this is a thread to discuss all things Paladins. So as long as it is related to Paladins (like those nice stories I've seen), it's fine. At least I don't mind answering/giving opinions to different type of things. neither do i (notice the other pallly threatds ;) ) i was just suggesting that we were losing our "focus" is all. there is alot to discuss about being/playing pallys. but since so many questions bring up other questions (look at the pally and undead thread) i just thought that maybe we could "organize" the discussion about a particular topic and explore "it" before moving onto the next. if it is not possible to do (im far from an expert when it comes to "threads"/opinions on BB's) then as emily lettera said soooooo many years ago on the original SNL.... "Never Mind" ;)
Sir Ferdinand 06-25-03, 10:05 AM	i just thought that maybe we could "organize" the discussion about a particular topic and explore "it" before moving onto the next. I can see what's your point, but it causes some problems. What if there's someone who is not interested in that subject? He/she should either leave or start a new subject. And the latter is IMO a better choice. For example this whole Paladin's code discussion took about 4 pages alone, and that's quite a lot for one subject.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-25-03, 11:25 AM	I think that we should write down some of our characters histories. That would at least be colser to being on topic to the orrigional post of this nightmare, ..........thread.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-25-03, 11:32 AM	I had a character in 2nd ed, during a fight with some higher level characters he was disarmed. W/o thinking he grabbed a sword from one of the fallen, nearby. After fighting for a couple of rounds, he scored a critical hit. When I told the GM about it, the GM informed me that I was holding a sword of life stealing. Knowing that the weapon was evil, I dropped it and picked up another weapon from the slain. At this point I had not found my weapon in the mess. It was not found untill after the fight ended. As I dropped the sword emediatly after finding it's powers I was not "harmed" by it.
Sir Ferdinand 06-25-03, 11:56 AM	Here's my story of the greatest Paladin character I have had. It's prettly long time when I played as him, so that's why this story isn't the longest and I can't even remember of which deity he served. Anyway, here's all I can remember. Ferdinand Silverhelm, human Paladin (I think his deity was Heironeuss, but I'm not sure) He was born in a small village and even as a boy he knew that he'll become a Paladin. But he didn't became a Paladin until he was in his 30s, but he never lost his faith. One night he just had a calling from his deity that it's time. Soon after he gathered a group of adventurers from a nearby small town. The party was successful in battles against evil, and they encountered a city which was lead by an evil government. He knew that he should do something about that city, but he was so unexperienced that he wouldn't have a chance, so he decided to travel around the world and get some experience and eventually purify that city from evil. One encounter I remember was against a very small green (I think it was green) dragon. I remember that I was only a 2nd level Paladin back then but still I asked the other party members to stay back, and let me handle this. The dragon demaded some money and other stuff from us, but my Paladin didn't accept it. So the dragon attacked me, but I managed to kill it after a while. (I had rolled very good stats and I had lots of HP and very good saves) We continued to travel around the world and we encountered a small Elven town in the middle of the forest. They let us to stay a night there when I explained that if they have some problems here, we could try to help them. And they did have some problems. There was a tomb nearby the town, and recently they had seen some undead walking around the town. So of course I accepted to help them, but I really didn't know what we would encounter. When we entered the tomb, my Paladin as a leader, we then saw some wights and I think some ghouls and other undead creatures. I ordered my allies to retreat and seal the gate as soon as I would get out, but it was too late. The wights had struck me couple of times and since I was only a 3rd level Paladin, I died and was turned into a wight myself. I can't remember if the other party members survived, but we ended the game there. * * * So although my Paladin died so soon, I was still very happy to be able to play so good a character. And I don't think any other class can give such an enjoyment as Paladins (though my Bard characters have been also very fun to play). And thanks to that character, I also chose it as my user name on these boards.
Sir Ferdinand 06-25-03, 01:28 PM	I think I could continue my previous post a bit more. I thought of playing as Ferdinand Silverhelm again sometimes, but it as a idea doesn't sound too good. I've thought that maybe he's been resurrected by some high level Clerics of the same deity (though by FRCS it is Torm or Tyr instead of Heirouneous). One thought has been that if I'll ever play as a DM, I'd include him in some of my games. It would be very nice to see Ferdinand Silverhelm to become Sir Ferdinand Silverhelm :fight!: or even Lord Ferdinand Silverhelm :king: if the game would get so high levels. But let's see if I'll ever become a DM myself...
Erlan-Starr 06-25-03, 10:17 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand I think I could continue my previous post a bit more. I thought of playing as Ferdinand Silverhelm again sometimes, but it as a idea doesn't sound too good. I've thought that maybe he's been resurrected by some high level Clerics of the same deity (though by FRCS it is Torm or Tyr instead of Heirouneous). One thought has been that if I'll ever play as a DM, I'd include him in some of my games. It would be very nice to see Ferdinand Silverhelm to become Sir Ferdinand Silverhelm :fight!: or even Lord Ferdinand Silverhelm :king: if the game would get so high levels. But let's see if I'll ever become a DM myself... why not DM and have Saint Ferdinand Sivlerhelm! ;)
Sir Neil 06-25-03, 10:42 PM	Originally posted by Thunder Dragonbane Knowing that the weapon was evil, I dropped it and picked up another weapon from the slain. At this point I had not found my weapon in the mess. Heh, that'd make a great scene in a movie. Sir Ferdinand, I think it would be a blast if your group gets into a lot of trouble, and when the cleric summons a celestial to help, the DM describes it looking like Silverhelm. Okay, Sir Neil, in 2nd edition. The first adventure opens with him walking into a village. His pony, Oatmeal, was pony-napped by rock gnome bandits, and he had to find a ranger to help him track them. Enter Selina, a tomboyish hunter. She agrees and leads Neil to the gnome camp. They cut down the trio and rescue his pony. 15 levels and 1.5 editions later, Oatmeal is a celestial heavy war horse; Selina has killed fiends, Crayola dragons, and a drow matron mother; and mythril-clad Sir Neil can drop a lich with a single touch. (But we never found his phylactery, so it didn't stick.)
Thunder Dragonbane 06-25-03, 11:31 PM	That is a shame.
Sir Ferdinand 06-26-03, 09:55 AM	By Erlan-Starr: why not DM and have Saint Ferdinand Sivlerhelm! ;) The problem is that I've decided to play at least one of my characters to 20th level before I'll start DMing myself. And I don't think I would even be a good DM, because it'd require a lot of work and time, and I'm not very good at using my time very effectively. By Sir Neil: Sir Ferdinand, I think it would be a blast if your group gets into a lot of trouble, and when the cleric summons a celestial to help, the DM describes it looking like Silverhelm. Yeah, it'd be a good way to introduce him again.
-Flex- 06-26-03, 03:21 PM	I've long been a fan of paladins myself, and on occassion I love to check these boards and watch all the discussions about code of conducts and trying to find a rather universal code that all paladins can follow. Well, rather, the universal code for all paladin's is a ambitious idea at best. While I believe it can be done, I truely think that anyones given idea of a paladin is going to differ, and the acceptable roles or actions for that said paladin is always going to differ. But the last thing I want to do is start an arguement or debate about code of conducts again, I just thought I would mention something, a term really, that I have yet to see used, or used quite rarely. In my eyes I see the paladin not as a knight of a royal family, or a country for that matter. Neither do I see him/her as a shining example of one who slays evil fiends. I try to consider that a paladin is just like any other devoted person. Their ambitions and thoughts will change from character to character, and while some might enjoy killing fiends, and some might enjoy keeping the military and diplomatic peace within a nation, I feel that I have a definite universal title for the paladin. That being that he/she is a champion, or knight of the people of the world. Skin color, race, religion, alignment; none of this should matter to a paladin, for people must be judged upon their actions before a paladin should truely have them judged. A paladin is their to fight for those who are oppressed, and bring light to a otherwise dreary world. Yes, they might fight evil fiends and the such for peace, but in the long run it is not the king, or the nobles, or himself that he is doing it for; but the people who see him as their warrior, and even for those who don't. I dunno, just seems like a theme that has lately been sorely missed on the boards lately. I used to be a member of the Save the Paladin Core Foundation, but i've been no doubt taken off the list for not posting actively on the boards, its a rare when I post, but I like reading the boards. I'd like to still be considered a member if at all possible. And I got a story of my 15th level paladin as well, quite an epic one in the sense it has been ongoing for the past 3 years now. (And we are just not a little bit past half way through the story!) I got a great DM, and while the campaign goes a little slow at times, he's still the best I have ever seen. I'll have to post my paladin's story on the board sometimes, maybe even some of my writings from his adventures. Anyhow, hope I didn't anger anyone with my rant about a champion of the people earlier, I was hoping it was a thing that could be mutally agreed upon by everyone. -Flex --Sir Aramil Korrelin, Captain in the most Noble Order of Karamiekos, Paladin of the People
Finarin Panjoro 06-26-03, 05:37 PM	There's a situation coming up in an adventure I'm preparing to run that applies to this discussion. One of the PCs is a human paladin and another is a NG halfling rogue. They are about to enter a small fortress in an isolated and hostile area where a group of escaped halfling slaves have asked a paladin to protect them. The paladin (of the same order as the PC) agreed, provided they would give him the authority to protect them properly. They did so. But now he has become a benevolent tyrant and some of the halflings are rebelling against him. He continues to follow the law very strictly which allows him to lock up the leaders of the malcontents (all chaotic good) when they try to persuade other halflings to leave with them (weakening the defense of the fortress). Enter the PCs. The PC paladin and halfling rogue are going to be put in the middle of this dispute. While a gnoll army bears down on the small fortress. The chaotic good halflings are going to hold a sit-out shortly before a gnoll attack. They'd rather die than live under an oppressor, even a benevolent one. It should be interesting to see how the PC paladin (a less rigid interpreter of lawful) interacts with the rigid NPC paladin.
Kevmann 06-26-03, 05:55 PM	Very nice Finarin!
Thunder Dragonbane 06-26-03, 10:01 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sir Neil [B]Heh, that'd make a great scene in a movie. Ok I missed this the first time arround. I do not follow your comment. :confused:
Sir Ferdinand 06-27-03, 07:01 AM	By -Flex-: I used to be a member of the Save the Paladin Core Foundation, but i've been no doubt taken off the list for not posting actively on the boards, its a rare when I post, but I like reading the boards. I'd like to still be considered a member if at all possible. You're still member #0000023, and you can include it in your sig if you want. You've (or no one else has) never been taken off from the membership list. Anyhow, hope I didn't anger anyone with my rant about a champion of the people earlier, I was hoping it was a thing that could be mutally agreed upon by everyone. There are different types of Paladins, and I don't see anything wrong with what you wrote. And about the universal code, in PHB that Paladin's code is universal code. But if sone one wants to add something to it, they can do it, but it's not universal code anymore. * * * By Finarin Panjoro: They did so. But now he has become a benevolent tyrant and some of the halflings are rebelling against him. I'm not sure if I read that right, but are you saying that the npc Paladin became a tyrant? If that is so, then he can't be a Paladin anymore.
Finarin Panjoro 06-27-03, 10:55 AM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand: I'm not sure if I read that right, but are you saying that the npc Paladin became a tyrant? If that is so, then he can't be a Paladin anymore. Sure he can. By tyrant I don't mean to say that he's executing people on a whim, or purging the community of people who disagree with him, or imprisoning people who haven't committed a crime. He's a BENEVOLENT tyrant. Every action he's taken has been within the law and for the good of the community AS HE PERCIEVES IT. He does not believe in capital punishment (that's evil in his view and not provided for in the law in any case). However the halflings have given him authority over their defenses and BROAD power to make changes. The mistake was largely theirs for putting too much power in the hands of one person, though they did this out of fear of the gnolls. They put safety over freedom and this is what they got. Because the situation is so dangerous he has used his authority to make the following laws and changes: -no one may leave the fortress without armed escort (all armed escorts are fanatically loyal wild elves under his direct command, the halflings are all commoners). -he's relocated the community to a more defensible location near the mountains (the fortress), taking the halflings away from their homes and the beauty of the land they love. -Weakening the fortress is a crime punishable by imprisonment, so the leaders of the uprising are guilty of harming the community, and have been imprisoned (plus he believes they would almost certainly be killed if he allowed them to leave). -He doesn't have the military man-power to guard the halflings while they farm. So he's put them on a ration system which is harsh, but survivable. -He's got all of their craftsmen working making crossbows, bolts, and fortifications to arm and defend the population. So they're not making anything else. This has resulted in the former slaves feeling as though they are slaves once again (they are not being entirely reasonable either). But he actually is protecting them from the danger of the gnolls and obeying the law in every case (easy to do since he pretty much is the law). So he has not done anything un-paladin like, and certainly not anything evil. He simply leans more to the strictly lawful side of lawful good than is probably healthy in this situation.
Kevmann 06-27-03, 05:34 PM	I know I said that I would not return but... I sent in my Seven Virtues of the Paladin to Regdars Repository and they accepted it and gave if four out of five stars. I realy like these virtues and belive them to be good. I was wondering if you guys would be against re-opening our discussion of the seven virtues? If yes, do you want me to re-post the virtues again here on the board.
Finarin Panjoro 06-27-03, 05:45 PM	Kevmann, I have no objection to you posting them here. I read them in Regdar's Repository and this seems like a good place to discuss them. -Fin
Kevmann 06-27-03, 05:52 PM	Thanks FInarin, I would like to hear from a few of the others before I re-open this can of worms.
Sir Neil 06-27-03, 09:28 PM	Originally posted by Sir Neil Heh, that'd make a great scene in a movie. Your paladin dropped the evil sword, but couldn't find his own in the pile. I imagined it playing out like a slapstick, since it was 2e and a round was an entire minute long. We pictured him as Jackie Chan fighting amidst a pile of weapons, looking at the evil blade in horror when it crit'd, discarding it and frantically rummaging through the heap. He'd pick up a weapon in time to parry, look at the hilt and realize it wasn't his, toss it at a villain; pick up another sword, nope, that's not his either...:) Kevmann, I don't mind if you discuss it here, but it might get more input in a thread on its own. Most people wouldn't know to discuss "Regdar's Seven Virtues" on the "Board Order of Paladins" thread.
Kevmann 06-27-03, 10:03 PM	Your right, OK I will start its own thread.
Thunder Dragonbane 06-27-03, 10:45 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sir Neil [B]Your paladin dropped the evil sword, but couldn't find his own in the pile. I imagined it playing out like a slapstick, since it was 2e and a round was an entire minute long. We pictured him as Jackie Chan fighting amidst a pile of weapons, looking at the evil blade in horror when it crit'd, discarding it and frantically rummaging through the heap...... ________________________________________ ____________ Yes I did look at the weapon in horror when I crit'd the person. We had a very graphic GM at the time. Think the "Wicked Witch", with todays computer graphic capabilities. Thankfully it wasn't that chaotic, I picked up a sword from a fallen gaurd that I knew to be non-evil. I ended up with a non magical weapon for the rest of the fight, but that is better than using a evil weapon. Mine was only +1 anyway. This was the first GM that I knew that made us re-roll 20's. For every roll that was a 20, he added another multiplier to damage. 1, 20 = x3,(I think) later that combat I actually rolled 5 in a row. What a mess, pieces went everywhere.
Sir Ferdinand 06-28-03, 12:51 PM	By Finarin Panjoro: Sure he can. By tyrant I don't mean to say that he's executing people on a whim, or purging the community of people who disagree with him, or imprisoning people who haven't committed a crime. Sorry, that word just made me think of some evil person, but now I see that he's just trying to protect those Halflings. However the Paladin should try to listen to those rebelling Halflings to make them feel better, because if he wouldn't care what they have to say, then that's be kind of non-Paladin-like.
Thunder Dragonbane 07-02-03, 10:24 AM	How can we express ourselves when, there are obvious trolls out there that are twisting everything that they are told? This last guy was so bat that white was black, and black was white.
Sir Ferdinand 07-02-03, 01:45 PM	How can we express ourselves when, there are obvious trolls out there that are twisting everything that they are told? This last guy was so bat that white was black, and black was white. I think I missed something here. (And I can see that this is a new topic) Who is this last guy you're talking about and are you talking about these boards or...?
Erlan-Starr 07-02-03, 02:51 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand I think I missed something here. (And I can see that this is a new topic) Who is this last guy you're talking about and are you talking about these boards or...? read the closed thread...war on paladins and see if you can figure out who we are refering to.
Sir Ferdinand 07-02-03, 03:37 PM	read the closed thread...war on paladins and see if you can figure out who we are refering to. Yeah, but I don't want to know what was going on. I didn't read that topic.
Erlan-Starr 07-02-03, 06:08 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand Yeah, but I don't want to know what was going on. I didn't read that topic. trust me....your not missing much ;)
Thunder Dragonbane 07-02-03, 10:12 PM	No you didn't miss much.
Tenerus 07-03-03, 12:31 AM	All I found there was a reason to finally put someone on my "Ignore" list. :D Beyond that, ignoring the thread is also a good idea.
Thunder Dragonbane 07-06-03, 12:20 AM	Yes but it is rather hard to reply to the subject of you are ignoring a topic. The topics were interesting, well worded debates, right up untill the one person showed up. And I have noticed that ignore does very little good. It only seems to work for those of you who use the "ICQ" types of comunication. Whatever they are called.
Tzalice Minoladir 07-06-03, 11:17 AM	Hey, you can't use logic with some people *shrug*I only read the first page before it got closed, but I actually went through and reread it. There were a lot of good arguments though, gotta admit.
Erlan-Starr 07-06-03, 11:50 AM	Originally posted by Tzalice Minoladir Hey, you can't use logic with some people *shrug*I only read the first page before it got closed, but I actually went through and reread it. There were a lot of good arguments though, gotta admit. yes...but thats the problem about trolls, they keep on insisting on raising such outrageous arguments that soon they hijack the thread, and no real discussions can continue. This was my first true interaction with a bona fide troll, and frankly i can see why they are universally shunned. aaaargh!
Sir Ferdinand 07-06-03, 12:33 PM	I think we should try to get on topic for a while, what do you think...
Erlan-Starr 07-06-03, 05:35 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand I think we should try to get on topic for a while, what do you think... i agree...lead on...btw...please check out my attempt at a semi universal CoC for paladins (based on a the Laws of Robotics) im interested in some feedback and or corrections/ammendments to make them better :)
Tzalice Minoladir 07-06-03, 09:02 PM	Yeah, I tried posting a shameless plug for the commandments earlier, but it didn't work. apparently something about posting twice in under 60 seconds *shrugs* I multi-task. Anywho, yeah, it is coming rather nicely and should be within completion rather shortly. Input from peers of such esteem would be greatly appreciated :fight!: I'm gonna tell a little story of my little Aeridyn *hugs the sock-Aeri doll she made* even though I've put it on other boards before because...well.. it's just such a great story. It was very cinematic at least in my mind, not her most shining moment alas. A bit of backstory: so the party picked up this rogue because he was the only one who knew the area. Pretty typical, Aeri was tracking an evil cult and everyone else--well I missed the first session, I'm not really entirely sure their motives. I know the bard wanted to visit home but the cleric and ranger I'm still not sure of. I'll remember to ask next session. Anyway, my paladin and the rogue decide to go investigate a cave outside of town a fair ways while everyone else stayed at the camp to tend to the other NPC wizard (yeah, we had 2 dmpcs). So they find on one end some odd acid trap and a goblin encampment--they decide not to venture down there just yet. Back the other way, they find some sort of sacrificing room with the remains of the 6 missing townsfolk and some alchemical potions. They take the components--he takes 3, she takes 4 (big symbolism with 7 in the campaign). She does a nice little service for the dead guys and they go to leave, not finding anything. On the way out, my aeridyn notices a hole in the ceiling so they climb up. Getting there, it's an entire room made of iron with some odd culty-face thing and a big blue crystal on the opposite wall. The back wall leads to a small room that's kind of painted in blood. They're investigating when one of the big scary cult BBEGs comes in. The rogue hides, but you know how hard it is to hide in shiny scale mail. Parlay doesn't work because... well.. he doesn't seem too interested in it. The rogue gets off a sneak attack, but my Aeri gets last inits, so *shrug* BBEG casts fear on Aeri who barely fails her save (at this time, she's 1st lvl, about 200 more xp and would have had aura of courage). DM rolls a 4 for rds and she runs away. meanwhile, the rogue catches on blue fire... I dunno, some BBEG thing. 24 seconds later, I'm like.. "I turn around and go back" but the DM makes the fear last for an hour, so she goes and gets the other PCs. They get back there and the BBEG's gone. Out of the room however comes the rogue obviously being controlled in full plate that's been nailed to him. He pulls out a boneblade (BoVD--not fun) which the explanation for is a whole other story that I won't go into. My paladin tells everyone not to advance. The cleric goes to try and help Jacob (the rogue). Jacob slashes him with this +2 or +3 swords and brings him to about oh, -1 hp. My paladin tries parlay, but it doesn't seem to be working so pulls out her whip and tries to disarm, I got a decent roll, but apparently because of the spell on the bone, the whip kind of disintegrated where it touched the blade. The ranger tries grappling with the rogue and succeeds, and the bard's way out of range of the fray (long room) so moves. On his turn he breaks the grapple and slashes the ranger (who was actually lvl 2) for about 10 pts of damage. Cleric's down. My pally goes to help stabilize him, provokes AoO, guy slashes her, rips the front of her armor and brings her to about 2 hp. She doesn't make it to the cleric because he was between the two of them, so she draws her greatsword. The bard finally gets in range for her crossbow and shoots at the glowy blue stone I mentioned earlier thinking it might be controlling him. She hits it and does a little damage. Aeridyn tells the ranger to grapple him again. Nat 20 grapple, pins him. He doesn't break it on his turn. Bard's reloading a heavy crossbow (full round act.) So Aeri actually takes an action to compose herself and think. Places the sword on top of the glowing blue stone on the helmet. Prays for forgiveness ("Forgive Me" *sighs, closes her eyes*) and stabs through. And yes, there are times when you can roll a nat 20 and not be entirely pleased with the results. It sounds gory, but in the next round, he would have broken the pin, damaged the ranger for at least the 5 to render him unconscious, damaged my pally for at least 2. The bard would have had one shot at best before he got to her. My pally had to do it or it prolly would've been a TPK. I mean, there really was no other choice. Actually the DM was like "I was expecting YOU to kill him..." She didn't lose her powers though (I think it's mainly because she said "forgive me" and spent that first action meditating on it) but it's really made an interesting mark for her. Everything turned out okay though...ruined her armour and best she could afford afterwards was leather :( ah well.. :cloud9: A shovel is an infinitely useful tool for a party I'm finding out.:bored: but that's my story. *bows* Alas, I am no bard.
BladeVenom 07-07-03, 01:55 AM	I don't see the Paladin with a Code of Conduct even being a playable character in anything but the simplest hack and slash adventures. Here's one type of scenario that would commonly occur. A Thay enclave has started a new enclave in the Paladins home territory. The legitmate ruler, although good was swayed by the generousity of the Thayan ambassador. So now they are legally allowed to come and ago and are protected by legitmate laws. What happens when one of the evilest Red Wizards leaves the enclave to go back to Thay, to finish working on a new evil spell since he ran out of slaves in the enlcave to experiment on? He meets the Paladin character who knows how evil he is, and that he must be stopped or he will continue murdering helpless innocent slaves to create new evil spells and magic. Why of course the Paladin cannot allow him to continue to kill and further his evil cause and smites him. Now the Paladin has to submit himself to the laws of his land which are legitmate and enforced by a legitmate ruler. The Red Wizard was obeying the laws and was legally allowed to come and go as he pleased, so the Paladin is a murderer by law. So the Paladin bravely submits to his death sentence as a matyr in his cause against evil. The only other choice would be to continue breaking the law, killing the good law enforcement officers to run away as an outlaw vigilante, which of course would mean he would lose his status as a Paladin. This kind of situation would common in any complex world, and I don't see how a Paladin could stay a Paladin or not be put to death somewhere for upholding his beliefs over laws of the land.
Erlan-Starr 07-07-03, 02:28 AM	Originally posted by BladeVenom I don't see the Paladin with a Code of Conduct even being a playable character in anything but the simplest hack and slash adventures. Here's one type of scenario that would commonly occur. A Thay enclave has started a new enclave in the Paladins home territory. The legitmate ruler, although good was swayed by the generousity of the Thayan ambassador. So now they are legally allowed to come and ago and are protected by legitmate laws. What happens when one of the evilest Red Wizards leaves the enclave to go back to Thay, to finish working on a new evil spell since he ran out of slaves in the enlcave to experiment on? He meets the Paladin character who knows how evil he is, and that he must be stopped or he will continue murdering helpless innocent slaves to create new evil spells and magic. Why of course the Paladin cannot allow him to continue to kill and further his evil cause and smites him. Now the Paladin has to submit himself to the laws of his land which are legitmate and enforced by a legitmate ruler. The Red Wizard was obeying the laws and was legally allowed to come and go as he pleased, so the Paladin is a murderer by law. So the Paladin bravely submits to his death sentence as a matyr in his cause against evil. The only other choice would be to continue breaking the law, killing the good law enforcement officers to run away as an outlaw vigilante, which of course would mean he would lose his status as a Paladin. This kind of situation would common in any complex world, and I don't see how a Paladin could stay a Paladin or not be put to death somewhere for upholding his beliefs over laws of the land. good 2 c u back Lye. btw just because you come up with a "scenario" doesnt mean its a good one. the entire thing is filled with gaping holes in logic. other than the fact you want things to be a certain way to "prove" how "unplayable" a paladin is, does not make it so. for those of you who didnt have the pleasure of "debating" with the old "Lye". may i present his newest incarnation..."BladeVenom". Be careful where you tread gentlemen...their b trolls in this forest! be on guard!
BladeVenom 07-07-03, 04:23 AM	Way to avoid the dillema, just accuse me of being someone else. Since the same discusion of lawfulness conflicting with good has come up before, then point me to the appropriate thread if you are not willing to discuss it again. I just tried a search check for Lye to see what he had to say and all I got back was: "The search term you specified (lye) is under the minimum word length (4) and therefore will not be found. Please make this term longer" I have always avoided playing Paladins because it's problematic following an absolute moral code, and it will certainly clash with many other players.
Erlan-Starr 07-07-03, 11:31 AM	Originally posted by BladeVenom Way to avoid the dillema, just accuse me of being someone else. Since the same discusion of lawfulness conflicting with good has come up before, then point me to the appropriate thread if you are not willing to discuss it again. I just tried a search check for Lye to see what he had to say and all I got back was: "The search term you specified (lye) is under the minimum word length (4) and therefore will not be found. Please make this term longer" I have always avoided playing Paladins because it's problematic following an absolute moral code, and it will certainly clash with many other players. ok "blade": just to make sure your really not "Lye" in another incarnation, and too prove your not just a "troll". look at your oringinal scenario and see if you see anything in your original setup that if looked at it impartially just doesnt make "sense". if you point out a few or the "holes" then perhaps we can actually debate some of your points you raise.
Thunder Dragonbane 07-07-03, 12:20 PM	He cannot, there are to many holes in the twisted logic of his orrigional post for him to ever make a claim that it is not a troll. Hello, Blackthorn. It is NOT good to see you. Have a good day. Quit trolling, it is getting old quick.:twitch::twitch::twitch::twitch:
Tzalice Minoladir 07-07-03, 12:26 PM	This board is really more for general discussion of paladin and paladin aficianados. If you don't wish to play a paladin because you can't fix your playing style to a specific code, then don't play a paladin. You have to excuse some of us on the board. We don't wish to see our Order locked because of trolls like previous posts have been. If you'd like to see the post where this has been discussed, check about four boards back "The War on Paladins" It's not the most shimmering example of anti-paladin logic, but there are some nice defenses of the class. As to the situation below. There are a few choices. I'll touch upon some. :u: When this law is announced, the paladin, his/her church, and his/her colleagues *should* petition to the king trying to sway his opinion and make him realise the dangers this could in fact put the country and populace in. :u: The king has been bribed, he's obviously not the most flawless leader. :u: You could always escort the wizard out of the kingdom, as a friendly gesture. However, as soon as he enters a new territory, it's no longer lawful for him to be THERE and you can take him to proper authorities there. (That may be betraying trusts, but with the code Erlan and the people over at the CoC thread are developing, it is allowable to break one code for a more important and higher law.) :u: He is beholden to his code before the law of the land so unless he has sworn fealty first to the king, he is justified by his code in action verse the wizard :u: with good enough reasoning, the paladin most likely would not recieve the death penalty. :u: There are ways around this occurance, and the best would be preventing it from occuring. If the king is being controlled by the wizards ,either through enchantment or bribery, the validity of these laws is seriously brought into question. :u: odds are that the wizard is just as leery of the paladin as the other way around. If the wizard attacks, it's self-defense ^.^ or you could always just not play paladin's in forgotten realms. Silly silly multiclassing creatures ^.^ anyhow, let's not get into another battle over this or if you'd like we can move it to another thread. :bigeyes: You could always just play a fighter if you don't like the CoC. But really, any character with an alignment should have a personal code. Morrow everyone ^.^
Frostbite_Ravenheart 07-07-03, 04:38 PM	HERE HERE, a few months ago i would of spit in all ur faces and laugh!!!!! but now i shall do much worse...much much worse... I shall join this order... Yes i the lover of chaos, bards, few, elves, were-wolves, ect...I recently played a paladin-cleric and i love him. I found new inspiration on both paladins and clerics. Hated goody two-shoes paladins and i hated the thought of worshiping another. So my DM dared me to play a paladin, which has to be LG obviously and follow a code against my normal one...and play a cleric. Three things i hated, paladins, clerics, and Lawfullness...ACk... I still disfavor clerics but not as much... BUT I TOTALLY LOVE THE PALADIN.... I am in and i say we shall defend our selves with the power of all the churches and all the lands of good and with the addition of urs truly we will have the power of the normaly neutral natrue gods and song deitys!
Thunder Dragonbane 07-07-03, 05:49 PM	Good to have you. Someone should correct me if I am wrong but I think that you are now member # 0000114.
BladeVenom 07-08-03, 04:40 AM	I started that off a little too provocatively. I think that having a rigid Code of Conduct would put character in no win situations from time to time. If it didn't why wouldn't every chracter class not want a code of conduct. Because it's hard to follow and would put them in no win situations. I do think rest of my argument was valid though. The Red Wizards of Thay try to get in every city that they haven't been to war with recently. They get into lawful cities, even good cities, even in some cities ruled by Lawful Good rulers. That's what makes them such great villians in a complex role playing game. Even though most Red Wizards are evil they get into everyplace as law abbiding merchants, and they keep that image up. It's not like, "dragon attack village, dragon must be killed," no moral ambiguity there. They present more of a challenge to an absolute code of conduct. I think the scenario I presented is in context with the practices of the Red Wizards, and the material I've read in FRCS and LoD. They are in good lands obeying the local laws, even though they are supported by evil means in their home country, and creating evil plots and magic to use against their neighbors, and other Red Wizards. This is from Lords of Darkness page 60. "While dealing in cheap magic items the Thayans are generally honest and honorable, but it's understood that somewhere, undetected, they are up to no good. The heroes need to walk a fine line between anti-Thayan crusading zeal (which means they don't gain the benefits of cheaper magic items that their enemies might) and full endorsement (which might cause problems with good churches and organizations such as the Harpers)." I think anti-Thayan crusading zeal could also get a hero into legal trouble. A little farther down on that page, "Another Red Wizard might use the enclave as a secure base from which to launch his plots and schemes against the forces of good nearby, or quietly weave a web of bribery and indebtedness among the local nobles through his "gifts" of valuable items. Many Red Wizard enclaves avoid such schemes and function as nothing more or less than dealers in magic, especially in cities where good and law rule. Others are far less scrupulous." Even if a local enclave leader isn't plotting or committing evil, he supports an evil system. The leaders he follows are evil, the money he takes in is going back to support evil against Thays neighbors, the Red Wizards are supported by slaves who are treated cruelly and usually only survive for a few years until being worked to death or put to death for committing a small infraction of the rules. So What's a Paladin to do? I think it's very easy to have a situation where following a strict code of conduct is going to put a Paladin in a no win situation. Why do you think there are so many Blackgaurd? So if you are in a no win situation, do you let your character die, or do you break your code of conduct?
Sir Ferdinand 07-08-03, 05:43 AM	By Erlan-Starr: please check out my attempt at a semi universal CoC for paladins (based on a the Laws of Robotics) im interested in some feedback and or corrections/ammendments to make them better :) I'll try to check it out soon. * * * To Tzalice Minoladir: That was a great story indeed, although some of it was little confusing to me (but that's because of my English skills). Anyway, I just want to make sure one thing: the DM makes the fear last for an hour, so she goes and gets the other PCs. I assume this was your DMs house rule, am I correct? * * * By BladeVenom: I don't see the Paladin with a Code of Conduct even being a playable character in anything but the simplest hack and slash adventures. I think it's the exact opposite. Paladins in hack'n'slash only games are basically just bad Fighters, and that's not the point of the Paladin class. In a roleplaying game for Paladins, social situations, moral questions etc. are the best parts of the game. And that's why I want to take a look at your example: Here's one type of scenario that would commonly occur. A Thay enclave has started a new enclave in the Paladins home territory. The legitmate ruler, although good was swayed by the generousity of the Thayan ambassador. So now they are legally allowed to come and ago and are protected by legitmate laws. First I'd like to say that this situation really isn't that common as you may want it to seem. Anyway, so far there's no problems... What happens when one of the evilest Red Wizards leaves the enclave to go back to Thay, to finish working on a new evil spell since he ran out of slaves in the enlcave to experiment on? He meets the Paladin character who knows how evil he is, and that he must be stopped or he will continue murdering helpless innocent slaves to create new evil spells and magic. Why of course the Paladin cannot allow him to continue to kill and further his evil cause and smites him. But the problems starts here. If the Paladin meets such Wizard, then the first thing is to try to use his social skills, not violence. Even if the Paladin knows that the creature tries to harm innocent people, the Paladin shouldn't attack first and talk later. It's the opposute. So... Now the Paladin has to submit himself to the laws of his land which are legitmate and enforced by a legitmate ruler. The Red Wizard was obeying the laws and was legally allowed to come and go as he pleased, so the Paladin is a murderer by law. So the Paladin bravely submits to his death sentence as a matyr in his cause against evil. The only other choice would be to continue breaking the law, killing the good law enforcement officers to run away as an outlaw vigilante, which of course would mean he would lose his status as a Paladin. The Paladin doesn't need to follow the laws of the land, but laws of his Code. Paladin's follow their Code, and good and law (which are both found in the Code). So if the Wizard was doing wrong, then the land's laws don't stop the Paladin to act against the Wizard. But as I said, he must talk first. So even if the Wizard was allowed to move within the lands, it doesn't mean that the laws would be the same for the Paladin, since the Paladin's Code says other than the land's laws. And you said that the land's laws are good. How is that? The laws aren't good anymore since the king allows evil creatures to swarm his lands. The king has changed the laws to serve evil as well, and that's not what Paladins must follow, not at all... This kind of situation would common in any complex world, and I don't see how a Paladin could stay a Paladin or not be put to death somewhere for upholding his beliefs over laws of the land. So the problem isn't in the Paladin class. They can keep up their believes even in the lands of evil, but they must always think before act. In your example the Paladin didn't think before he acted, so I don't see anything wrong if he'd lose his powers. * * * Frostbite_Ravenheart, although this Order isn't the same as Save the Core Paladin Foundation, I guess we could still continue to give the membership numbers here. Our first thought was to make some sort of new membership thing here, but I don't think it would work nor would it serve us much better either (although anything can happen). But anyway as Thunder Dragonbane said, you're now member #0000114. Welcome to our Foundation.
Tzalice Minoladir 07-08-03, 01:22 PM	sorry if my story was a little confusing. What I meant by the whole hour get the other PC things was since she couldn't turn around after 24 seconds and go back and fight, she kept going, She eventually made it back to very near the base within an hour and so, figuring out where she was, went and got the others before returning to the cave.. That clear things up? Yeah, and I think the DM made a house ruling on the fear lasting that long so my he could get the whole animated rogue thing going. ****************************** And Bladevenom: as to the "Why do you think there are so many blackguards?" question. There are a lot of reasons for this. :b: Some PCs want to play blackguards all along and want the cool stuff you get for transfering paladin levels to blackguard levels so take paladin for the first 8 or so levels until they can meet the prereqs for blackguard and then transfer the 8 level in paladin to fun times in blackguardville. :b: Not all blackguards come from paladin stock. Fighters make excellent blackguards as do monks and rogues off hand. I suppose evil mages COULD become blackguards and evil clerics work nicely as blackguards as well. "Blackguard" does not always mean "Fallen Paladin". :b: Not all paladins that fall become blackguards. Some fail to be lawful. Others espouse neutrality. If my pally falls, she'll prolly become either a cleric or a holy liberator (which is actually probably a bigger fall from grace being a pally of St. Cuthbert :angel: ). :b: If the paladin really was in a no win situation, that is taken into account. There's always atonement. Plus there's usually always some way out of a situation that is still within the code. Really it comes down to the reason there are blackguards is that people want to play them. As with assassins or any other core or prestige class.
Erlan-Starr 07-09-03, 10:58 AM	Originally posted by BladeVenom I don't see the Paladin with a Code of Conduct even being a playable character in anything but the simplest hack and slash adventures. Here's one type of scenario that would commonly occur. A Thay enclave has started a new enclave in the Paladins home territory. The legitmate ruler, although good was swayed by the generousity of the Thayan ambassador. So now they are legally allowed to come and ago and are protected by legitmate laws. What happens when one of the evilest Red Wizards leaves the enclave to go back to Thay, to finish working on a new evil spell since he ran out of slaves in the enlcave to experiment on? He meets the Paladin character who knows how evil he is, and that he must be stopped or he will continue murdering helpless innocent slaves to create new evil spells and magic. Why of course the Paladin cannot allow him to continue to kill and further his evil cause and smites him. Now the Paladin has to submit himself to the laws of his land which are legitmate and enforced by a legitmate ruler. The Red Wizard was obeying the laws and was legally allowed to come and go as he pleased, so the Paladin is a murderer by law. So the Paladin bravely submits to his death sentence as a matyr in his cause against evil. The only other choice would be to continue breaking the law, killing the good law enforcement officers to run away as an outlaw vigilante, which of course would mean he would lose his status as a Paladin. This kind of situation would common in any complex world, and I don't see how a Paladin could stay a Paladin or not be put to death somewhere for upholding his beliefs over laws of the land. First, appologies, after reading your last post it is obvious you are infact not "Lye" so welcome to the board! Now back to our regular scheduled program. ;) The problem I see with your initial scenario is as follows: A Thay enclave has started a new enclave in the Paladins home territory. So far no real problem, it appears that these "enclaves" are the equivelent to a modern day "embassy". as a matter of fact i can see a "good" realm could just as easily set up a similar situation in a "evil" realm, but this time instead of using wizards they use paladins! (i love the spell hide alignment! ;) ) What happens when one of the evilest Red Wizards... of course hes Evil...which is why the "good" king has the paladin shadowing him! only a complete fool would not try to keep tabs of his "guests". ;) ...to finish working on a new evil spell since he ran out of slaves in the enlcave to experiment on? this brings in a couple of questions....obviously the intelligence gathering in the kingdom is quite good...how else do you explain that the paladin "knows" that the wizard(s) in question are working on a new "evil" spell? He meets the Paladin character who knows how evil he is, and that he must be stopped or he will continue murdering helpless innocent slaves to create new evil spells and magic Well, this is not quite as black and white as you would make it seem. As mentioned previously, the overall intelligence of what the Wizards of Thay are doing is quite good. What is missing is not "what" they are doing...but "why" they are doing it! Who is to say the paladin in question was not infact ordered to follow/escort the Wizard in question and ascertain as much information as to what the "Wizards" are up too? If the paladin "smites" the wizard in question, he could infact be endangering not only his realm but potentially the entire world! Remember, there is a reason why paladins tend to have high "wisdom" scores. They are not automatons of death and destruction. their primary mission is to defeat evil. The most obvious way is of course..."Must kill "evil" creature X" but there is more than one way to fight evil. most are forthright granted....but others require a more "deft" touch. The way the paladin is written, and considering that he has the ability to "hide" his alignment, it is obvious that the designers tried to make the "paladin" much more 3 dimensional character than the stereotypical "Dudley Doright" with a sword. Given the fact that we know little about this paladin and/or what his/her mission is, the remainder of your scenario is much more problamatic.
Sir Ferdinand 07-10-03, 11:22 AM	Yeah, and I think the DM made a house ruling on the fear lasting that long so my he could get the whole animated rogue thing going. That's what I thought. Because normally Fear lasts only 1 round per level.
Tzalice Minoladir 07-11-03, 11:34 AM	Yeah, special case DM thing I suppose. Oh well, made for a more interesting story I suppose. She prolly would have died had she gone back alone anyhow.
Rose Madder 07-11-03, 03:57 PM	Ok--pardon for butting in: slightly different paladin topic: What to do with treasure? This is I think more valid with lower levels, where one is still trying to get really good armor, a +1 anything, etc.... What are you doing with treasure? Do you equip paladin first, then give money away? Do you turn down rewards for good deeds as being only what any nice self-respecting paladin would do? Seems like this paladin coud really suck up the gold... save for the good stuff next shopping trip or give in thankfulness to one's deity for coming through in the pinch? And do you DMs give goodies out to paladins who give their coin away a bit too freely? It is nicely in character, but... Your opinion please?
Erlan-Starr 07-12-03, 12:04 AM	Originally posted by Rose Madder Ok--pardon for butting in: slightly different paladin topic: What to do with treasure? This is I think more valid with lower levels, where one is still trying to get really good armor, a +1 anything, etc.... What are you doing with treasure? Do you equip paladin first, then give money away? Do you turn down rewards for good deeds as being only what any nice self-respecting paladin would do? Seems like this paladin coud really suck up the gold... save for the good stuff next shopping trip or give in thankfulness to one's deity for coming through in the pinch? And do you DMs give goodies out to paladins who give their coin away a bit too freely? It is nicely in character, but... Your opinion please? well....unlike previous incarnations...a paladin isnt obligated to absolutely give away money...however i think it is safe 2 say that a paladin that becomes an Ebenizer Scrooge with a sword problably isnt the way to play him. alot of it has to do with what type of world your in. if magic items can be bought/sold on the open market...it makes absolute sense for a paladin to accumalate wealth...after all...a under equiped paladin isnt going to be able to defeat evil as easily. but the trick is balancing what you might need with hording...its easy to get sidetracked....being a paladin can be quite a challenge! ;)
Tzalice Minoladir 07-12-03, 11:33 AM	Hey Rose, welcome to the boards. (That's a good book by the way ^.^). As to the question, I'd go with Erlan. However, I'll say I did like the concepts that 2e imposed upon paladins as far as tithing and magic item space. Personally, my Aeridyn's code limits her to 15 items including a suit of armor, 4 magic weapons, and stuff for her mount and I still have her tithe a fairly large portion of her finds to the church (which yeah, is annoying at lower levels. I think where we last left off, she had 5 gold, needs to tithe and owes the druid a boat moreover she needs to buy some better armour for herself as her scalemail got into a little accident.... (it happened in my above story) >.<. Unfortunately her priorities are in that order, so she'll be in leather for a while. I think, if your paladin tithes, that is their priority. However, any excess they find should go towards equipping themselves in the best possible equipment. If they don't tithe, there is still the whole helping those who need thing. The trick to playing a pally is I think really just making sure that you don't go to any excess. I have actually yet to DM any paladins but i don't know if I'd give any bonuses for tithing or the like, but it's definitely brownie points. Paladin gets loads of cool stuff, but no one ever said it would be easy. The church is more likely to help the paladin and thus his/her party however if donations are generous. :angel:
Rose Madder 07-12-03, 10:29 PM	thx Tzalice--I was confusing older flavor of paladin w/ 3rd edition... Rose Madder is the name of my current pally; havent read the King book w/ same name... my Rose pally is the Pink Paladin--wears black spiked banded mail (ok--so she has money issues) w/ a nice pretty rose-pink surcoat, emblem is rose... I like the contrast of danger vs silly. Had a dwarven paladin in full plate named Eikant Suimm... i just cant do serious dnd...or anythign for that matter. So--another question (s): this is probably painfully obvious to you all, howeve ri am not all that experienced in dnd, so please bear with me-- marching order of paladins vs other members of party, and honor: paladin (-9 move silently), clanking and clanging (in say, a dungeon) out in front, to attract attacks adn free the rogue and wizard to attack in their own peculiar ways, or paladin behind rogue a ways, letting rogue scout out the way, to check for traps, etc, BUT that means letting letting someone else enter danger first--there are honor issues here... would love your opinions, all.. .how to join order/get number? :embarrass
Sir Ferdinand 07-13-03, 04:46 AM	marching order of paladins vs other members of party, and honor: paladin (-9 move silently), clanking and clanging (in say, a dungeon) out in front, to attract attacks adn free the rogue and wizard to attack in their own peculiar ways, or paladin behind rogue a ways, letting rogue scout out the way, to check for traps, etc, BUT that means letting letting someone else enter danger first--there are honor issues here... would love your opinions, all.. Well, I'd say it depends on the players. If the Paladin player wants him/her Paladin to be frontline, then by all means he could go first and secure the areas. However if the Rogue wants to go first and scout the area, then the Paladin has no choice but to let the Rogue go. Well he could try to talk to the Rogue of course, but if the Rogue has made the decision to go first, then that's it. So from those two options I'd go with the second. But as I said, it depends on the players, and how they want to play their characters. If something happens to the Rogue, then it's not the Paladin's fault. .how to join order/get number? Well to join this Order, you basicaly need to just post here. We thought of some kind of membership in this Order as well, but this thread has grown so big already that there's no need for specific membership lists. However there's this old Save the Core Paladin Foundation, and if you want, you could have membership number to that Foundation.
Tzalice Minoladir 07-13-03, 10:37 AM	I think we're on #0000115 as to membership numbers. I read back through the last 3 pages (If you read it backwards there are secret subliminal messages about being chivalric, it's creepy :angel:) and I couldn't find, but I believe someone said something about being 0000114. Welcome to the order Rose ^.^ (and nothing wrong with slightly silly DnD characters. I've run quests based on lucky charms and that old nickelodeon show Legends of the Hidden Temple :D. They're fun and no one ever realises what's going on until about 2 hours into it when they're like "Heeeeey!") As to marching order, I'd suppose the paladin could go in the front or the back. Strategically, they're probably better off in the back so the rogue can scout ahead and they can "protect the party from being caught by surprise." Putting the pally in front would result in a lot more wandering encounters. But it depends on the paladin and it depends on the party. However, a paladin prolly shouldn't be the trapspringer "Okay, so you fell down the pit trap, just climb up now" *Paladin in full plate with 80 lbs of gear* "....Just a minute...":nonono: I dunno, that's how I see that one.
Tenerus 07-13-03, 10:50 AM	I don't think a paladin would have issues with a a scout doing his job. Maybe that is just me, however.
Rose Madder 07-14-03, 07:25 PM	Thx!!! slinking back paladin (sneak sneak clang crash) it is, then...
Thunder Dragonbane 07-14-03, 10:16 PM	If there is a "scout" in the party I will let him do his job. In this case I take reargaurd position. Otherwise I trade off with the party's fighter, or Barbarian for point. This seems to work, most of the time.
OilPaintingofDeath 07-15-03, 12:16 AM	I'm just starting with my Paladin I really need to get a wider perspective of all things Paladin. Basically I'm looking for a Paladin Walkthrough.
Tenerus 07-15-03, 12:30 AM	If there is a "scout" in the party I will let him do his job. In this case I take reargaurd position. Remember all, there is no dishonor in being the Rear-guard. It is one if the most dangerous jobs out there. Historically, during the Crusades, King Richard the Lionheart used the Knights Hospitaller almost exclusively in this role, prefering them to even his own troops (who he put of the sides). The Battle of Roncesvalles (from the Legends of Charlemagne) is based on a rear-guard action. Fought by Count Roland (or Orlando, depending on the source), who is one of the prime inspirations of the Paladin class.
Thunder Dragonbane 07-15-03, 01:23 AM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tenerus [B]Remember all, there is no dishonor in being the Rear-guard. It is one if the most dangerous jobs out there. I never said that there was. Actually in some situations it can be fun. I have on a couple of occasions basicly told the party to run and held a small horde off of them for as long as I could. You should have seen their faces when I cought back up with them this last time. Not only did I face fifty to one odds, I actually survived. (Thanks the gods of good for a narrow raviene, and no enemy spell slingers.) Without those I would have been swarmed over.
Tenerus 07-15-03, 01:46 AM	I was just eleaborating on your post, Thunder. It seems a lot of people who come to this thread are new to playing paladins, and can always use some help in debunking the all too common "lawful stupid" stereotype that some books seem to forcefeed on them.
Sir Ferdinand 07-15-03, 03:16 PM	I'm just starting with my Paladin I really need to get a wider perspective of all things Paladin. Basically I'm looking for a Paladin Walkthrough. Unfortunately it's almost impossible to list all things what Paladins are required to do and what Paladins can do with their abilities etc. So you really must just ask some specific questions and we can try to answer the questions.
Rose Madder 07-15-03, 04:29 PM	Hi All! OK-- i will feel fine then about bringing up rear--hey--i'll be closer to our wizard Tank (paladin whiffs most saves, attacks, etc, then the wizard bales her out... it is scary) who i am sure will rescue her again... I reeealy need new dice... OIlpaintingof death, bet we had the same art-teacher... seriously-ish, there are a lot of great paladin-threads here, so if you go through them you will pick up a great deal. Have you looked at the Ten commandments of the paladin thread? that's got great discussion on it... and there is one on paladins and prisoners... and of course this thread which you have already found! You could also find threads on specific uses of special abilities, or certain types of attacks... i find this site almost overwhelming in how much info there is--though it takes a long time to read through so many threads... Give us specific questions...
Thunder Dragonbane 07-15-03, 09:54 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tenerus [B]I was just eleaborating on your post, Thunder. My mistake, I thought you meant somthing else.:embarrass
Tzalice Minoladir 08-07-03, 11:02 AM	wow... do you know how long it takes to find a thread that's fallen back 13 pages? I have a question I came up with last night and bear with me, it was kinda late. So a guardian naga is a LG creature, right (If you aren't sure, just trust me)? The guardian naga has a poisonous bite attack, but uses it judiciously. Now the PHB states that a paladin, a LG class, may not use poison. If said naga, without arms or such, were to take levels in paladin for some reason or another (we'll assume it happens). Would the naga be forced to use only spells or would it be allowed to use its natural bite attack given the stipulation that paladins can't use poison? I guess that goes for any paladin with a natural poison, but ah well. Sorry, popped into my head last night.
Sir Ferdinand 08-07-03, 12:09 PM	If said naga, without arms or such, were to take levels in paladin for some reason or another (we'll assume it happens). Would the naga be forced to use only spells or would it be allowed to use its natural bite attack given the stipulation that paladins can't use poison? I guess that goes for any paladin with a natural poison, but ah well. Sorry, popped into my head last night. Hmmm... this is a tough question. I think one could make a special exception on this one, since otherwise that Paladin couldn't attack at all. Of course attacking others isn't a neceaasrity to Paladins, but if he had to protect someone else, that'd be his only choice. So he's basically just using a natural attack and poison is a side product. EDIT: wow... do you know how long it takes to find a thread that's fallen back 13 pages? That's why I have a link to this thread in my sig ;)
Tzalice Minoladir 08-07-03, 01:45 PM	didn't think about your siggy Ferdie. Also didn't think to read through my subscribed threads. It was fun to look through the past two-three weeks of threads. As to the naga, it's LG and it uses poison as a regular attack, sure it casts as a 7th level sorcerer, but still, that's like 3rd level spells at best I think. I dunno, I mean the whole it being lawful good caught me offguard while reading my MM
Sir Ferdinand 08-07-03, 02:21 PM	didn't think about your siggy Ferdie. Also didn't think to read through my subscribed threads. It was fun to look through the past two-three weeks of threads. I searched through 11 pages on my previous posts page today. It was kind of fun too, I was searching one Cleric thing. As to the naga, it's LG and it uses poison as a regular attack, sure it casts as a 7th level sorcerer, but still, that's like 3rd level spells at best I think. I dunno, I mean the whole it being lawful good caught me offguard while reading my MM Do you mean that his bite doesn't cause any damage? If that's the case, then it'd make it even more complicated. But if the poison is an add on on top of bite attack damage, then it could be accepted IMO, though only if it would be his last choice. As for the spells, this makes it a bit easier for Nagas, since they could cast spells to help others, but if he'd run out of spells, and his bite attack would be the last choice, I don't think he should be penalised of such attack which is natural to him. Especially because it's natural poison, not magical or alchemical.
Maligant the Wise 08-09-03, 02:15 AM	Hello all, I do not have a copy of CRI 3.5. What if any are the changes to the Paladin class? Thanks, :angel:
Sir Ferdinand 08-09-03, 10:01 AM	Go here 3.5 edition SRD Classes part II - Paladin (http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/v35/ClassesII.rtf) I didn't want to post it here, because it would've taken too much space, but Paladin is the first class in that link, so go and take a look. Some changes are good, some are not...
Tzalice Minoladir 08-09-03, 12:46 PM	The bite does damage, but I don't know if the poison's an optional add on. Oh well, it's not like I'll be playing one. Just a thought I had :)
Tzalice Minoladir 08-09-03, 12:49 PM	oh, shameless plug, the CoC project's done :)
Rose Madder 08-10-03, 01:15 PM	Hi All! Well, there could be a reason that nagas are LG-- nagas are a part of the Vajrayana Buddhism legends. Sacred guardians and all that good stuff. Personally, (being of that faith) nagas will always be LG in my campaign, and I would allow a paladin naga to use its own poison because it is not a hidden weapon---after all, the naga is a giant snake, and many snakes are poisonsous... It is being true to its nature, no deception there. Tricky question though...
Frostbite_Ravenheart 08-10-03, 02:36 PM	WOW its been a long time since i been on this thread...(Rubs his eyes in disbelif at how much it grew) You know its not easy liking soo many classes and races and then calling yourself the reprsentive of good (i have posted in EVERY good-alinged race/class thread :P what a nerd, yet a good nerd :D) Ok heres topic for discusion, hope i am not intruding but its somthing that has plagued paladins for YEARS. Having posien-using-Treaser-stealing-Lock-picking-Trap-setting-pick-pocketting-GOOD-ALIANGENT-pain-in-the-Arse-rouges. Now I have always had a rouge in my game when i was a paladin (i am playing a NG Bard-Paladin as of now, We all got a speacil power wether it be a nice sword (the fighter) invisablity 3x per day (the rouge) or the complete spell book (The wizard) he alloued me to be a Paladin-Bard beaucse its not that much stronger. Paladins and bards are two classes that are called underpowered the most often but i love them both) Anyways thats beside the point. Alright what should a paladin do when he has a consent ill-lawful rouge take actions that help the group but seem so evil somtimes? I tend to rebuke (verbally hes not undead :P) the theif but its very hard even if i am Leader of the group :D. He always keeps pulling pranks and threw the fighters sword into a pond once while we were on top of a hill that toook an hour to climb...The dm likes it beacuse he thinks its perfect anarcy that the group needs to solve but the fool-prankster dosent do anything thats directly evil. Well hope this starts some good discusion (Exsuse me if i have any speeling erros i dident check my work ;) )
Rose Madder 08-10-03, 02:59 PM	Wow, Frosty, that's quite a character issue... and I don't know...We have a halfling rogue too (doesn't everyone?) So far I have solved this from a player standpoint. Whenever the rogue (NG) needs to do something unlawful, like lockpicking, my character finds something that requires her attention around the corner. She never sees the crime, and no one in their right mind will give over... However, that tactic will only work so long, and I truly am not sure what to do when I have to "bust" the rogue. Several options: 1. Play indignant, outraged Pally, and thrash that .. .um.. person. 2. Play offended, but worried-about-you-soul pally, and preach at her. A lot. Annoy her into right behavior. 3. Deeply affronted, "you have disappointed me, our friendship is in danger" pally. 4. "Haahaa, what a playful spirit--now its my turn to play" play... After all, justice is a good thing.... Persuade all other PCs to treat the rogue to a lesson in "fair play". All of you together could probably think up enough pranks to seriously challenge the rogue's sanity... and sounds like they will be rather eager to get a shot at the rogue, too... How about a thread for "101 Ways of Getting Even with the Party's Thief"?
Tzalice Minoladir 08-10-03, 03:35 PM	Oooh.. where's that 101 ways to get back at your party rogue thread? *plays the party rogue too ^.^* Hmm... frosty, if you're a NG paladin, you might not have as big a problem as the LG pally would with the rogue stealing lest the rogue's taking from those who actually need it. I like Rose's options ^.^ amusing. If you're NG though, you might just wanna talk to the rogue if s/he does something that puts someone in the party or its goal at risk ^.^ Good luck!
Ax'Orl 08-11-03, 11:46 AM	What is the groups general ideas on the definition of Lawful....for me I play my pallys as orderly, honest, and obedient to the rules of their order. However, some in my group have taken to saying that the Pally should not break the LAW. The way my character is, He knows that the laws were created by imperfect men/women and are interpreted by more imperfect men/women therefore the laws are imperfect. He obeys a higher calling....what are your opinions?:angel:
Sir Ferdinand 08-11-03, 11:54 AM	Alright what should a paladin do when he has a consent ill-lawful rouge take actions that help the group but seem so evil somtimes? Hmmm... first the Paladin really should try to talk to the Rogue, though I'm sure he has done that already. Second, since you're the leader of the group, you could talk to other party member about it and you could make a trick to him. Just say that you'll leave the Rogue right where he is, if he doesn't end his tricks. And if he doesn't believe, then the party could really do that, although they would come back to get the Rogue back at one point. It's really hard to say, especially becaue you don't seem to play by the rules anyway. So I don't know how much your Paladin could bend the rules without losing his powers.
Sir Ferdinand 08-11-03, 11:59 AM	Ax'Orl, this is my view of Paladin and laws. I'll make it short (because I've been trying to explain it in this thread and many other threads). Paladins' main goal is to stay Good. However you could say that the law of the Paladins is their Code. Code determines what Paladins can do and cannot do, so basically any law which differs from the Paladin's Code is not a law that Paladins follow.
Tzalice Minoladir 08-15-03, 10:08 AM	yeah, you're lawful to your personal code. Might I suggest actually writing it up for your DM. Cuts down character/dm disputes greatly and helpsyou understand your paladin a bit better. If you're at a loss... *blatant promotion of first link in her sig... and the second one too, but it's not pally related* They're only required to respect just laws and right rulers. An evil ruler does not have the right to rule and any law conflicting with the pally's CoC (their view of just, right, and good) is thereby not just. :)
Frostbite_Ravenheart 08-15-03, 06:32 PM	Yeah i dident see that before Sir Ferdinand, I am NG not LG...now what would cause me to loose my powers? I guess doing anything thats evil romotly evil (Like killing somone who shows up at detect evil but you have no reason too...kinda like a mercy thing. What if he is a rouge that has nothing else to do? Then again would that person be evil?) Meh the thing is that i am leader but he is generaly well liked beacuse he is funny. People in my group (after my damn half-elf paladin had to set the example) do not hold grudes...thats what women do... (LADIES DO NOT TAKE OFFENSE FROM THAT I DO NOT MEAN IT DONT HURT ME!!!!!...Most of my paladins have somthing...Wrong with them...or have taken oaths of poverty or abstinnece...beacuse preduce always went to him he became sextest...I REPEAT MOST OF MY PALADIN AND I DONT ACT LIKE THAT!!!!) Thanks for the input though :devil: whoops :blush: i mean :angel: :D
Tzalice Minoladir 08-18-03, 02:40 PM	if your DM allowed a NG pally, it shouldn't be a problem
|B|-Deadman- 09-27-03, 03:55 AM	I'm in a position where my lvl 6 human sorc, has turned. He was a LE character before, but due to his company, a elven ranger CG and a gnome druid LG, i've come to a point where i have to make a choice. Due to the characters behaviour in the game, i'm beginning to admire their courage and abilities. I've decided that based on this, i could choose to become either, ranger, cleric, fighter or paladin. Now i favor the Paladin class a LOT! I've played many a Paladin, some i've played a bit longer than others, hehe, but i've never been in the situation i'm in now. I'm trying to find out if it would in any way go against the Codes of an "ordinary" Paladin to be fighting from the back of the rows, combining my spell abilities with that of the paladin. Now i've chosen some touchspells, ranged touch spells (invented a few too), and with the paladins hit bonus, they might just be very efficient in a combat situation. This, combined with the spell that provides you with a ghostly hand to deliver touch attacks, makes it natural and most tactically wise for me to be in the back, as i'm not wearing armour now, nor do i really plan to, nor do i have the hp to stand up front and tank. But is it against a Paladins ways. I've read Defenders of the faith over and over, as well as the PhB, 3.5. Nowhere does it state that i cannot fight from the rear of the party. It states, actually, that any tactical advantage should be used etc. But still.. i cannot help but feeling that i'm taking advantage of the rules and i'm not playing my paladin right. Would any of you ever dream of making this combo, and if so, would you consider staying in the back and not feel a twinge of guilt anywhere? I look forward to hearing your oppinions, and i'd like to thank you all in advance.
Tzalice Minoladir 10-03-03, 10:36 PM	The paladin is supposed to use his/her better judgement. There's nothing saying he must be on the front lines, however, you will be getting that shiny new BAB and d10 HD so you could feasibly fight (wait, spell failure from armour...hmm). I wouldn't see a problem with it. Sounds fun.
Sir Ferdinand 10-05-03, 06:58 AM	|B|-Deadman-, think of it like this. Being a soon dead Paladin in front line is worse option than being behind your allies using the powers you really have mastered. As long as you do everything you can to help your allies and you don't run away from the battle, then there's nothing wrong with such tactic.
DrakeRunner 10-05-03, 10:51 AM	Yeah. Many a Paladin player thinks they have to go overboard on everything. No they shouldn't run away, and you don't have the required stats to tank. Nobody is going to fault you except for people who expect Paladins to be frothing religious zealots. Thats my buzzword, btw, if you've seen my other Paladin posts. Way too many people see Frothing Religious Zealots. FRZs. Hah. Anyway, if it weren't for the fact Smite was a melee attack, there'd be more Paladin archers. Thats pretty much the whole reason they wade into battle. The rest is just stuff that people have reinforced with their FRZ idea. Hmmm. For the rogue, well, if he hasn't done anything evil, the Paladin should really just accept that not everyone follows the LG (Or NG I suppose)way of life, and accept that. I'd keep doing the "I'll just be around the corner then" in the same way "Man, I'm so glad I was looking in the other direction if you pickpocketed that person, so I wouldn't know or be held accountable." In fact, be that blatantly obvious to the rogue. If you stopped getting upset about it, he'd probably get bored and quit the pranks.
Frostbite_Ravenheart 11-23-03, 04:54 PM	Wow its been awhile but should we try and revitalize this foundation?
Super Draco Whitewind 11-23-03, 09:53 PM	Originally posted by Sir Ferdinand This is a new thread for all things Paladins. You can discuss about the rules of Paladins, what Paladins are required to do, what is expected from them, 3.5 edition Paladins, saving the core Paladin etc. And you can share your own Paladin characters, stories of Paladins etc. But remember that this place is not meant for Paladin variants. This place is only for the core Paladin class presented in either 3rd edition or in 3.5 edition (excluding the stories of different Paladins). So this thread has basically the same idea as Save the Core Paladin Foundation, but now there's no membership number and this is for more general discussion. Feel free to post all things Paladins. Here are the rules we all should agree with (credits goes to Erlann-Starr who wrote these rules): Paladins Anonymous: VIII Step Program of Paladins Anonymous I. We admit we are powerless over the fact that the Paladin is a "Core Class" as dictated by WoTC. II. We have come to believe that a Power greater than ourselves (WoTC) will not fail us and keep it that way. III. We have made a decision to accept that no amount of whining/complaining and/or pleading will change this unalterable fact. IV. We accept that all Paladins will be Lawful and Good. V. We accept that all other classes be they "Homebrew" and/or official PrC's that do not accept Step IV shall not be considered a Paladin. VI. We are entirely ready to protect the status of the "Paladin" to our utmost. But all defense must be of a noble nature. Personal Insults and/or Flames go counter to the Paladins CoC, thus prohibited. This is why I decided to start my own foundation. simply becuase of the fact that i don't agree with that all. vairants and the like are welcome into my thread, and not focusing 100% on simply the core paladin, despite the title, which shall soon be changed. ~Draco
Super Draco Whitewind 11-23-03, 09:53 PM	double post
Super Draco Whitewind 11-23-03, 09:53 PM	triple post
Asmodeous 11-24-03, 12:41 AM	Hello everybody! im a long time role player of dnd, v 1 - 3.5 and only recently started playing my first paladin, whose name is aramis of torm, currently level 5. my dm has really been twisting the thumb screws on him morally as he should ;-) anyway, my paladin had been in the past faced with two moralle dilemna's which where basically "you must make a deal/let evil scum live in order to perform your quest/defeat a greater evil) both times i decided to do the wrong thing, and make the "deal" so to speak, do the quest and kill the even eviller bad guy, then return to my church and serve volunteray penance. so my dm sends the chruch inquisitor for me. seems my mentor a level 7 paladin has fallen and wants to know if my mentors failings has passed on to his student. having served two voluntary penances makes things look pretty bleak for my paladin. anyway, my character had done the right thing in both cases as even though the people i was forced to deal with where morally evil, they had done nothing wrong to the best of my characters knowledge where as the targets of my quests had, such as keeping a very young gold dragon hostage and plan to sacrifice to evil diety. it turned out that this was the flaw passed on to my paladin by his mentor, that every compromising decision made had to be atoned for which eventually led to his falling and would eventually lead to my pallies. in the end, i kept my pally hood though i had a good rap over the knuckles, but learnt that a paladin cannot defeat every form of evil that he encounters, but as long as he always goes after the worst evil that he knows of, then he is doing the pally thing right, and can keep his pally hood. does this sound all right by all you experienced paladin players out there? Im still trying to cut my teeth on this whole paladin character playing so some pointers would be very handy!
aravilar_holistacia 11-24-03, 01:19 AM	If you wish to continue to call this thread a "foundation" I suggest you read the CoC guidelines provided by WizO_Catoblepas to prevent this thread being locked. aravilar PS: :bump:
Elurindel 04-16-05, 07:31 AM	I'm currently playing a campaign where a 6th level paladin is adventuring with a bard/dragon disciple, a fighter/ranger, and a sorceror who wants to be an arcane archer. i think I'm the only pure character, although I'm considering becoming a Risen Martyr, if it makes for a good storyline. We're currently in a desert land, stopping the machinations of a white dragon and his half-dragon son from another continent, who go forth, spreading icey doom before all they see.