Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Krunk The Smasher 08-21-03, 03:11 AM	Anyone have some suggestions for RPing a Pally? I want to play one soon, but I have never played one, nor have I ever played a LG alignment (i have really only played a CG and NG). Any tips would be appreciated.
aleshandre 08-21-03, 09:25 AM	The can of worms has been opened. Think of the ideal knight in shining armor, then go a step beyond that. For a good example, watch Disney's Sleeping Beauty. The prince fits in the template. [personal oppinion]Paladins should follow a set of laws that are good in nature, but should be more strict in obeying them. Where a CG or NG character would be more flexible in how they aproach justice, a Paladin has no room for that kind of flexibility. [/personal oppinion] Paladins aren't neccesarily perfect, but they try to be. In a battle, the Paladin is the one who stays to hold the narrow corridor, so that his friends and comrades can retreat. Think in terms of what vows the Pally has taken. The Following are the kind that may be required of a paladin (depending on the god, religion, etc.): chastity (does not neccesarily restrict marriage) obediance (to a set of laws or a higher authority like a church, priest, or LG monarch/govt.) sacrifice (of self, interests, money, etc. Not neccesarily blood sacrifice) abstinance (restricts all sensual activity and marriage) Others may be required, some, all or none of these may be required. Once you have established acceptable oaths, etc. according to the Pal's religious/philosophical orientation, you have all the guidlines you need.
Trydan 08-21-03, 09:27 AM	Firstly, make 3 standard responses to common party activities. For example, here are some frequently occurring situations: [list=1] Another party member comes up with an idea A party member volunteers to do something dangerous An NPC, Monster, bystander, etc. dies [/list=1] The responses should involve righteousness, justice and divinity. Here are some suggestions to the above situations: [list=1] "Pelor be praised, that he hath chosen to bestow his wisdom upn you." "May Pelor guide you through the darkness in the name of Righteousness" "Pelor grant the fallen their eternal rest/torment" [/list=1] As you go on, pick up some more stock phrases. Also, always hold up the group in non-critical (or if you wish, critical) situations with your rituals and habits. PC: Okay crew, let's get out of here and hit the road... Pal: We may depart after my daily offerings to my god. PC: But, c'mon, we shouldn't waste time. Pal: Do you call devotions to the all-powerful a waste of time? Or are you merely seeking to corrupt us? Where is your allegience! Other habits can include making offerings, seeking out temples in every waypoint-village, polishing the armour like a ritual every morning, etc. etc. Then start questioning the "cause": "Are we smiting evil?", "Where is the damsel in distress?", etc. And of course, refuse to engage in any dubious activities, suggested by chaotic members of the party. E.g. Rogue: Right... I'll just quietly sneak around the back Paladin: Oh no you wont. (and then, turning to the DM... "I go and kick in the front door!") These are al very simple, but they should help get you started, and provide a basis for developing some more sophisticated role-playing techniques. May the goodness of Pelor bless you in your playing style and bestow upon you the valour to inspire awe and greatness in your fellow players!
ron4555 08-21-03, 10:26 AM	I think its reasonable for an adventuring Paladin to feel it is his or her role to be a shining beacon of the way others should act, while understanding (to some extent) that others may not share his views. A Paladin need not assume all who do not follow his religion are corrupt. A fellow party member whose actions have proven them to be valliant and good need not accept whatever rituals the Paladin assumes. Furthermore, in non-FR games, a Paladin is acceptable as someone who seeks personal perfection and doesn't have any set ritual other than meditation or concentration time to assess the situation and determine the greater good that needs to be served. A Paladin above all is an example. Never run out of fear (but retreating to gain a great goal later is still fine. They're Lawful Good, not Lawful Stupid). Never take advantage of the weak. Never ignore the needy out of convenience. The ends never justify the means to a Paladin, no matter how evil the enemy. For the lawful bent, I see a Paladin as both personally ordered, and respectful of all legitimate authority. If a town is ruled by an evil regent, but one who applies all laws equally and is the rightful ruler (not an invader who has enslaved a town) the Paladin will respect the laws while in that jurisdiction. However, if the laws are applied unequally against the innocent, he no longer is compelled to obey. Role-playing a Paladin is an interesting process, and its best to understand the parameters your DM will place on you, and transgressions can result in power loss. Good luck, its a great class to play.
Domni Dalrose 08-21-03, 11:52 AM	I'm not sure if you like to read or not, but I highly reccomend a book called The Clandestine Circle (Dragonlance) by Mary H. Herbert. It's the best take on a pally I've seen in recent years and should give you some ideas on playing one.
aleshandre 08-21-03, 12:16 PM	I like the way that ron4555 put it. I had a Paladin (back in AD&D) and he acted just that way. In my group, we had a CE thief, who was VERY careful around my Pally not to do evil things. My Pally even saved his life after he (the thief) drank an elixer of badness and tried to kill everyone else in the party. He was just that kind of guy, stand as a light for his companions and let them have thier own ways, in hope that the example would bring them to enlightenment. OTOH, there was an incedent where the Ranger in the group was about to use a wand of lightning on a female Ranger, who was leaving (just because she turned him down in the tavern). My guy attacked and destroyed the wand with his sword, nearly costing his own life, since there were several charges left in the wand, just because it was the right thing to do. the point is, oppose even those of your own alignment, even if they share your god, if they are acting in an evil manner. Spare and protect the lives of people who are acting in a good and just manner, because they may change for the better. note: oppose doesn't necessarily mean kill, just see to it that they learn a lesson.
JusticeZero 08-21-03, 12:43 PM	Imagine a -good- police officer (assuming you're in the U.S. or somewhere where the law is actually good). The kind that works in the system and does their best to see right things done. Now find someone who's religious who actually lives up to a set of higher morals (this may be hard to find, I understand, but i'm noyt asking for an extreme, just a good example). Now combine the two, leaving out any outright perverse or horrific remnants. Try to act something like that.
Veii 08-21-03, 01:41 PM	Try a non-traditional paladin. Maybe he isn't an inspiritional talker? Maybe he leads by action. In fact, he may be a bit older than the rest of the group. Seen some action and had his zeal healthily tempered. He still fights the good fight and doesn't tolerate evil but he isn't a televangelist trying to convert every flower he walks by. Also, paladins do not always need a structured and written code. The tenents of their faith in conjuction with their Lawful Good alignment (also in conjunction with a DM with common sense) should be code enough. I once played a mute paladin. Could not speak at all. Great character. Never became comical either. He always walked a thin line with his paladin status, which to me, is how it should be. The life of the Paladin is supposed to be hard. Paladins should have to make hard decisions. When your best friend who is LN (entirely reasonable), decides he has to kill a cleric from your church for whatever reason, what do you do? In my mind, the high level Paladin is not a knight in shining armor at all. He is a man who grips on to his faith like it is the last thing that preserves him. Having led a hard life and made many difficult choices, he looks back with a lot of sour memories. He may have done the right thing, but that doesn't always make a person feel good about it (which we can all relate to). Once more, some ideas of a non-traditional paladin.
MrNiceGuy 08-21-03, 02:05 PM	Originally posted by Krunk The Smasher Anyone have some suggestions for RPing a Pally? I want to play one soon, but I have never played one, nor have I ever played a LG alignment (i have really only played a CG and NG). Any tips would be appreciated. IMO the most important thing you can do is discuss at length your code w/ your DM. Sadly, many DMs make it their mission to render the Paladin unplayable. You need to determine if you own DM is going to do this. Please keep in mind that every time the character walks around a corner should not present some kind of hopeless moral dilemma - these will doubtless crop up in the game, but if there is nothing else, you will rapidly tire of the character. Paul
krunchyfrogg 08-21-03, 04:24 PM	A good influence I've seen posted on enworld quite a bit is to play your character like Samurai Jack. Good advice, in my book. Read Dragonlance: Chronicles, and pay attention to Sturm Brightblade (Sturm isn't really a Paladin, but he acts like one should!). Just remember that not everybody can live up to your high standards, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't let them know about it when they don't. Always remember that, as a Paladin, you need to set a good example all the time. The Paladin's Handbook has some other great examples, and you can probably pick one up pretty cheaply on ebay.com.
Israfel666 08-21-03, 07:03 PM	Have you read any of Drizzt's book? Well, think about Drizzt. He is the perfect paladin. Yes, yes, I know that Drizzt is listed as CG in the FRCS. But believe me, he is CG not because he does not respect laws and traditions, but just because he currently has none to follow. I don't pretend to read Salvatore's mind, but if Drizzt found a worthy king/knightly order, he would be as loyal and even zealous as one can be. The three most significative quotes that prove that Drizzt is a paladin: 1) Read about his time on the pirate-hunting ship Sea Sprite. Not once did he question the captain's orders, since he considered them good. 2) Read his anti-drug, anti-alcohol thoughts at the beginning of "The Spine of the World". They are just an awesome example of lawful speech (his thoughts on personal responsibilities are nothing short of wonderful). On a side-note, I have made a copy of that page and sticked it to my bedroom door - I fully share this "prohibitionistic" (sp?) view, and I keep that page as a reminder. 3) Artemis Entreri once called him "that paladin in black skin". An significative expression, I believe.
Krunk The Smasher 08-22-03, 12:52 AM	Thank you for all the great ideas folks! I will probably play a Pally once my current character dies/retires (a 6th level CG dwarven cleric).
Leap 08-22-03, 03:16 AM	Well, Northern European / UK / US culture and mythology is full of examples of "Paladins" (Knights of the Round Table, Knights Hospitaler, Knights Templar, Jedi Knights,Teutonic Knights, Charlemagne's Paladins and so on.....) who could provide a basic framework......although a few had difficulty with the "good" componant of LG ;) For further info on my opinions on paladins, if you are interested, check out the "Tribal Paladins" thread on here............... Oh, and Aleshandre, you were right about cans of worms, but I appears to have missed most of this one :(
Trydan 08-22-03, 06:01 AM	Real paladins don't open cans of worms; they open cans of wyrms. (an old one, I know, but someone had to say it)
maddog60 08-22-03, 02:13 PM	From my experience with playing Paladins the concept is simple. You're a hero. That's all there is to the concept. You'll act the good guy at any given point in time. However, the trinity of sometimes conflicting superiors each Paladin has creates headaches and many of the debates here on the board. (Those 3 being Deity, Law, and Good). However, here's my take how to handle each of these major aspects to a Paladin: Deity: You must remember, you are not a Cleric. You may be totally devout, a shining example of the virtues your God appreciates, a particularly active member of the church, but your first duty is not to your God. If your god, be he Heironius, Pelor, Tyr, Torm, Helm, whoever, were to tell you for example "Kill that innocent child to prove your loyalty to me." I as a Paladin would rip my holy symbol from my neck, toss it upon the ground, tell my deity "If that is what you want, then you are not worthy of my faith," and walk away. You should as a Paladin stress the virtues of your God, but not if they conflict with being Good. Law: You must be lawful. You can't just go vigilante, stealing obviously out of the question, and generally respect authority. This does not mean you tolerate tyrants who abuse their power. You can lead rebellions, if such a rebellion is justified by righteousness. Remember you're all for doing things the legal way, but you wouldn't defend an evil dictator just because he is King. Contrary, you'd aid the people in improving their station in life. Good: being Good is the key to being a Paladin. Unlike in the real world, in dnd Good is an absolute. While Crusaders in medeival times thought themselves the righteous, it was only subjective. As a Paladin your foremost duty is to uphold the absolute righteousness. Take effort to show Mercy, Care, Selflessness, Remorse, Tolerance, and many othe virtues that can be forgotten if you get too whipped up in an evil killing frenzy. If your three key aspects ever conflict, do whatever acheives the most Good, as righteousness overrides both your duty to Law and Deity. A couple of tips as well would be: 1) Don't play the haughty, I'm so much better than you Paladin. Don't go around inforcing your beliefs upon everyone and the party, looking down on those that aren't as virtuous as you are. That's the kind of playing that antagonizes a group and gives Paladins a bad rap. Accept your party members (except evil ones). If anything feel sorry for them that they don't live a virtuous life, and try to help them better themselves, but don't force it. Tolerance should be key to a Paladin. Pride and arrogance is not becoming of one. 2) Don't use detect evil as an excuse to go on murderering sprees. Detect Evil should be used when you need to know what to do, not as a means of finding more trouble than you need to. 3) Paladins don't have to be knights in shining armor stereotypes. Nothing says your Paladin has to be courteous (though most are). You might want to make yours unique be say giving him a gruff nature, like saving someone and being like "Don't expect me to come save you when you do something stupid like wnadering off with orcs around again...", however his actions speak leagues more than his words. 4) Trust your party. Many paladins tend to cause party problems because they never trust the Rogue, or keep looking for ways in which their companions fail to live up to acceptable standards for the Paladin. Think of this. After several adventures, you've all trusted your life in the hands of your comrades. You would logical trut them, and likely you are friends. If a Paladin doesn't trust his friends, well he might naive in doing so, but it doesn't fit the character.
aleshandre 08-22-03, 05:04 PM	I have to say that I have never heard a better stance on how a Paladin should act than from MD60. Very well said.
Trydan 08-23-03, 08:27 AM	Agreed. Nice post [b]maddog60[b].
Veii 08-23-03, 02:21 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by krunchyfrogg A good influence I've seen posted on enworld quite a bit is to play your character like [b]Samurai Jack. Good advice, in my book[B].[QUOTE] Sorry, have to disagree. Samurai Jack is, as his name implies, a samurai. This is a wholly different thing from the western european knight in shining armor. Jack has done things that a Paladin cannot do because of his alignment restrictions. One example being when Jack teamed up with a group of gangsters to get to Aku. Paladins cannot knowingly associate with anyone of evil alignment. If you wish to play a Samurai (an excellent class by the way) puchase Oriental Adventures.
krunchyfrogg 08-23-03, 04:31 PM	I'm not saying that you should play a Samurai when I posted that. I'm saying that the general attitude of Samurai Jack is the same as that of a Paladin. SJ is noble, honorable, and although he has to work with Chaotic people at times (The Scotsman), he doesn't waver in his ways, and sets an example. BTW, who said a Paladin is a Knight in shining armor? Isn't that what the Chevalier PrC is for?
Veii 08-23-03, 09:02 PM	Originally posted by krunchyfrogg BTW, who said a Paladin is a Knight in shining armor? Isn't that what the Chevalier PrC is for? I was speaking of the typical archtype. See my earlier post for my ideas about a paladin.
krunchyfrogg 08-24-03, 11:54 AM	Your ideas, maybe not the ideas of Krunck the Smasher. I hardly think wearing armor changes the style that you roleplay a character after.
Fawkes 08-24-03, 01:37 PM	My advice for playing a Paladin (which is the same advice I give any of my players): forget about the class, its powers and benefits, and its stereotypical personality, and dwell on the character and her alignment first and foremost. A Paladin is Lawful Good. Once you can get that down, you're practically there. Lawful: * Your word is your bond. * You respect authority. * You uphold the law. * You do not lie, cheat, steal or deceive. * You never betray a trust. Good: * You protect the innocent. * You champion the weak. * You care for the sick and helpless. * You give freely to those who have less than yourself. * You accept the surrender of those who yield. That's a Paladin. Many people have this stereotypical perception that Paladins have to be Templars or Holy Knights, clad in plate armor, swinging swords and practicing chivalry. That's not the case. For example, IMC the current Paladin (level 7, all levels in Paladin) is a female elven swashbuckler who wears light armor (currently wearing studded leather +2), fights with rapier and main gauche, cracks off-color jokes, tumbles all over the place while fighting, and has a couple of vices. Oh, and the character is also gay (she has an NPC lover). PC has CHA 18. The current campaign I'm playing in also has a Paladin - this version is a gruff male mountain dwarf who fights with a spiked chain and wears heavy armor, drinks dwarven spirits like a vaccuum, and curses like a sailor (every time he Smites he yells "and now Moradin f's you in the -insert body part here- with holy righteousness!!!" or something like that). He's rather uncouth (amazing considering his 16 charisma) around "well-mannered society", he's shy around women (especially bearded women), but he's an amazing haggler in the marketplace. This dwarf also spends as much time in the brothels as he can. And he eats like a pig and practices questionable personal hygiene. Still, it's a Charisma of 16... Both PCs use their Detect Evil ability like a radar, fully scanning areas for as long as it takes to determine if Evil is present. However, they accept the fact that Evil will always exist. Their job is combat evil where it strikes (i.e. where it is active). They are civil (well, as civil as that dwarf can get) even towards NPCs that have registered as Evil on their radar, but they will watch those characters like hawks, each in their own way. When evil *acts* are committed, they are there to fight it to the best of their abilities. Both of them, Paladins. Both of them, exceptionally LG. Two of the best-played Paladins I've ever had the pleasure of witnessing.
Trydan 08-25-03, 04:09 AM	A Paladin is Lawful Good. Once you can get that down, you're practically there. Yes, agreed. Nice summary of it too.
Leap 08-25-03, 05:28 AM	One thing that I have seen "forgotten" on the subject of paladins, more time than anything else, is that they should 99% of teh time be members of an order of knighthood. Yes you may find "knight errants" but by and large it is in the paladins make-up to be part of an order - and answer to a highly defined code of practice (that in the eyes of non lawfuls can easily be seen to get out of hand - think of "the measure" of the knights of solamnia in DL)........... Also, Paladins are the heros of a highly organised (indeed, regimented!) culture who value sharing and trustworthyness. They oppose "being disorganised" (that is, not having strong, detailed and definate rules for much of life - judge dread, although by no means a paladin, shows a very paladin trait by always refering to and adhering to, the law (which he carries with him)) and have a fervent dislike of those who refuse to share or who betray confidences.
Fawkes 08-25-03, 05:51 AM	Originally posted by Leap One thing that I have seen "forgotten" on the subject of paladins, more time than anything else, is that they should 99% of teh time be members of an order of knighthood. This hasn't been true since AD&D 1e, when the Paladin was a subclass of the Cavalier. When the Paladin became a Fighter subclass in 2e, it was released from the confines of the knight stereotype. It's even less true in 3e, where many differing character concepts can be applied to the Paladin class. Originally posted by Leap Also, Paladins are the heros of a highly organised (indeed, regimented!) culture who value sharing and trustworthyness. They oppose "being disorganised" (that is, not having strong, detailed and definate rules for much of life. That's certainly one way to look at it. However, it is not the only way to look at it. Assuming we're talking 2e or 3e, the only requirement is that for a Paladin to be Lawful Good, and that he be a spiritual warrior of some sort (in 3e even an explicit deity becomes optional). Check out the two examples in my post above. Those two are every bit Paladins under 2e and 3e definitions.
MrNiceGuy 08-25-03, 09:36 AM	Originally posted by Fawkes This hasn't been true since AD&D 1e, when the Paladin was a subclass of the Cavalier. When the Paladin became a Fighter subclass in 2e, it was released from the confines of the knight stereotype. It's even less true in 3e, where many differing character concepts can be applied to the Paladin class. Actually in 1st ed AD&D, the Paladin began as a subclass of fighter, then moved to being a subclass of Cavalier in Unearthed Aracana. Paul
DrakeRunner 08-25-03, 11:12 AM	If you're playing with a DM off these boards, yes. Just remember, be Lawful Good. Do whats right, not what's stupid. You are not a martyr, nor will you be damned for killing something. You are a holy warrior. You are not limited to insane limitations on honor and dignity(Which is only for stuck up Paladins anyway). Fawkes and Maddog covered it pretty well. If you're playing with any of the DMs I've seen talk about their Paladins on this board, tear your sheet up and start something else, Paladins are THE most hated class here. I've seen some DMs not let them use Bluff, Magic equipment, ranged weapons, intelligence, tactics, stealth, or even things that might make them look silly.
LoricDAHPaladin 08-27-03, 12:45 AM	Originally posted by DrakeRunner If you're playing with a DM off these boards, yes. Just remember, be Lawful Good. Do whats right, not what's stupid. You are not a martyr, nor will you be damned for killing something. You are a holy warrior. You are not limited to insane limitations on honor and dignity(Which is only for stuck up Paladins anyway). Fawkes and Maddog covered it pretty well. If you're playing with any of the DMs I've seen talk about their Paladins on this board, tear your sheet up and start something else, Paladins are THE most hated class here. I've seen some DMs not let them use Bluff, Magic equipment, ranged weapons, intelligence, tactics, stealth, or even things that might make them look silly. Drakerunner paints the scope of the Paladin with very broad strokes, and mixes his colors too much. Instead of crisp, clear colors, Drakerunner comes closer to shades of gray. Maddog seems to have the basic concepts down, but playing a paladin is another matter. It is difficult.
Baron Phylos 08-27-03, 02:29 AM	Originally posted by maddog60 Deity: You must remember, you are not a Cleric. You may be totally devout, a shining example of the virtues your God appreciates, a particularly active member of the church, but your first duty is not to your God. If your god, be he Heironius, Pelor, Tyr, Torm, Helm, whoever, were to tell you for example "Kill that innocent child to prove your loyalty to me." I as a Paladin would rip my holy symbol from my neck, toss it upon the ground, tell my deity "If that is what you want, then you are not worthy of my faith," and walk away. You should as a Paladin stress the virtues of your God, but not if they conflict with being Good. Then years later, as the paladin's god prophesized, that child grows up to be a psychopath tyrant who lays waste to half the planet while enslaving the other half. And the paladin is probably burning in hell for thinking he was bigger and better than his God when it came to knowing what was right from wrong.
DrakeRunner 08-27-03, 11:04 AM	Yes I use broad strokes and muddle the colors a bit. Welcome to life. No matter how many fairy tales you allude the Paladin to, he is still a mortal living in a world of greys. He's going to have to deal with that. As for that child, Baron, the god says To Prove Your Loyalty, not To Stop Him From Enslaving Half The World. The God didn't care about the child, only his Paladin's blind unquestioning obedience.
Fawkes 08-27-03, 10:44 PM	Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin Drakerunner paints the scope of the Paladin with very broad strokes, and mixes his colors too much. Instead of crisp, clear colors, Drakerunner comes closer to shades of gray. Maddog seems to have the basic concepts down, but playing a paladin is another matter. It is difficult. Playing a Paladin isn't easy, but it's not meant to be a straightjacket for a player either. I side with DrakeRunner - DMs should not expect any more from a Paladin than they do a Cleric. From a "real people" standpoint of roleplaying the Paladin, they are entitled to have flaws just as any other character. As long as those flaws have nothing to do with their being Lawful Good, then the point is moot. It's hard enough being LG without the baggage of chivalry and whatnot.
LoricDAHPaladin 08-27-03, 11:55 PM	Recognizing that it is a game, the fun is supposed to be playing a challenge, not someone who has all the power but no accountability. You call it a straightjacket, I call it being a Paladin.
Leap 08-28-03, 04:46 AM	Fawkes – But then “baggage” is at the heart of being a paladin; a complex detailed code acting as an explicit map for life…..Paladins are sophisticated characters, and thus very challenging to play. What you call a “straight-jacket” they call “the law” :) Think of them as like devils in their love of small print but ones who are not using such to corrupt and trick but actually believe such detail necessary for the good running of things (“to avoid confusion”). This would seem like a straight-jacket to “non-Lawfuls” (myself included!) but to the paladin it is a provider of “necessary security”. Put a German and a Spaniard in a room together and you will typically see the conflict between Lawful and Chaotic cultures/people. :) To provide a context, think of the ranger, typically seen as an exemplifier of CG, as someone who is far less explicitly detailed in their code of behaviour. Where the LG paladin goes for explicit and specific, the CG ranger goes for imbedded/implicit and general. Ok so this is largely my unpacking of what Lawful and Chaotic mean, and leaves out all the stuff stolen from “good” and “evil” in 3rd edition (honesty, reliability etc), but it works rather well….if I say so myself ;)
Tzor 08-28-03, 08:59 AM	Originally posted by Fawkes DMs should not expect any more from a Paladin than they do a Cleric. From a "real people" standpoint of roleplaying the Paladin, they are entitled to have flaws just as any other character. As long as those flaws have nothing to do with their being Lawful Good, then the point is moot. I think instead of thinking whether or not a DM should expect more or less from a paladin as a cleric, the thinking should be in what ways the actions and motivations of a paladin can differ from the actions and motivations of the cleric. Personally I think there is a fundamental difference between the two. The paladin's duties are first and foremost to Goodness and Law, and then to his/her deity. The clerics's duties are first and foremost to his/her deity. I consider this an almost unwritten compact that all non LG deities have to agree to if they want to have paladins. Non lawful deities have to accept that their paladins are going to go overboard on the order, and non good deities have to accept that their paladins are going to place goodness ahead of some aspects of the deity's portfolio. To the extent that no character should be perfect, even the paladin should have some fault, as long as those faults do not cause a potential loss of paladinhood. I'll address my last comment on Leap's suggestion that a paladin should belong to an order of knighthood. I agree complete, but I should point out that what "knighthood" is might not be understood my many. Do not confuse the trappings of knighthood, the armor, the spurs, the lance, with the core meaning of knighthood. An order of knighthood was in effect a bridge between the church and the state. Orders of knighthood were approved and sanctioned by the church, and knights swore fealty to specific regents of the state that they served. (They did this in exchange for feudal land grants, or just for the spiff perks of being a knight.) Paladins too need to be in an organization of similiar minded men, sanctioned by the deity that they are under and loyal to the regents they serve. That organization could be exceptionally formal and ever present, or it could be a common bond of fraternity which all of the order recognize in each other. That order also serves as a one step separation from the paladin and the deity, as opposed to the closer relationship between the deity and the cleric, and at the same time, provides a heirarchical process for the relationship between cleric and paladin.
Fawkes 08-28-03, 01:54 PM	Leap: Originally posted by Leap But then “baggage” is at the heart of being a paladin; a complex detailed code acting as an explicit map for life…..Paladins are sophisticated characters, and thus very challenging to play. What you call a “straight-jacket” they call “the law” :) The "complex detailed code" that you speak of was clearly present in 1e, when the Paladin was a subclass of the Cavalier and thus had a hard and fast code. The Paladin of 3e has no such requirement, other than "a code of conduct that is in line with lawfulness and goodness". I outlined the guidelines for lawfulness and goodness that I require from my Paladin PCs in my previous post in this topic. The "straightjacket" I refer to isn't the LG code, it's the Paladin stereotype of the strong knight in shining armor. Especially in 3e, Paladins are free to be very different from their distant 1e cousins. Originally posted by Leap Think of them as like devils in their love of small print but ones who are not using such to corrupt and trick but actually believe such detail necessary for the good running of things (“to avoid confusion”). This would seem like a straight-jacket to “non-Lawfuls” (myself included!) but to the paladin it is a provider of “necessary security”. Put a German and a Spaniard in a room together and you will typically see the conflict between Lawful and Chaotic cultures/people. :) Again, I raise an objection. The Lawful alignment doesn't require that a PC be nitpicker, be very detailed, or be very organized. IMC, Lawful simply means the following: * Your word is your bond. * You respect authority. * You uphold the law. * You do not lie, cheat, steal or deceive. * You never betray a trust. It has nothing to do with the character's own personality, only his behaviour in terms of society and interpersonal relationships. You can very well have a ditzy and disorganized PC who maintains a Paladin-class LG alignment. I'm not European, but I think that your German/Spanish analogy refers to society and what it impresses on its people. German society is perhaps highly regimented and promotes the efficiency and welfare of the state foremost, while Spanish society champions individual rights foremost. That's well and good, but it has nothing to do with an individual German or Spaniard. Originally posted by Leap To provide a context, think of the ranger, typically seen as an exemplifier of CG, as someone who is far less explicitly detailed in their code of behaviour. Where the LG paladin goes for explicit and specific, the CG ranger goes for imbedded/implicit and general. Sorry for being in rules-lawyer mode, but 3e Rangers can be of any alignment. But I get what you mean. My unsolicited advice is for you to try to dissociate individual PC personalities from alignments. They don't impact each other. My counterpart laundry list of Chaotic traits goes: * You champion individualism. * You aren't bound by what you say. * Rules are meant to be broken. * Spontaneity and creativity are of utmost importance. * Complete freedom of thought and action are inalienable rights. * You do what you think is best. It has nothing to do with being "implicit or general". CG PCs can be exacting and specific as much as any Lawful alignment can. It's the content of the explicitness that is different. Originally posted by Leap Ok so this is largely my unpacking of what Lawful and Chaotic mean, and leaves out all the stuff stolen from “good” and “evil” in 3rd edition (honesty, reliability etc), but it works rather well….if I say so myself ;) Well, you're the master of your campaign. You can tie alignments to personality if you wish. But it doesn't need to be that way. :)
Fawkes 08-28-03, 02:17 PM	Originally posted by Tzor I think instead of thinking whether or not a DM should expect more or less from a paladin as a cleric, the thinking should be in what ways the actions and motivations of a paladin can differ from the actions and motivations of the cleric. Personally I think there is a fundamental difference between the two. Sorry, what I meant was that both Cleric (including the Druid) and the Paladin both have responsibilities to divine powers. In some cases (depending on the deity) they have responsibilities to organizations. DMs tend to expect extreme behaviour from Paladins, but are unexplainably flexible when it comes to the behaviour of Clerics. I believe that a Cleric and a Paladin of, say, Heironeous would have similar behavioural requirements: they need to be Lawful and Good. No more, no less. Many DMs tend to say that Paladins need to be more (often much more) than just "plain Lawful Good". I say that hasn't been required since Unearthed Arcana, but I guess old habits die hard. Originally posted by Tzor An order of knighthood was in effect a bridge between the church and the state. Orders of knighthood were approved and sanctioned by the church, and knights swore fealty to specific regents of the state that they served. (They did this in exchange for feudal land grants, or just for the spiff perks of being a knight.) Understood, but you're outlining a real-world system, from our own history. Again, your point is perfect for 1eUA rules, when Paladins and Cavaliers were always human, and had great chances of being of noble birth, started the game with plate armor and a warhorse, and so on. In 3e, the Paladin is no longer exclusively human, nor is the Paladin a Cavalier. He's simply "the final hope that cannot be extinguished" in a land infested by evil. I can't see a Dwarven or Gnomish Paladin fitting into the feudal system. :) Originally posted by Tzor Paladins too need to be in an organization of similiar minded men, sanctioned by the deity that they are under and loyal to the regents they serve. That organization could be exceptionally formal and ever present, or it could be a common bond of fraternity which all of the order recognize in each other. That order also serves as a one step separation from the paladin and the deity, as opposed to the closer relationship between the deity and the cleric, and at the same time, provides a heirarchical process for the relationship between cleric and paladin. Surprise, deities aren't required for Paladins. (The female Paladin IMC that I gave as an example in my previous post has no deity.) Also, same deities have no organization at all. Finally, in a non-feudal setting, there really is no point. Again, as in my post to Leap, a Paladin isn't necessarily bound by heirarchical processes and monolithic organizations. Not in 3e. You can have a poor farm boy that was called by a God of Retribution into Paladinhood. He wears padded armor, fights with a pitchfork, and has never been to Paladin school. And yet, because of his pure heart, he is a Paladin without ever setting foot in a temple.
DrakeRunner 08-28-03, 08:47 PM	Why is it that everyone is so ready to choke and strangle the Paladin until he is unable to realistically live? He can't guard something because he's not taking the fight to evil, and he can't take the fight to evil because his "code of honor" prevents him from doing it better than a mentally damaged halfling peasant. The section on his CoC is purposefull vague, but there are only a number of DMs that I can count on one hand here at the boards who don't pile on 2 pages worth of restrictions and penalties. And if any of them are crossed? BLAM, stripped of Paladinhood. Despite the global opinion, THEY ARE NOT frothing glory-begging shiny-armored stick-up-their-butt holy moron who has no actual use in an adventuring situation because their CoC has more crap in it than all the beauracratic horse puckey in the world put together!