Pal. of Tyranny code - Playable? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Pal. of Tyranny code - Playable? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
mouser
03-24-04, 01:28 AM The paladin's code has been cause of much good roleplay and frustration since the early days of 1st edition: a difficult path designed to help balance out the class' powers.

I love the new paladin variants. Gives a nice alternative to the blackguard for many characters. But the code for the evil variants strikes me as even harsher than the original "paladin of honor" code. If a paladin of honor or a paladin of freedom ever knowingly commits an evil act, she loses her powers. That's tough, but doable. A high road for a noble soul to tread. A paladin of tyranny though must never commit a good act. Not one. Not even a little one. That's harsh. It seems like sooner or later you'd have to help somebody out. (Maybe a paladin of slaughter could just go around killing and hurting everything, but that's not really how I see a _lawful_ evil character behaving).

Has anyone here roleplayed this? How did it work out?
Lina_Inverse
03-24-04, 01:43 AM good act,ie helping people you dont know without reason beyond helping.

too easy,helping your friends/family is neutral as they are an extension of the self.
helping the people under your dominion is lawful,prolly not good depending why you do it.
NorthSaber
03-24-04, 03:20 AM I'm with Lina on this one - as long as there's something for you to gain by doing something, it's not selfless and good. Even if it's saving a baby from a burning building, you may demand the parents pay you 100gp for your act. To me evil has always equaled selfishness, and in the end, most of our behavior (even the behavior that on the surface seems selfless and good) is driven by selfish gains.

Sure, I may buy my mom a gift for her birthday, but then again I expect her to do the same for my birthday. Perhaps I help some guy around in the computer lab, but I expect him to maybe help me in the future, or to tell his friends what a cool guy I am. In the extreme, leaving behind one's life and moving to Africa to teach and feed the starving children might be nothing more than my ploy to guarantee a spot in Heaven.

There's a line in there somewhere between selfish and selfless, good and evil, but it's a very thin one.
Millennium
03-24-04, 06:18 AM Frankly, I don't quite but the PoT code as it stands either. To get around it while keeping the flavor, I remove the supernatural aspect of the code, but keep it as an "honor" thing. Then, I give PoTs the ability to strip the powers of other PoTs, but count this as a major Good act (after all, you're removing a major force for Evil from the world), so any PoT who does this had better be able to prove that the victim was grossly violating his code.

The point behind all of this: the PoT only loses his powers if he gets caught. By making the stripping of a PoT's powers count as a major Good act, I ensure that the power doesn't get abused too badly, because someone who abuses it is likely to find himself on the wrong end of it in short order. Part of the modus operandi of LE is a dependence on law for protection, and so this fits quite well with the ideals of the class.

And yes, it is entirely possible for a PoT to abuse this power, conceal evidence, and hide from the "justice" of other PoTs. This, too, fits with LE, however, and so I don't see this as a serious drawback.
Salla
03-24-04, 09:08 AM Since PCs aren't supposed to be evil, it's 'playability' is a moot point, really.
caeruleus
03-24-04, 12:44 PM This is why I prefered the chaotic good and lawful evil versions of the paladin from Dragon Magazine (issues 310 and 312 respectively).

The chaotic good paladin had an aura of chaos, and detected and smited law rather than evil. (For you Greyhawk fans, I personally like how this fits with Tritherion.) The basic idea seems to be that chaos is the ultimate good, or that a chaotic society is the best sort. So these paladins focus their energy on fighting the order that constrains freedom.

The lawful evil paladin had an aura of law, and detected and smited chaos rather than good. The idea here seems to be that they feel the need to impose law just to make sure things go their way--and that's evil (especially taken to their extremes).

Anyway, here's the reason I bring this up. If the lawful evil paladin is more about law than evil (just as the lawful good paladin is more about good than law), then you can say that he won't lose his paladinhood by performing a good act, but that he'd lose it by performing a chaotic act, since he's all about imposing regulations on everyone.

That would make the chaotic good paladin prohibited from performing a lawful act--making a formal contract, following through on a promise that he later realized was mistaken, joining some organization, etc.

Draco Caeruleus
Count Arioch the 28th
03-24-04, 12:47 PM You know, I knda like that one, to be honest.
Baron Phylos
03-24-04, 06:59 PM Paladins of Tyranny should just use the Dr.Doom defense to justify their good deeds

"Dr.Doom has saved this pathetic commoner's life so he may bear witness to my inevitable rise to absolute power and then grovel at my feet as a servant!!"

"Dr.Doom fed this puppy so that one day he may serve me as a fierce guard dog at my ultimate fortress of tyranny!!!"

"Dr.Doom bought a new roof for that orphanage so that after my inevitable rise to undisputed tyrant of this world, I shall have willing recruits in my cruel enforcers squads!!! Mwuhahahaha!"

;)
mouser
03-25-04, 01:13 AM I like that idea caeruleus. The character concept I keep thinking of is the person who realizes the world would be a much different place if he were king, so he's gonna go and make it happen.

He would be all about using force to impose his order on the world, but would probably end up doing some "good" things along the way. After all, the point of him killing all those people and forcing the rest into servitude is to make the world a better place for everyone. It's just such a shame they don't all see it that way.

Oh, and btw, salla, evil characters are _very_ playable. Gives a nice change of pace now and then if nothing else :angel:
Lina_Inverse
03-25-04, 01:17 AM im gonna say one thing.the LE paladin opposeing chaos seems perfect to me.

so many LE charecters are evil because they know everything will be better when they rule(see doctor doom)there ruthless but generally people would be happier.this of course assumes people want to be cuddled and told what to think,which they do.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
mouser 03-24-04, 01:28 AM	The paladin's code has been cause of much good roleplay and frustration since the early days of 1st edition: a difficult path designed to help balance out the class' powers. I love the new paladin variants. Gives a nice alternative to the blackguard for many characters. But the code for the evil variants strikes me as even harsher than the original "paladin of honor" code. If a paladin of honor or a paladin of freedom ever knowingly commits an evil act, she loses her powers. That's tough, but doable. A high road for a noble soul to tread. A paladin of tyranny though must never commit a good act. Not one. Not even a little one. That's harsh. It seems like sooner or later you'd have to help somebody out. (Maybe a paladin of slaughter could just go around killing and hurting everything, but that's not really how I see a _lawful_ evil character behaving). Has anyone here roleplayed this? How did it work out?
Lina_Inverse 03-24-04, 01:43 AM	good act,ie helping people you dont know without reason beyond helping. too easy,helping your friends/family is neutral as they are an extension of the self. helping the people under your dominion is lawful,prolly not good depending why you do it.
NorthSaber 03-24-04, 03:20 AM	I'm with Lina on this one - as long as there's something for you to gain by doing something, it's not selfless and good. Even if it's saving a baby from a burning building, you may demand the parents pay you 100gp for your act. To me evil has always equaled selfishness, and in the end, most of our behavior (even the behavior that on the surface seems selfless and good) is driven by selfish gains. Sure, I may buy my mom a gift for her birthday, but then again I expect her to do the same for my birthday. Perhaps I help some guy around in the computer lab, but I expect him to maybe help me in the future, or to tell his friends what a cool guy I am. In the extreme, leaving behind one's life and moving to Africa to teach and feed the starving children might be nothing more than my ploy to guarantee a spot in Heaven. There's a line in there somewhere between selfish and selfless, good and evil, but it's a very thin one.
Millennium 03-24-04, 06:18 AM	Frankly, I don't quite but the PoT code as it stands either. To get around it while keeping the flavor, I remove the supernatural aspect of the code, but keep it as an "honor" thing. Then, I give PoTs the ability to strip the powers of other PoTs, but count this as a major Good act (after all, you're removing a major force for Evil from the world), so any PoT who does this had better be able to prove that the victim was grossly violating his code. The point behind all of this: the PoT only loses his powers if he gets caught. By making the stripping of a PoT's powers count as a major Good act, I ensure that the power doesn't get abused too badly, because someone who abuses it is likely to find himself on the wrong end of it in short order. Part of the modus operandi of LE is a dependence on law for protection, and so this fits quite well with the ideals of the class. And yes, it is entirely possible for a PoT to abuse this power, conceal evidence, and hide from the "justice" of other PoTs. This, too, fits with LE, however, and so I don't see this as a serious drawback.
Salla 03-24-04, 09:08 AM	Since PCs aren't supposed to be evil, it's 'playability' is a moot point, really.
caeruleus 03-24-04, 12:44 PM	This is why I prefered the chaotic good and lawful evil versions of the paladin from Dragon Magazine (issues 310 and 312 respectively). The chaotic good paladin had an aura of chaos, and detected and smited law rather than evil. (For you Greyhawk fans, I personally like how this fits with Tritherion.) The basic idea seems to be that chaos is the ultimate good, or that a chaotic society is the best sort. So these paladins focus their energy on fighting the order that constrains freedom. The lawful evil paladin had an aura of law, and detected and smited chaos rather than good. The idea here seems to be that they feel the need to impose law just to make sure things go their way--and that's evil (especially taken to their extremes). Anyway, here's the reason I bring this up. If the lawful evil paladin is more about law than evil (just as the lawful good paladin is more about good than law), then you can say that he won't lose his paladinhood by performing a good act, but that he'd lose it by performing a chaotic act, since he's all about imposing regulations on everyone. That would make the chaotic good paladin prohibited from performing a lawful act--making a formal contract, following through on a promise that he later realized was mistaken, joining some organization, etc. Draco Caeruleus
Count Arioch the 28th 03-24-04, 12:47 PM	You know, I knda like that one, to be honest.
Baron Phylos 03-24-04, 06:59 PM	Paladins of Tyranny should just use the Dr.Doom defense to justify their good deeds "Dr.Doom has saved this pathetic commoner's life so he may bear witness to my inevitable rise to absolute power and then grovel at my feet as a servant!!" "Dr.Doom fed this puppy so that one day he may serve me as a fierce guard dog at my ultimate fortress of tyranny!!!" "Dr.Doom bought a new roof for that orphanage so that after my inevitable rise to undisputed tyrant of this world, I shall have willing recruits in my cruel enforcers squads!!! Mwuhahahaha!" ;)
mouser 03-25-04, 01:13 AM	I like that idea caeruleus. The character concept I keep thinking of is the person who realizes the world would be a much different place if he were king, so he's gonna go and make it happen. He would be all about using force to impose his order on the world, but would probably end up doing some "good" things along the way. After all, the point of him killing all those people and forcing the rest into servitude is to make the world a better place for everyone. It's just such a shame they don't all see it that way. Oh, and btw, salla, evil characters are _very_ playable. Gives a nice change of pace now and then if nothing else :angel:
Lina_Inverse 03-25-04, 01:17 AM	im gonna say one thing.the LE paladin opposeing chaos seems perfect to me. so many LE charecters are evil because they know everything will be better when they rule(see doctor doom)there ruthless but generally people would be happier.this of course assumes people want to be cuddled and told what to think,which they do.