Do you think this would cause problems [Archive] - Wizards Community

Do you think this would cause problems [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Pegasos989
07-06-07, 05:36 PM Disclaimer: Though this is about paladins, this is not "one of those paladin threads" in that sense, so don't stop reading when you see the word.

So, I am starting as a player in a low-magic campaign (and thus the spellcasters I normally play are out of question).

I concidered playing a paladin. I thought that even if I don't play a spellcaster, I want something besides "Roll to Hit, Roll to damage, repeat every round". As I would have charisma, daunting presence (or whatever is that feat called. It practically makes opponent shaken if he fails a saving throw, kinda like intimidate but better) feat seemed nice. I was not certain if this would stack with the intimidate skill so I asked the DM. When I brought up the feat...

DM "I am not sure about the ethics of this. You are going to play someone good with high standards afterall..."
ME "I don't think that forcing enemy to be scared is any worse than killing him."
DM "Yeah but trying to gain combat advantage by scaring him... I don't know about that..."

Now to the question. I am not asking which one is correct in the matter. I could create a paladin without that feat too. Or whole another class. I am also not interested in your views of the mechanics of the feat & intimidate stacking.

What I am uncertain of is... There are obiously some pretty big diffrences in how I see paladins and how he sees them. Do you think that they are large enough that it could be problematic? I don't want to spend half of the game time arguing what my character would do and other half on why he shouldn't lose his powers.

So, I want opinions on whether I should
a) Solve the whole opinion diffrences in some way (and hints on what that should be)
b) Just play something else
c) Try to play this paladin as I see fit and hope it will not be a problem
d) Something else, what?
Paladin_Hiroshi
07-06-07, 05:48 PM I play a paladin, so could you please;

1) make a list of 3 things a paladin must do, in your opinion,
2) 3 things they must be
3) and 3 things they must never do.

Don't point out the obvious, go for the subtle, and then try and point out whether your dm would argue.

:) if you do that, I think I can help you :D

...oh and I like the idea. I have a character with that, kind of a grizzled veteran :)
buzzsawl
07-06-07, 06:08 PM Agreed.

Should be fine as long as you two can pre-make a list of do's and don'ts...

Of course, it does sound like your ideas of paladins are quite a bit different, so if you can't come to some sort of agreement on the above, I'd be looking for other possibilities as to good classes to play.

(Maybe Crusader if you're allowed ToB? Or Grey Guards PrC if you can use CompScoundrel)
Forfeit
07-06-07, 06:09 PM Make it so that only evil people gets afected.

That way the DM wont have an excuse, because evil must be banished.
Comus
07-06-07, 06:19 PM Hm. Let me see if I can find my last Paladin's code... Ah, here we go.

"The enemy of Good is not always Evil. The misled are often as dangerous as the malicious, but do not confuse the two.

Suffer not the Evil to live. They have no mercy, and you should likewise show them none, for they have not the hearts to understand it.

Treat the Good but misled with compassion, but remember that the Greater Good comes before the life of any one person, even a Good person.

Fear and terror are the weapons we use to destroy evil. Prison and Execution were always intended to be fearful, a deterrent rather than a punishment. Deter Evil in any way needed, for one act of Evil not committed is worth nearly any price.

Do not rely on local authority to punish Evil. If they are not doing enough Good, then there is no reason to be confined by their actions. Use your own judgment, but do not break laws simply because you do not like them - do so only when it is for the Greater Good.

The tools of Evil and the tools of Good are different only in what hand wields them. Use whatever means you must to defeat Evil where you find it. But do not use indiscriminate weapons like poison - we must be careful to do harm only to those we intend.

Finally, show no weakness. Morally, you must always be pure. Spiritually, you must always be sure. And physically, you must always be sound. Your enemies must believe you are invincible, as untouchable as Good itself."

~ Bludbayn Vaughn Doum, Paladin.

Most relevant part bolded. There's no reason a paladin can't be scary.
Salla
07-06-07, 06:51 PM The vast majority of fear effects in the books do not have the Evil tag, so that's not an issue. Whether or not that's considered dishonorable (aka Chaotic) is a matter for debate.

I'd toss it and just play a cleric.
buzzsawl
07-06-07, 06:55 PM Most relevant part bolded. There's no reason a paladin can't be scary.

Honestly the only situation I can think of where being scary even affects any code of honor, is if you scare someone into running away and then shoot them in the back.

And that's really more the shooting in the back part that could be considered dishonorable.
1337Ninja
07-07-07, 10:44 PM I don't have the book with the feat in it, but you could just have a character who is very scary rather than one who intentionally intimidates foes. Looking scary is not a dishonourable act.
Comus
07-08-07, 02:15 AM I don't have the book with the feat in it, but you could just have a character who is very scary rather than one who intentionally intimidates foes. Looking scary is not a dishonourable act.
Neither is intimidation. For an extreme example of Honor + Intimidation, look at the samurai culture of Japan.
Saberus
07-08-07, 02:50 AM IMNSHO, yes, a Paladin can intimidate, frighten and even bluff in combat. Doing something to gain an advantage in the fight against evil is not only honorable, but sometimes necessary.

If you appear scary enough, you can stop meaningless battles against weaker opponents before they start. It is less honorable to slaughter the weak.

and since Intimidate and Daunting Presence are far more effective against those of lower level than you, you can assure you don't lose you paladinhood from reckless and/or wanton killing.

Using the Bluff skill to feint in combat is not just for thieves, who still have respectable BAB. Paladins can benefit from this skill too, even if it is cross class. Particularly dexterious opponents become easier to handle, and bring to justice. Just don't go stabbing people in the back. And if you can spare the feat, there is one in either the CW or CAd that allows you to feint as a move action instead of a standard action.
Myree
07-08-07, 04:31 AM I agree with most of the other posts. IMHO, the main thing to remember here is along the same lines as "Charisma does not just mean looks". A great leader (i.e. high charisma) will MANY times unknowingly intimidate or humble others. Who hasn't seen a movie where the General just looks at a couple of Privates and has them shaking in their boots and tripping over each other? Where I would consider them crossing the "right and just" line is if they use it unnecessarily against non-enemies. Making a commoner wet themselves in the process of getting information is NOT a "nice" thing to do -- better to give them a smile and nicely ask for their help. However, making the orcs foul themselves is another thing altogether.

But, as others have said before me, you need to work this out with your DM, and putting a list together like Paladin_Hiroshi suggests is a great start.
Ace_of_time
07-08-07, 11:34 AM It would be easier to just go knight and be done with it.
Paladin_Hiroshi
07-08-07, 01:08 PM I'd like to say, the above advice is gold!!!!

:) these are the right responces, mature and sensible (not often seen in a paladin thread)

In my view, a paladin is good at what he does. He is a warrior against evil and chaos (to a lesser extent). As he has been training in martial aspects, it's only natural for him to learn from the best, how to fight effectivelythis means, if you don't have to kill someone, then don't, they would teach him footwork, parries, dodges, all those little tricks that turn the balance.

Why? Because evil doesn't play fair. Evil will trip you, sneak attack you, poison you, push you around, unless someone stands up to it. The paladin won't sink to evil's depths, but he has a few little tricks to...even the playing field...
Ack
07-08-07, 05:43 PM A real-life anecdote with some bearing on this:

During the war in Iraq, a couple of British journalists were in a city which, while still in Iraqi hands, was coming under pressure from oncoming Coalition forces. As such, the fact that they were foreigners was making their position increasingly precarious, so they decided to leave before it was too late.

When they were a little way out of the city, they were flagged down by a group of soldiers who turned out to be SAS-R (Australian SAS). They were then politely (but thoroughly) debriefed regarding conditions in the city and then sent on their way.

Now, as anyone who is familiar with the world's military organisations would know, SAS-R is one of the most effective special operations forces in the world. They define scary (I know; I've met one or two). These guys could have come the heavy on the journalists and terrified them into answering their questions. They didn't; in fact, they were even polite about it. Why? Because it wasn't called for.

Now, I wouldn't go so far as to call SAS-R the modern day answer to paladins ... but they do go after the bad guys, they hit hard, and they pull no punches. And they don't go after civvies. :D

And you could do a lot worse than that.
calronmoonflower
07-08-07, 06:29 PM Oh My God! Paladins that scare evil people! That's unheard of! Seriously though the evil beings should be intimated by paladins.

By the rules as written there is no reason that a paladin cannot scare opponents, as long as you do not use it for evil deeds you are fine.

Try Ki Shout and Great Ki Shout from Oriental Adventures is you have it. That way you could actually panic opponents.
Callista
07-08-07, 06:43 PM I agree with the above posts--If there's anything Evil should fear, it's a paladin. Morale is a very real part of battle; and if you can intimidate your opponent into surrendering, you might not even have to fight them. Then, by honorable treatment of your prisoners, you may even be able to bring them to your own side...
pokemaniacbill
07-08-07, 07:01 PM I think fear seems more humane then a sword in the face, don't you? For all you know, it will be an effective deterrant.
danielinthewolvesden
07-08-07, 08:09 PM Discuss this with him, Show him this thread, ask him to respond here.

If not then try a Crusader. MUCH more difficult to play but somewhat mor epowerful and about the same concept.
Cartigan
07-08-07, 08:12 PM Paladins arn't Knights, I fail to see the problem of a Paladin's presence making an enemy helpless.
Illithid_Tentacles
07-08-07, 08:33 PM Being scary is neither evil, chaotic, nor dishonorable. Taken to an extreme, yes, it CAN be these things, but that's true about almost everything.
windscar18
07-08-07, 08:37 PM How about you look at the Grey Guard from Complete Scoundrel? That way, even if you look upon Paladins differently than him, the Grey Guard basically throws those stereotypes out the window: it's FOCUSED on interrogation, fright, etc.
danielinthewolvesden
07-08-07, 08:43 PM How about you look at the Grey Guard from Complete Scoundrel? That way, even if you look upon Paladins differently than him, the Grey Guard basically throws those stereotypes out the window: it's FOCUSED on interrogation, fright, etc.

Ooh, good one!
Ace_of_time
07-08-07, 09:26 PM Paladins arn't Knights, I fail to see the problem of a Paladin's presence making an enemy helpless.

There is not that much of a difference in them. he says here or just play something else. I was just making a suggestion if he decides not to go pal.

So, I want opinions on whether I should
a) Solve the whole opinion diffrences in some way (and hints on what that should be)
b) Just play something else
c) Try to play this paladin as I see fit and hope it will not be a problem
d) Something else, what?
Cartigan
07-08-07, 09:42 PM There is not that much of a difference in them.
Beside the fact the Knights have a fairly codified ethical ruleset that force them to act chivalrous. The Paladin code isn't about chivalry or honor in the way the Knight is, it's about being "Good" and following the righteous path.
Ace_of_time
07-08-07, 10:08 PM Beside the fact the Knights have a fairly codified ethical ruleset that force them to act chivalrous. The Paladin code isn't about chivalry or honor in the way the Knight is, it's about being "Good" and following the righteous path.

Oh! Well! your right why was I so blind? Burn the witch!
DarkNick
07-08-07, 10:28 PM daunting presence...I think people are focusing on only one meaning of daunting.

To daunt can mean to discourage and awe...

To me this feat fits a paladin perfectly. They are so strong in their convictions, so charismatic, so powerful in their righteousness that people near them feel awe or are subdued i.e. quiet in their presence, while opponents feel discouraged, dispirited in the face of such goodness and rightness.

A daunting task is a huge task. A daunting presence is a huge presence. The Paladins appears powerful, lordly, commanding, angelic... You're not just making your enemies fear you - you are putting the fear of your god into them.. One way to look at it is the Paladin is not consciously causing fear in their opponents - instead their opponents fear the Paladin because of what he is. Evil should rightly fear where a paladin walks and everyone else should be awed by them. They are a power to be reckoned with. The common folk look up to them and feel humbled by being in the paladins presence, enemies quake at the sight...
Enlightened1
07-08-07, 10:46 PM [QUOTE=Pegasos989;12983903
What I am uncertain of is... There are obiously some pretty big diffrences in how I see paladins and how he sees them. Do you think that they are large enough that it could be problematic? I don't want to spend half of the game time arguing what my character would do and other half on why he shouldn't lose his powers.

So, I want opinions on whether I should
a) Solve the whole opinion diffrences in some way (and hints on what that should be)
b) Just play something else
c) Try to play this paladin as I see fit and hope it will not be a problem
d) Something else, what?[/QUOTE]

NOT C! Definitely NOT C! That's just going to do exactly what you want to avoid.
B is probably my pick. Unless you and the GM can come to a fairly quick agreement on what's expected, and what he's going to punish you for, it's probably not worth the time and energy to argue it out (though it would be great great if it can be resolved reasonably!) So, A would be ideal. I don't have any specific suggestions without knowing more details, but if the two of you are very far apart, it would take some work to reach a workable compromise. And then you have to work with the expectations of the other players, so you aren't always having game-session arguments where the other players are demanding that the GM punish you. (The only suggestion that comes to mind is at least getting agreement that any alignment punishment gets a "warning shot", so there's a fair chance to hash it out without taking up game time to do so.)
I would think that between variant classes and multiclassing, there's enough interesting fighter options that one could fit your "not just roll-to-hit" goal.
Ack
07-08-07, 10:57 PM daunting presence...I think people are focusing on only one meaning of daunting.

To daunt can mean to discourage and awe...

To me this feat fits a paladin perfectly. They are so strong in their convictions, so charismatic, so powerful in their rightousness that people near them feel awe or are subdued i.e. quiet in their presence, while opponants feel discouraged, dispirited in the face of such goodness and rightness.

A daunting task is a huge task. A daunting presence is a huge presence. The Paladins appears powerful, lordly, commanding, angelic... You're not just making your enemies fear you - you are putting the fear of your god into them.. One way to look at it is the Paladin is not conciously causing fear in their opponants - instead their opponants fear the Paladin because of what he is. Evil should rightly fear where a paladin walks and everyone else should be awed by them. They are a power to be rekoned with. The common folk look up to them and feel humbled by being in the paladins presence, enemies quake at the sight...

The Green Lantern oath says it perfectly:

In brightest day, in darkest night
No evil shall escape my sight
Let those who worship evil's might
Beware my power, Green Lantern's light!

:D
DarkNick
07-08-07, 11:15 PM The Green Lantern oath says it perfectly:

In brightest day, in darkest night
No evil shall escape my sight
Let those who worship evil's might
Beware my power, Green Lantern's light!

:D

yeah, they are the guys that make bad people go "fuuuurrrc...." and fill their pants.
DX2052
07-08-07, 11:19 PM Even if you DO convince the DM to allow it, make sure he reads this
If a paladin falls in the forest, does it make a sound? (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=610188), given he had some issues with the concept, he is BOUND to have issues with some action of yours.

and anyways, I'd take it something similar to criminals fleeing from the police, the police aren't scary, but the criminals are (justifiably) afraid of the police.

and Ack, I prefer the original "blackest day".
Callista
07-09-07, 12:02 AM Well, I don't see why you couldn't do the exact same concept with a different knight-style class. If you like, you can even write yourself a code of conduct, be Lawful Good, and seek atonement if you mess up.

Sometimes it's better to compromise. But you know your DM best.

One thing I do suggest if you decide on Paladin: Write out your code of conduct, and have your DM OK it beforehand. That way, you can determine the gray areas, and which way your character will feel about them--treatment of prisoners, what to do in case of a hostage situation, what to do if you have to decide between two bad choices, how important your own honor is, how much you have to care about the laws of the land, whether you're allowed to ambush people or infiltrate an enemy castle in a sneaky manner... That sort of thing. That's what a Code is for: First, to state the basic principles for making normal decisions; and then, to show where the boundaries are, to make the hard decisions. Also, writing down your Code really, really keeps your DM off your back.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Pegasos989 07-06-07, 05:36 PM	Disclaimer: Though this is about paladins, this is not "one of those paladin threads" in that sense, so don't stop reading when you see the word. So, I am starting as a player in a low-magic campaign (and thus the spellcasters I normally play are out of question). I concidered playing a paladin. I thought that even if I don't play a spellcaster, I want something besides "Roll to Hit, Roll to damage, repeat every round". As I would have charisma, daunting presence (or whatever is that feat called. It practically makes opponent shaken if he fails a saving throw, kinda like intimidate but better) feat seemed nice. I was not certain if this would stack with the intimidate skill so I asked the DM. When I brought up the feat... DM "I am not sure about the ethics of this. You are going to play someone good with high standards afterall..." ME "I don't think that forcing enemy to be scared is any worse than killing him." DM "Yeah but trying to gain combat advantage by scaring him... I don't know about that..." Now to the question. I am not asking which one is correct in the matter. I could create a paladin without that feat too. Or whole another class. I am also not interested in your views of the mechanics of the feat & intimidate stacking. What I am uncertain of is... There are obiously some pretty big diffrences in how I see paladins and how he sees them. Do you think that they are large enough that it could be problematic? I don't want to spend half of the game time arguing what my character would do and other half on why he shouldn't lose his powers. So, I want opinions on whether I should a) Solve the whole opinion diffrences in some way (and hints on what that should be) b) Just play something else c) Try to play this paladin as I see fit and hope it will not be a problem d) Something else, what?
Paladin_Hiroshi 07-06-07, 05:48 PM	I play a paladin, so could you please; 1) make a list of 3 things a paladin must do, in your opinion, 2) 3 things they must be 3) and 3 things they must never do. Don't point out the obvious, go for the subtle, and then try and point out whether your dm would argue. :) if you do that, I think I can help you :D ...oh and I like the idea. I have a character with that, kind of a grizzled veteran :)
buzzsawl 07-06-07, 06:08 PM	Agreed. Should be fine as long as you two can pre-make a list of do's and don'ts... Of course, it does sound like your ideas of paladins are quite a bit different, so if you can't come to some sort of agreement on the above, I'd be looking for other possibilities as to good classes to play. (Maybe Crusader if you're allowed ToB? Or Grey Guards PrC if you can use CompScoundrel)
Forfeit 07-06-07, 06:09 PM	Make it so that only evil people gets afected. That way the DM wont have an excuse, because evil must be banished.
Comus 07-06-07, 06:19 PM	Hm. Let me see if I can find my last Paladin's code... Ah, here we go. "The enemy of Good is not always Evil. The misled are often as dangerous as the malicious, but do not confuse the two. Suffer not the Evil to live. They have no mercy, and you should likewise show them none, for they have not the hearts to understand it. Treat the Good but misled with compassion, but remember that the Greater Good comes before the life of any one person, even a Good person. Fear and terror are the weapons we use to destroy evil. Prison and Execution were always intended to be fearful, a deterrent rather than a punishment. Deter Evil in any way needed, for one act of Evil not committed is worth nearly any price. Do not rely on local authority to punish Evil. If they are not doing enough Good, then there is no reason to be confined by their actions. Use your own judgment, but do not break laws simply because you do not like them - do so only when it is for the Greater Good. The tools of Evil and the tools of Good are different only in what hand wields them. Use whatever means you must to defeat Evil where you find it. But do not use indiscriminate weapons like poison - we must be careful to do harm only to those we intend. Finally, show no weakness. Morally, you must always be pure. Spiritually, you must always be sure. And physically, you must always be sound. Your enemies must believe you are invincible, as untouchable as Good itself." ~ Bludbayn Vaughn Doum, Paladin. Most relevant part bolded. There's no reason a paladin can't be scary.
Salla 07-06-07, 06:51 PM	The vast majority of fear effects in the books do not have the Evil tag, so that's not an issue. Whether or not that's considered dishonorable (aka Chaotic) is a matter for debate. I'd toss it and just play a cleric.
buzzsawl 07-06-07, 06:55 PM	Most relevant part bolded. There's no reason a paladin can't be scary. Honestly the only situation I can think of where being scary even affects any code of honor, is if you scare someone into running away and then shoot them in the back. And that's really more the shooting in the back part that could be considered dishonorable.
1337Ninja 07-07-07, 10:44 PM	I don't have the book with the feat in it, but you could just have a character who is very scary rather than one who intentionally intimidates foes. Looking scary is not a dishonourable act.
Comus 07-08-07, 02:15 AM	I don't have the book with the feat in it, but you could just have a character who is very scary rather than one who intentionally intimidates foes. Looking scary is not a dishonourable act. Neither is intimidation. For an extreme example of Honor + Intimidation, look at the samurai culture of Japan.
Saberus 07-08-07, 02:50 AM	IMNSHO, yes, a Paladin can intimidate, frighten and even bluff in combat. Doing something to gain an advantage in the fight against evil is not only honorable, but sometimes necessary. If you appear scary enough, you can stop meaningless battles against weaker opponents before they start. It is less honorable to slaughter the weak. and since Intimidate and Daunting Presence are far more effective against those of lower level than you, you can assure you don't lose you paladinhood from reckless and/or wanton killing. Using the Bluff skill to feint in combat is not just for thieves, who still have respectable BAB. Paladins can benefit from this skill too, even if it is cross class. Particularly dexterious opponents become easier to handle, and bring to justice. Just don't go stabbing people in the back. And if you can spare the feat, there is one in either the CW or CAd that allows you to feint as a move action instead of a standard action.
Myree 07-08-07, 04:31 AM	I agree with most of the other posts. IMHO, the main thing to remember here is along the same lines as "Charisma does not just mean looks". A great leader (i.e. high charisma) will MANY times unknowingly intimidate or humble others. Who hasn't seen a movie where the General just looks at a couple of Privates and has them shaking in their boots and tripping over each other? Where I would consider them crossing the "right and just" line is if they use it unnecessarily against non-enemies. Making a commoner wet themselves in the process of getting information is NOT a "nice" thing to do -- better to give them a smile and nicely ask for their help. However, making the orcs foul themselves is another thing altogether. But, as others have said before me, you need to work this out with your DM, and putting a list together like Paladin_Hiroshi suggests is a great start.
Ace_of_time 07-08-07, 11:34 AM	It would be easier to just go knight and be done with it.
Paladin_Hiroshi 07-08-07, 01:08 PM	I'd like to say, the above advice is gold!!!! :) these are the right responces, mature and sensible (not often seen in a paladin thread) In my view, a paladin is good at what he does. He is a warrior against evil and chaos (to a lesser extent). As he has been training in martial aspects, it's only natural for him to learn from the best, how to fight effectivelythis means, if you don't have to kill someone, then don't, they would teach him footwork, parries, dodges, all those little tricks that turn the balance. Why? Because evil doesn't play fair. Evil will trip you, sneak attack you, poison you, push you around, unless someone stands up to it. The paladin won't sink to evil's depths, but he has a few little tricks to...even the playing field...
Ack 07-08-07, 05:43 PM	A real-life anecdote with some bearing on this: During the war in Iraq, a couple of British journalists were in a city which, while still in Iraqi hands, was coming under pressure from oncoming Coalition forces. As such, the fact that they were foreigners was making their position increasingly precarious, so they decided to leave before it was too late. When they were a little way out of the city, they were flagged down by a group of soldiers who turned out to be SAS-R (Australian SAS). They were then politely (but thoroughly) debriefed regarding conditions in the city and then sent on their way. Now, as anyone who is familiar with the world's military organisations would know, SAS-R is one of the most effective special operations forces in the world. They define scary (I know; I've met one or two). These guys could have come the heavy on the journalists and terrified them into answering their questions. They didn't; in fact, they were even polite about it. Why? Because it wasn't called for. Now, I wouldn't go so far as to call SAS-R the modern day answer to paladins ... but they do go after the bad guys, they hit hard, and they pull no punches. And they don't go after civvies. :D And you could do a lot worse than that.
calronmoonflower 07-08-07, 06:29 PM	Oh My God! Paladins that scare evil people! That's unheard of! Seriously though the evil beings should be intimated by paladins. By the rules as written there is no reason that a paladin cannot scare opponents, as long as you do not use it for evil deeds you are fine. Try Ki Shout and Great Ki Shout from Oriental Adventures is you have it. That way you could actually panic opponents.
Callista 07-08-07, 06:43 PM	I agree with the above posts--If there's anything Evil should fear, it's a paladin. Morale is a very real part of battle; and if you can intimidate your opponent into surrendering, you might not even have to fight them. Then, by honorable treatment of your prisoners, you may even be able to bring them to your own side...
pokemaniacbill 07-08-07, 07:01 PM	I think fear seems more humane then a sword in the face, don't you? For all you know, it will be an effective deterrant.
danielinthewolvesden 07-08-07, 08:09 PM	Discuss this with him, Show him this thread, ask him to respond here. If not then try a Crusader. MUCH more difficult to play but somewhat mor epowerful and about the same concept.
Cartigan 07-08-07, 08:12 PM	Paladins arn't Knights, I fail to see the problem of a Paladin's presence making an enemy helpless.
Illithid_Tentacles 07-08-07, 08:33 PM	Being scary is neither evil, chaotic, nor dishonorable. Taken to an extreme, yes, it CAN be these things, but that's true about almost everything.
windscar18 07-08-07, 08:37 PM	How about you look at the Grey Guard from Complete Scoundrel? That way, even if you look upon Paladins differently than him, the Grey Guard basically throws those stereotypes out the window: it's FOCUSED on interrogation, fright, etc.
danielinthewolvesden 07-08-07, 08:43 PM	How about you look at the Grey Guard from Complete Scoundrel? That way, even if you look upon Paladins differently than him, the Grey Guard basically throws those stereotypes out the window: it's FOCUSED on interrogation, fright, etc. Ooh, good one!
Ace_of_time 07-08-07, 09:26 PM	Paladins arn't Knights, I fail to see the problem of a Paladin's presence making an enemy helpless. There is not that much of a difference in them. he says here or just play something else. I was just making a suggestion if he decides not to go pal. So, I want opinions on whether I should a) Solve the whole opinion diffrences in some way (and hints on what that should be) b) Just play something else c) Try to play this paladin as I see fit and hope it will not be a problem d) Something else, what?
Cartigan 07-08-07, 09:42 PM	There is not that much of a difference in them. Beside the fact the Knights have a fairly codified ethical ruleset that force them to act chivalrous. The Paladin code isn't about chivalry or honor in the way the Knight is, it's about being "Good" and following the righteous path.
Ace_of_time 07-08-07, 10:08 PM	Beside the fact the Knights have a fairly codified ethical ruleset that force them to act chivalrous. The Paladin code isn't about chivalry or honor in the way the Knight is, it's about being "Good" and following the righteous path. Oh! Well! your right why was I so blind? Burn the witch!
DarkNick 07-08-07, 10:28 PM	daunting presence...I think people are focusing on only one meaning of daunting. To daunt can mean to discourage and awe... To me this feat fits a paladin perfectly. They are so strong in their convictions, so charismatic, so powerful in their righteousness that people near them feel awe or are subdued i.e. quiet in their presence, while opponents feel discouraged, dispirited in the face of such goodness and rightness. A daunting task is a huge task. A daunting presence is a huge presence. The Paladins appears powerful, lordly, commanding, angelic... You're not just making your enemies fear you - you are putting the fear of your god into them.. One way to look at it is the Paladin is not consciously causing fear in their opponents - instead their opponents fear the Paladin because of what he is. Evil should rightly fear where a paladin walks and everyone else should be awed by them. They are a power to be reckoned with. The common folk look up to them and feel humbled by being in the paladins presence, enemies quake at the sight...
Enlightened1 07-08-07, 10:46 PM	[QUOTE=Pegasos989;12983903 What I am uncertain of is... There are obiously some pretty big diffrences in how I see paladins and how he sees them. Do you think that they are large enough that it could be problematic? I don't want to spend half of the game time arguing what my character would do and other half on why he shouldn't lose his powers. So, I want opinions on whether I should a) Solve the whole opinion diffrences in some way (and hints on what that should be) b) Just play something else c) Try to play this paladin as I see fit and hope it will not be a problem d) Something else, what?[/QUOTE] NOT C! Definitely NOT C! That's just going to do exactly what you want to avoid. B is probably my pick. Unless you and the GM can come to a fairly quick agreement on what's expected, and what he's going to punish you for, it's probably not worth the time and energy to argue it out (though it would be great great if it can be resolved reasonably!) So, A would be ideal. I don't have any specific suggestions without knowing more details, but if the two of you are very far apart, it would take some work to reach a workable compromise. And then you have to work with the expectations of the other players, so you aren't always having game-session arguments where the other players are demanding that the GM punish you. (The only suggestion that comes to mind is at least getting agreement that any alignment punishment gets a "warning shot", so there's a fair chance to hash it out without taking up game time to do so.) I would think that between variant classes and multiclassing, there's enough interesting fighter options that one could fit your "not just roll-to-hit" goal.
Ack 07-08-07, 10:57 PM	daunting presence...I think people are focusing on only one meaning of daunting. To daunt can mean to discourage and awe... To me this feat fits a paladin perfectly. They are so strong in their convictions, so charismatic, so powerful in their rightousness that people near them feel awe or are subdued i.e. quiet in their presence, while opponants feel discouraged, dispirited in the face of such goodness and rightness. A daunting task is a huge task. A daunting presence is a huge presence. The Paladins appears powerful, lordly, commanding, angelic... You're not just making your enemies fear you - you are putting the fear of your god into them.. One way to look at it is the Paladin is not conciously causing fear in their opponants - instead their opponants fear the Paladin because of what he is. Evil should rightly fear where a paladin walks and everyone else should be awed by them. They are a power to be rekoned with. The common folk look up to them and feel humbled by being in the paladins presence, enemies quake at the sight... The Green Lantern oath says it perfectly: In brightest day, in darkest night No evil shall escape my sight Let those who worship evil's might Beware my power, Green Lantern's light! :D
DarkNick 07-08-07, 11:15 PM	The Green Lantern oath says it perfectly: In brightest day, in darkest night No evil shall escape my sight Let those who worship evil's might Beware my power, Green Lantern's light! :D yeah, they are the guys that make bad people go "fuuuurrrc...." and fill their pants.
DX2052 07-08-07, 11:19 PM	Even if you DO convince the DM to allow it, make sure he reads this If a paladin falls in the forest, does it make a sound? (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=610188), given he had some issues with the concept, he is BOUND to have issues with some action of yours. and anyways, I'd take it something similar to criminals fleeing from the police, the police aren't scary, but the criminals are (justifiably) afraid of the police. and Ack, I prefer the original "blackest day".
Callista 07-09-07, 12:02 AM	Well, I don't see why you couldn't do the exact same concept with a different knight-style class. If you like, you can even write yourself a code of conduct, be Lawful Good, and seek atonement if you mess up. Sometimes it's better to compromise. But you know your DM best. One thing I do suggest if you decide on Paladin: Write out your code of conduct, and have your DM OK it beforehand. That way, you can determine the gray areas, and which way your character will feel about them--treatment of prisoners, what to do in case of a hostage situation, what to do if you have to decide between two bad choices, how important your own honor is, how much you have to care about the laws of the land, whether you're allowed to ambush people or infiltrate an enemy castle in a sneaky manner... That sort of thing. That's what a Code is for: First, to state the basic principles for making normal decisions; and then, to show where the boundaries are, to make the hard decisions. Also, writing down your Code really, really keeps your DM off your back.