Code of Chivalry

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

Level30Swordmaster

Dec 04, 2013 15:49:13

Question is: Can the code of chivalry be used in the D&D system?  I would like to make a lawful good paladin, but I want to model him after a historical crusader like Raymond IV  or carolingian horsemen like Roland and Charlamagne.  I took what typical oaths made I could find, categorized them into society, community, personal and war, tried to order them in order of importance as best I could and included typical knightly rights that could be applicable to the D&D system.  I have kind of a abrogation system to for moral choices when oaths conflict with each other and whatnot.  Is this a waste of time?  Is it doable?  Any other ideas?

 

The sworn oaths:
Each category of oaths as well as the oaths themselves are given in order of weight.  The one that comes first abrogates the other when one oath comes in conflict with another.
 
Oaths regarding loyalty and piety:
Faith and loyalty are given the most weight due to the fact that the survival and prosperity of the community as a whole comes before the individual

1. To fear god, maintain his church and keep faith
2. To serve the liege lord in valor and faith
3. To respect authority
 
Oaths regarding personal, familial and societal honor:
It is debatable whether 1 & 2 could be switched unless you're sir Lancelot, however women are the bearer of children and therefor vital for the prosperity of the community, so you should notice community > family/comradery > self.

1. To protect the weak and defenceless, aid widows and orphans and respect the honor of women
2. To live by honor and for glory and uphold the honor of your fellow knights
3. To never refuse a challenge from an equal
 
Oaths regarding warfare: 
Warfare comes before the self, otherwise you would care about yourself before wanting to be a martyr or defend against attacks.

1. To fight for the welfare of all
2. To show no mercy to the evil-aligned and not hesitate to make war with them
3. To never turn your back on an enemy
 
Oaths regarding personal behavior:

1. To always be trustworthy and truthful
2. To be generous and fair and eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
3. To be always and everywhere right and good against evil and injustice

Personal Rights:
The purpose of personal rights is for the fulfilment, enhancement and further abrogation of oaths when an oath comes in
conflict with another oath or with personal rights, except in the case of the first oath of piety (see martyrdom).
 
Martyrdom - Death in the service of faith or the fulfilment of the oaths grants the status of martyr
War - The evil-aligned; whether by choice, nature or circumstance is your natural enemy
Conquest - You do not receive personal income, therefor income comes from the right of conquest
Ransom - Rather than killing an enemy, you may choose to ransom person or property in return for compensation
Hospitality - You may demand the right of safe passage, food and/or rest when passing through another's property
Justice - You reserve the right to deliver swift justice to the honorless and law breakers
Respect - You reserve the right defend personal, familial and societal honor and settle disputes via judicial dueling
Champion - you may choose to champion the weak, defenceless, women, orphans, etc. in a judicial duel
Mediator - you may choose to mediate a judicial duel

Rules of Judicial Dueling (Holmgang)
The right of holmgang may be invoked to settle disputes via a judicial duel.
A mediator may be called upon to mediate the terms of dispute and its resolution including rewards for victory.
A person outclassed may call upon a champion to fight for them or a champion could offer his or her services. 
If the duel is to be scheduled, then it must be carried out within one week of the offense. 
Failure to appear forfeits the duel.
The boundries of the fighting area must be well defined. Willingly stepping out of bounds forfeits the duel.

Forfeit
 - If the offended party forfeits, they are deemed honorless
 - If the offending party forfeits, the offended party is declared the victor

#2

Centauri

Dec 04, 2013 16:02:08

Anything can work, with buy in. You're clearly bought into it, so it would just be a matter of your DM buying in with your breakdown and application of it. You'd want to make sure that you didn't wind up making a character that didn't mesh well with the game the DM wanted to make.

 

The abrogation aspect seems key. D&D's approach to this kind of thing lacks that and is rife with contradictions.

 

It's probably in there somewhere, but I didn't see anything that covers what happens if those oaths are broken. Not that anything has to happen, ruleswise. Whatever it is, make sure it's interesting and not just a dead end and a useless character - unless that would be interesting to the player.

#3

Centauri

Dec 04, 2013 16:13:08

Also, keep in mind that there might be loopholes in that code, as a result of the presence of magic, something Ray and his colleagues didn't have to deal with.

#4

Mad_Jack

Dec 04, 2013 17:25:05

 

 If your campaign world is a place where the chivalric code is an inherent part of the flavor of the world - i.e., a common or at least commonly-known thing and respected or followed by a lot of people, particularly the rest of the party, it works just fine. A "knights and castles" campaign is pretty standard fare in D&D.

However, if a sizeable portion of society is largely indifferent to the fact that your character is a chivalrous knight, or you're the only one in your party holding themselves to your code, then you're going to have various degrees of conflict with either the party or the campaign world. This may be as small as just having trouble finding opportunities to roleplay your adherence to the code or as large as often finding yourself in conflict with other members of the party whose characters favor a more pragmatic or self-serving approach to adventuring.

 

(Reply to #3)

Level30Swordmaster

That's probably a good point.  I hadn't really done much of anything to retouch it yet after extracating it from the song of roland yet.  I also don't know what campaign world it's going to be in.  The one my old group used to play in was a pretty big knight world though.

 

Edit... something wrong with the quote button, but anyway... all good points.  Thanks

Edit, edit... duh ok, I see where it says reply to #3.  sorry I'm new here.  (I can't believe nobody else hadn't already taken my screenname by now lol)

#6

Level30Swordmaster

Dec 04, 2013 19:29:32

Update:  The idea got scrapped completely, because war is incompatible with the rules of lawful-good as defined by the D&D system.  oh well.  Thanks anyway, guys.

#7

DaBeerds

Dec 05, 2013 10:55:05

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
#8

Krusk

Dec 05, 2013 13:53:19

IIRC this is how the actual paladins code was formed, wasn't it?

#9

crimsyn

Dec 05, 2013 15:12:03

First, off, yes, you can play your character how ever you want*.  It's not necessary, but if you want to write up a big long moral code and have your character swear oaths, that can be cool.

 

Centauri has a good point as well - if you are throwing in a bunch of oaths, think about what happens if your character breaks them.  If it's something boring like "he loses all his power and is now useless," that's not really fun for anyone.  But if it's something like "he has to do some cool adventuring to make up for it" then it can be fun.  You could even start out with him having broken his oath and took up adventuring to make up for it through good deeds.

 

As for alignment, it doesn't have any mechanical effects in 4e and can safely be ignored.  It sounds like you've developed a more interesting and complex background for your character and his worldview and personal moral codes than "it says LG on my character sheet."  If you want to play this character, I'd stick to it.

 

*There are some caveats if you want to be a good player and make the game fun for everyone, so be careful not to play Nofun McBuzzkill the Lawful Stupid Paladin.  Read this article, especially parts one through five, before playing a character with a strict moral code:  http://lookrobot.co.uk/2013/06/20/11-ways-to-be-a-better-roleplayer/

#10

Level30Swordmaster

Dec 05, 2013 18:49:51 		The DM disagrees, so it had to be trashed. The only way he would allow it was to remove alignment from the game which would render alignment based classes useless. Or I could use it 'possibly' for lawful neutral, but he would prefer the group to be good / heroic.
#11

Centauri

Dec 05, 2013 19:20:21

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
(Reply to #11)

Level30Swordmaster

Spells like detect evil will automatically fail was one example. I don't want to press it to much. He's annoyed enough already.
#13

warghoul

Dec 06, 2013 5:35:35

 Apparently your DM never heard of Dragonlance......

 

http://dragonlance.wikia.com/wiki/Solamnic_Knights

(Reply to #13)

Level30Swordmaster

He has, but I think he is just mad that I took the question to the forums. I did send it him first, but he never answered, so I brought it up here. After that he just trashed it.
#15

Level30Swordmaster

Dec 06, 2013 6:22:01 		I was already in the hotseat because I made a neutral fighter. I thought it would be cool to model a character after the 15th century swabian mastet at arms, Hans Talhoffer. Since the NPC is a lawful good cleric, it doesn't fit with the group.
#16

DaBeerds

Dec 06, 2013 7:15:48

This sounds like a recipe for disaster.  It sounds like the DM wants to tell a story and you and the rest of the group are along for the ride.  My advice find a new DM.

(Reply to #16)

Level30Swordmaster

I know... but he's my brother. If he wants to roll me up a character and tell me how to play it, I will do it happily. I don't want to ruin his game.
#18

Scatterbrained

Dec 06, 2013 8:59:55

Threads like these make me thankful for being part of a group that doesn't get hung up on stuff like this. Good luck with your game.

#19

DaBeerds

Dec 06, 2013 12:53:03

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
#20

DaBeerds

Dec 06, 2013 12:53:07

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
#21

crimsyn

Dec 06, 2013 20:10:13

Okay, so you came up with an interesting moral code for your character, and your DM said no "because alignment"

 

He also gets upset with you because you made a fighter, and it didn't align with his NPC.  He's trashing all your character ideas, blocking everything you come up with, and now he's mad that you are posting on a D&D forum.

 

This is a recipe for disaster.  Your posts have set off so many red flags in my head that I don't know where to begin.

 

Your DM basically wants to tell a story and wants his players to shut up and follow along.  He's blocking all of your character ideas.  And, he's upset that you're posting on a forum.  If he's into this kind of control freakery, this game is not going to be good for you or for him.  If he's already getting frustrated and putting you in the hot seat, neither party is having fun.  He's frustrated with you (for all the wrong reasons), and you're feeling the heat.  I'd bow out and start looking for other groups, either online or in person.  Or, study up on how to be an effective DM and start your own group - this side of the table can be just as much, if not more fun.

 

I presume the DM in question is reading this forum as he's upset over this.  Dude, you need to lighten up, and learn to work with your players instead of against them.  For your sake and theirs.

 

Also, this kind of crap around alignment is exactly why 4e got rid of alignment based mechanics.  Since you mentioned "alignment-based classes," I'm presuming you're not playing 4e.  What edition are you playing, by the way?

#22

pinkisthenewred

Dec 08, 2013 22:19:31

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
#23

Be3Al2

Dec 09, 2013 15:40:06

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
(Reply to #22)

Level30Swordmaster

The paladin I designed would invoke the right of holmgang. I really don't like the direction paladin's are going now anyway. I'm old school. It's cool that there can be evil paladin's now, but there's no mention of chivalry or the old knights in the description and they're simply just a champion of a diety. A basic fighter will do just fine.
(Reply to #21)

Level30Swordmaster

I started playing seriously in 1st/2nd edition and I liked the d20 system of 3rd edition. I didn't really get into 4th edition. They're doing the 5th edition playtest. I don't know the rules that well and it's been a long time since I've played any d&d at all. I was probably just expecting another 2nd edition.
#26

DaBeerds

Dec 10, 2013 7:56:55

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
(Reply to #26)

Level30Swordmaster

I got the nostalgic glasses half off from the sears catalog just before they discontinued it. The original player's handbook that I had was the official phb (before 2nd e) and had the picture of a wizard on it. It listed Roland and the peers of Charlemagne as examples of paladins.
#28

Level30Swordmaster

Dec 10, 2013 9:05:48 		There was never any actual 'codified' or written down code of chivalry. The code of chivalry was just the most common oaths sworn by the elite horsemen of the carolingian empire who all had traditional values tied to the values of germanic paganism even though the official religion was Christianity. By the time of the crusades, knights, who traced their lineage and traditional values to the carolingians, used them as a model for their conduct. They got completely replaced by king arthur later, who was purely fictional, but fit better with Christianity.
#29

DaBeerds

Dec 10, 2013 9:22:33

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
(Reply to #29)

Level30Swordmaster

That was the problem. By our standards, chivalrous knight wouldn't be considered 'good'. A knight straight out of the dark ages on the other hand would probably strive to live without regret or shame and would consider their own actions, provided that every action was in persuit of fulfilling an oath, as the best possible action and therefore 'good' in their mind.
#31

Level30Swordmaster

Dec 10, 2013 10:11:12 		What it really boiled down to is, I wanted to play a paladin if I'm going to be on team good. I just didn't want to be the stick-in-the-mud lawful-stupid paladin turning the other cheek and relocating hobgoblins peacefully from their dungeon abodes to the nearest office of the magistrate. I wanted to play an 'actual' warrior, which was why I started with a neutral fighter.
#32

LordOfWeasels

Dec 10, 2013 12:24:54

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
#33

Kishri

Dec 10, 2013 18:36:17

Level30Swordmaster wrote:
#34

Diachronos

Jan 13, 2014 7:30:52

crimsyn wrote: