Paladins

[Longes]

Is the existence of a class with unique roleplaying restriction a good thing? Especially a class which can be easily lead by the MC into losing all his abilities. Especially in the world where MCs are frequently malicious and take joy in making the paladin fall. Also, did you ever had any problems with the paladin in your game?

[Midnight_v]

Is the existence of a class with unique roleplaying restriction a good thing? Especially a class which can be easily lead by the MC into losing all his abilities. Especially in the world where MCs are frequently malicious and take joy in making the paladin fall. Also, did you ever had any problems with the paladin in your game?

I never thought that it was a good idea, no. I've seen assholes playing "GOTCHA!" with the paladin, yeah that sucks. Ultimately, its just the detect on everyone you see/refuse help etc from non-good sources. Which is really strange sometimes, because there are a lot of bad people who might be in charge or you might need. YMMV
Its my least favorite class, and I think Battle Clerics make more sense, so pally's end up staying cause ... tradition I guess. D&D is pretty fucking busted anyway, that's just 1 small symptom really.

[Wiseman]

I tend to play very loose and vague with the paladin code. As long as you act in a generally good manner, that's enough for me.

[Aryxbez]

In my olden times of DMing, I abused the Paladin's code unfortunately (DM power tripping is all it enables)....The worth I see in it, allows it to differ from the other classes in terms of magic systems, so everything doesn't seem the same. I very much like the idea of clerics of different gods, to be different, and feel different as well. Course lot of this can be covered with strong flavor and description, and D&D covers the latter with "favored god weapons", and Domains.

Also, did you ever had any problems with the paladin in your game?

Once, the Party Paladin was the [Tome] Soulborn class, and was better than everyone in the party. To the point people wouldn't want to play without him & wizard player, that count?

[erik]

You are probably best off dumping the code of conduct and having various orders use Mark of Justice to enforce desired behavior.

[Koumei]

There is a place for roleplaying instructions/hooks in a class. But it would be better to either:
A. Not apply an effect. Just say "This is what they do" and then tell someone they're expected to do that. Mention that if they don't follow it, they're giving the order a bad name and they'll be hunted down by their former brethren for their daily encounters. Remind them that one of these groups has Smite Evil and is Good, the other has Smite Evil and is Evil, these are not good odds without convincing the other PCs to help.
B. Have that be an entry requirement more than anything else - the Order of Tyr won't train anyone who doesn't meet their criteria, but after you're in, you can still gain levels after they kick you out for torching an orphanage.
C. Just make it a temporary penalty thing, where every bad act causes you to suffer the effects of a temporary negative level for an hour or so.
D. Actually put an annoying deity in their head that berates them for being bad and provides advice - the trade-off being that instead of them having 1/day Smite Evil, the deity adds Smite Evil to every single attack they make that has its approval. Alternatively a following spirit creature that gives advice on what they should be doing (or, you know, the actual paladin mount). I'd suggest a fairy that plays a musical instrument and is called a Spritely Companion, but few will get that joke.

Any of these will work better for an ongoing game and mitigate "DM is being a dick". Some of these can still be annoying, some can provide their own hooks and such.

That said, I have to wonder what qualifies as "associating with or aiding Evil". Does a paladin fall for hiring an Evil person and training them up and sending them on fetch quests in an overall effort to convert them to Good? (Hi, Aribeth! No wonder you fell, HAHAHAHA!)

[Longes]

That said, I have to wonder what qualifies as "associating with or aiding Evil". Does a paladin fall for hiring an Evil person and training them up and sending them on fetch quests in an overall effort to convert them to Good? (Hi, Aribeth! No wonder you fell, HAHAHAHA!)

There is a thread on Paizo forum, where the GM made paladin fall for gambling. Not even cheating - just gambling, and then not returning the money he won to the guy.

Antipaladin moral code is sooooo much better...

[Cyberzombie]

I tend to play very loose and vague with the paladin code. As long as you act in a generally good manner, that's enough for me.

Same here. I've never had any problems with the paladin code.

[Drolyt]

I don't know whether roleplaying restrictions are bad in general, but the paladin code of conduct is awful. It might make sense if the paladin were part of a specific religious or chivalric order, but they aren't. They are just champions of good (and sometimes law, whatever the hell that means). Why wouldn't a holy knight be allowed to lie in order to save someone's life? Why is poison inherently more evil than stabbing people? Why the hell is it the paladin's personal responsibility to punish wrongdoers? Again, these restrictions might make sense for a member of a specific organization, but the fluff of the paladin nowhere justifies them.

[Rawbeard]

I had a paladin that killed a street kid that was forced to work for some thieves because the kid detected as evil. No dilemma at all, right?

[erik]

Some roleplay restrictions/guidelines can certainly be good but 3.x dropped the ball just about every damned time they used any. Largely because the biggie was alignment restrictions (of which only Clerics made any sense) and no good comes from their alignment system at all. And of course Paladins crank it up a notch with a CoC that is both impossible to follow during the course of typical adventuring and with harsh results if you fail to live up to it.

A decent DM has to ignore the rules for Paladins and use a light touch to make an enjoyable venture, and as such I never had problems with them among friends. All my bad Paladin stories come from Living Greyhawk and none of them were stupid/poor play by paladins; they were just either stupid modules or stupid DMs.

I heard tell that the Kingdom of Iuz metaregion (which was Texas and Oklahoma if I recall) basically was no-mans-land for Paladins since modules would have agents of the local evil kingdom ask party members if they were good and if you lied you got a notch towards losing paladinhood, and if you didn't then adventure fail/TPK. I never played in that region so tis hearsay tho.

I did experience a shitty LG adventure where at the very onset the party came into possession of an important book/documents during a fight in a city. The local authorities who arrived on the scene asked for the evidence that we got off the assassin who slipped away and we handed it over to them. We did so after going back to the city guard building with them and confirming they were legit. Adventure over. We failed. They were apparently in league with the bad guys. I don't blame that on having a paladin in the party because 4-5 of 6 of us were lawful good and it seemed like the proper thing to do. That's a shitty module (or the DM read the module wrong, which happens too).

Anywho.
Arcana Unearthed had the right idea for Paladins. The Champion basically is a sworder who can select various causes that have associated power sets. They have suggestions for how to tend to their charges but no screwing of players.

They of course suffer from the same flaw that afflicts all AU non-caster classes, they have maybe 5-10 class abilities spread over 20 levels.

[Longes]

I heard tell that the Kingdom of Iuz metaregion (which was Texas and Oklahoma if I recall) basically was no-mans-land for Paladins since modules would have agents of the local evil kingdom ask party members if they were good and if you lied you got a notch towards losing paladinhood, and if you didn't then adventure fail/TPK. I never played in that region so tis hearsay tho.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD71ip1osM4

[Dogbert]

Let's see...

A goody-two-shoes class in a game that's specifically about enlightened self-interest at best and Grand Theft Fantasy at worst... why would anyone ever...???



The class rejects d&d's most basic objectives since looting your enemy's corpse flies in the face of "sanctity of the dead"... they won't do it, and they won't allow the rest of the party to do it either so why would anyone even consider taking one of these along for a delve? "LG" is barely something people put up with, now put LG+religious zealot together and the result is totally unplayable if you ever attempt to use it verbatim.

Those who have read historical chivalric codes can also attest that the only function they had was tying a knight's hands to render him powerless before the Catholic church' crimes against humanity.

[Drolyt]

looting your enemy's corpse

Is there a reason we want this to be something characters do?

[fectin]

looting your enemy's corpse

Is there a reason we want this to be something characters do?

You're taking that way too seriously:

Those who have read historical chivalric codes can also attest that the only function they had was tying a knight's hands to render him powerless before the Catholic church' crimes against humanity.

[hyzmarca]

Paladin as written is a bit too restrictive, but the concept isn't bad. It's fairly useful for exploring the concept of Good and Law. And of the letter of the code vs the spirit.

I like equivocal Paladins, who break their code in spirit while keeping to it in letter.

I like reasonable Paladins who break their code in letter while keeping to it in spirit.

In neither case should they suffer because both cases are interesting.

I like Paladins whose code compels them to do things that are conventionally evil, or at least morally dubious, in the name of Good.

I like Paladins whose code compels them to challenge the conventional morality of the setting.

Both cases are interesting.

I especially like Paladins whose code compels them to break their code.

I especially love Book of Vile Darkness, where the one member of the Paladin order who breaks every one of his oaths for the greater good gets Paladin powers from Pelor while all the others who keep to their code are stuck with useless fighter levels are get slaughtered.


GMs who play gotcha are terrible and should have saks of rutabagas placed on their heads. But codes of honor are great roleplaying tools.

[MGuy]

As Koumei said, I think it is better to have the 'code' in the fluff rather than hard coded mechanics, especially if most other classes doesn't get the same treatment.

[Neon Sequitur]

I've come to see the (relatively) new Inquisitor class as everything the Paladin should have been, and I'm playing my current character as such. After helping our party take down a bunch of mooks with the judicious and repeated use of the Blistering Invective spell, (people he intimidates burst into flames), someone in the group shouts something about looting the bodies.

Inquisitor crosses his arms and sneers, "YOU loot the bodies. I'm just here to burn the unrighteous."

He's on a mission and he doesn't give a holy Lawful Good f**k about anything else.

If I could play a Paladin like that and get away with it....

[zugschef]

A paladin is *not* a champion of law, though.

[Otakusensei]

In Pathfinder, my group usually allows the paladin to follow a specific deity rather than the default good guy dynamic. Under those rules you are basically living your life in the service of the deity and their personal philosophy, as long as you keep it in those guidelines you're fine.

I like the idea of having some sort of in game direction, like a spirit guide, to help navigate. Not because I think people can't handle roleplaying, or MC are looking to fuck with paladins, but because without communication an honest mistake can look like either of those.

I'm about to start a new campaign this week and plan on playing a dhampir paladin of a lawful good god, I'm thinking of specifically asking the MC if at some point we can do a fall and redemption story arc. It sounds like a blast.

[Longes]

In Pathfinder, my group usually allows the paladin to follow a specific deity rather than the default good guy dynamic. Under those rules you are basically living your life in the service of the deity and their personal philosophy, as long as you keep it in those guidelines you're fine.

I like the idea of having some sort of in game direction, like a spirit guide, to help navigate. Not because I think people can't handle roleplaying, or MC are looking to fuck with paladins, but because without communication an honest mistake can look like either of those.

I'm about to start a new campaign this week and plan on playing a dhampir paladin of a lawful good god, I'm thinking of specifically asking the MC if at some point we can do a fall and redemption story arc. It sounds like a blast.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/won ... ithfulness

[Drolyt]

I've come to see the (relatively) new Inquisitor class as everything the Paladin should have been, and I'm playing my current character as such. After helping our party take down a bunch of mooks with the judicious and repeated use of the Blistering Invective spell, (people he intimidates burst into flames), someone in the group shouts something about looting the bodies.

Inquisitor crosses his arms and sneers, "YOU loot the bodies. I'm just here to burn the unrighteous."

He's on a mission and he doesn't give a holy Lawful Good f**k about anything else.

If I could play a Paladin like that and get away with it....

This whole post confuses me. If paladins worked like that they wouldn't be paladins. Why not just say you don't like to play paladins?

[Maxus]

It's all in how you play them, I suppose. You can be Good without being Nice.

Saint Iratus was a 8th-Century Paladin who gained divine recognition for his merciful defeat of the Kiron the Tyrant-King of Kroll. History tells us he had Dark King Kiron in a headlock, and was making passable progress towards unscrewing Kiron's head, while delivering a eloquent catolog of the Dark King's lifetime of sowing evil, hatred, and misery, and was screaming "REAP THE WHIRLWIND FUCKSTAIN!" when Sharptooth, his barbarian companion, persuaded him to relent and spare Kiron's life. Kiron later reformed, and joined a monastery which had a vow of silence and also a prohibition against nodding or moving the head.

For his great-hearted compassion and temperance, Iratus was visited by angels in his dreams, and went on a holy journey to Mount Celestia. There, he got permission to cut a golden oak from the high reaches, and fashioned the oak tree into a gorgeous, solid table.

Then he carried the table on his back, to the court of a Balor and chokeslammed the Balor through the table. The table shattered and riddled the Balor with holy splinters. The battle went precipitously downhill for the Balor from there.

Afterwards, Iratus gathered up the pieces, proclaiming he was going to "MAKE SOME FUCKING SHIVS OUT OF THIS TABLE, BECAUSE THAT BALOR CAUGHT ON WHITE FIRE WHEN HE HIT THE WOOD AND I WANT TO SEE THAT SHIT AGAIN!"

He made good on his word, whittling rough daggers and, one on occasion, a wooden sword, out of it, and legend tells that a whole table leg survived intact, and that this was wielded by Saint Iratus as a greatclub to terrific effect in later battles.

After his eventual death, the mourners found his workroom was covered in splinters of the Golden Table, left behind as he whittled out weapons, and they gathered up the holy oak and kept them safe. Soon, Iratus's students and disciples formally declared themselves the Order of Saint Iratus, and the splinters were given out as recognition of great deeds. They also dedicated themselves to Iratus' philosophy of battle and life in general, which ran as such:

1) PUT THAT ARMOR ON AND START RUNNING, YOU HANDFUCKERS. I SPREAD FLUFFY BUTTERY-SMOOTH GIRLY-MAN MUSCLE LIKE THAT ON MY TOAST FOR BREAKFAST!

2) WHO THE FUCK SPENDS THEIR TIME PRACTICING THE NINE-CRESCENT WATER MOON STRIKE OF FLUFFY BUNNY BULLSHIT? JUST BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF THEM! IT WORKS FOR ME!

3) PRACTICE YOUR FUCKING MAGIC, DIMCOCK! THAT SHIT IS FUCKING AWESOME!

4) BE COOL TO THE POOR, THE SICK, THE ELDERLY, AND THE LADIES! UNLESS THEY'RE EVIL, THEN KILL SOME OF THEM SO HARD EVERYONE ELSE STRAIGHTENS THEIR SHIT UP!

As might be gathered, the Iratians pride themselves on their physical strength, and take direct approach to combat, augmented by choice spells and heavy armor; they often emulate Saint Iratus himself by focusing on grappling. They are also generous to the common man (and polite to the ladies/and or men), while being very vocal and demonstrative in their destruction of evil.

Iratus was canonized after his miraculous appearance to a group of downhearted adventurers, who were ready to cease fighting against governmental corruption in a lawless city, some fifty years after his death. Records say he shouted at them for twenty minutes, in profanity that made some observing knackermen vomit, then marched the party to a local gang leader's office and kicked the gang leader in the testicles so hard they flew out his mouth, then gave some money to a street urchin for his sick grandmother and proclaimed "DO IT LIKE THAT FUCKERS. IF THE LAWS ARE SERVING EVIL THEY'RE FUCKING BAD LAWS AND YOU SHOULD KILL THEM TOO! DON'T MAKE ME COME BACK DOWN HERE AND REPEAT MYSELF." and disappeared while he ranted about the obviousness of his approach.

[kzt]

Indeed.

[Kaelik]

It's all in how you play them, I suppose. You can be Good without being Nice.

I think his point is that Paladins who yell at people to light them on fire are about the same thing as thieves who lock themselves in monasteries and give up the concept of ownership, or Mages who hate magic and hit people with a non magical sword, or Fighters who wave their magic wand to shoot lightning bolts.

Which is to say, not Paladins.