Umm.. it essetially says you have to be Lawful Good in PHB. The "code" there isn't like the Ten Commandments, but an explanation to the player what Lawful Good means.

But PHB is essentially Greyhawk, and not FR, so anything that you read in a book specifically about Forgotten Realms overrules stuff said in PHB and other core books. FR Campaign Setting has some of the differences between paladin orders explained, but there's no single code mentioned.

Very important to make a difference between Player's Handbook and Forgotten Realms, because there are differences in some things.

Which is why I asked if the stuff in the PH applies to FR.

And why would deities add "Do not kill my enemies" to the code? That seems stupid to me ... in fact, adding "kill my enemies" or at least "defeat my enemies" lets the Paladins go full out and still be LG.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Just fulfilling the deity's desires doesn't justify murder. It doesn't make it a good act, and thus could lead to the paladin's fall.

Again, I want to use my example of Jews and Christians because I think it demonstrates the situation best in RL terms. Jews are the paladins here, and Christians are the clergy etc. followers. The Christians can do the Lord's bidding to their best skill, because they're only bound by 7 rules as per Noah's pact, but the Jews got 613 rules to follow just because they happen to be Jews.

The clergy of a LN deity isn't bound by their alignments as much as a paladin of a LN deity is, just because they're clergy and not paladins. Paladins are special, they gotta do the job in a special way to keep true to both their god and their alignment. It means coming up with some good excuses why you need to kill this Anhuran, instead of just killing him for being an Anhuran. And then you hope that Hoar is happy with your motives, because he expects more of you than of his other followers.

That's why I added 'defeat'. Capture, to take to where they can be healed from their delusional worship.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Because some people, creatures or monsters just can't be saved.

Take Frey for example. Do you really think a Paladin of Amia is going to try to subdue him and then take him back to Kohl to "try to talk some sens into this poor, misguided creature?"

Hell no, they are going to try to find his phylactory and kill his ass - and as they should. Frey is not redeemable - in any way. You get to a point where there is no redeeming, except removing them from existance.

Regards,

_________________

"Come under the flag of truce, and brook no treason... for mineself is Death, and care not whom knows mine touch."
- Frey Asaid'De Majere

In that case, it would be both Lawful and Good to kill them, which is what was written before the or.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

I'm unsure what the point of contention is here, likely it's just me.

Drone stole all my geritol.



Regards,

_________________

"Come under the flag of truce, and brook no treason... for mineself is Death, and care not whom knows mine touch."
- Frey Asaid'De Majere

I'd say that the expected behavior of paladins certainly differ from god to god. There's an element of "always LG" but what constitues LG changes from context to context: Tyrran Paladins having slaves where it's legal etc.

The alignment system is shady, at best, anyways.

_________________
To err is human; to forgive divine, but VENGEANCE IS MINE!

You could also ask is it OK for the Paladin to hand the prisoner over to his/her clergy, if that means the prisoner will likely be killed. Deity's dogma would say, do it and it would indeed be a Lawful act, and a Good act from the clergy's point of view. But also an Evil act, because the prisoner might die.

I wouldn't fall the paladin for that, though. It's a compromise between being LG and devoted to your church.

A Paladin of Hoar is a challenge indeed though. If anyone wants a stab at it, here's some info Iron's cooked up about them:

Paladins of Hoar

Hoar is a dark, vengeful deity of retribution and poetic justice. Balancing between the influences of Tyr and Shar, and dealing with Beshaba to bestow bad luck upon the deserving, the Doombringer seems an ill-fit patron for paladins. Yet there are those who brave this narrow path and earn a fearsome reputation as uncompromising paragons of justice.

In Chessenta and the southern lands, Hoar is known as Assuran, the god of vengeance. Two temples, The Thunderous Hand of Vengeance in Akanax and the Amphitheater of the First Thunder in Mourktar, rival for leadership of the faith. Paladins from this region are uncommon, but are likely to swear fealty to either one of the temples and act as the priesthood's swordarm to mete out just punishment. In western and northern Faerûn, however, Hoar is considered to be more concerned in poetic justice and fitting punishment rather than vengeance. There, his worship is scattered and the only notable temple is the Hidden Hand of Fate in Archendale. Paladins from these regions are more common, and often act without the strict guidance of the clergy.

It is the Hoarites' duty to learn of injustice and repay it in full. Hoarite paladins often track down wanted villains, but refuse to collect the bounty unless it can be used as fitting compensation for the wronged party. Enacting justice is reward enough for the paladins. Feared and disliked as they are by many less-than-innocent people, they are often the only hope poor folks have of repaying those who've wronged them; whereas bounty-hunters demand gold and local authorities may not find evidence enough to press charges, the Hoarites will listen to the most wretched beggar, assess the truth of the account and decide the most fitting way to enact retribution.

Hoar instructs his followers to uphold the spirit of the law over that of the letter. After catching a criminal, a Tyrran paladin will take the captive for trial in the city where the crime was committed, if at all possible. A Hoarite, however, may suspect the captive will weasel his way free of any charges with his knowledge of local legislation. To make sure justice is done, he will simply administer whatever punishment is fitting on the spot. This has gained Hoarites the reputation of vigilantes, and the disapproval of many town watches and Tyrrans.

As instruments of poetic justice, paladins of Hoar are not without a sense of humour. Hoar teaches that revenge is at its sweetest with an edge of irony. While evil clerics of Hoar might think highly of the irony in feeding to the wolves someone who beat their dog, his paladins aim for punishments that teach a lesson but still compensate the crime committed. Violence will meet violence, but a paladin should avoid excessive violence whenever the foe's offence does not outright demand it. A greedy landowner who's kept his underlings in hunger would be better served with a task of sowing the fields, reaping the harvest and baking bread for his servants, rather than starving him to death; something a more malicious Hoarite might opt to do. On a similar note, retribution has two aspects: punishing injustice, for certain, but also rewarding good deeds. While far from charity workers, Hoarite paladins do their best to give suitable rewards to those they witness doing the just and right thing. If someone offers a room in their home for a travelling Hoarite to rest in, the paladin might later invite the family to spend a few nights in a fine inn in the nearby city, at his expense.

Paladins of Hoar are in a difficult position in their church, because some Hoarites are evil and even their neutral brethren may enact cruelties that would enrage many a goodly faith. Hoar's dogma speaks of an eye for an eye, and his paladins consider it a strict commandment that ensures fairness, whereas some others interpret the maximum severity of punishment more liberally. Especially in powerful temples, church hierarchy is established and paladins might end up subservient to evil clerics. That's one reason paladins are uncommon in southern lands where the rule of the church is stronger. Hoarite paladins in the Heartlands and the North are often loners who interact little with the rest of the clergy. A paladin of Hoar will not fight an evil priest of Hoar, because he knows they both apparently have the deity's favour, whether he likes it or not. The paladin may debate matters of moral and dogma and try to persuade the clergy to condemn excessive cruelty, or simply avoid or refuse to work with the evil clergymembers, though. However, it's not unknown for Hoarite paladins to thwart the plans of Hoarite assassins and other lay members when they go too far. Such incidents occasionally cause strife within the church and set the extremes of the clergy at odds with eachother. Fortunately, the neutral medium is by far the strongest group and has so far managed to maintain balance and relative unity.

Hoar's dogma tells to answer evil with evil, and that ”those who do not respond to attacks against their person or that which they hold dear only invite further attacks” Mercy is a luxury for those who don't take the fight against injustice seriously. On the other hand, it's important to a paladin that something good also results from the punishment. The path of a Hoarite paladin in narrow and paradoxical indeed: excessive cruelty results in a fall from goodness but showing undue mercy at the expense of rightful retribution is a breach of their code just as well. Likewise, working against the church they are sworn to serve is unacceptable, but neither may they actively partake in evil deeds. There are certain practices in the church of Hoar that would seem blasphemous to paladins of deities such as Lathander or Kelemvor: sometimes the victim of violence or betrayal begs with his last breath for a chance to take revenge. A Doombringer of Hoar may grant that wish and raise the victim as a revenant, an undead whose only purpose is to take vengeance upon those who wronged him. Once the task is done, the revenant crumbles and the spirit passes on to afterlife. Similarly, Hoarites may command undead to turn against their creator and crumble once he is destroyed. Paladins of Hoar understand the grim irony and justice in such actions, allowing these undead to complete their task.

There are no actual paladin orders dedicated to Hoar. However, the Fellowship of Poetic Justices is an order of bards, paladins and crusaders of both Tyr and Hoar who seek to spread tales of ironic justice and fight injustice in ways more efficent than violence.

_________________
To err is human; to forgive divine, but VENGEANCE IS MINE!

I'd say that in various non-LG Churches, Hoar being the most obvious due to the somewhat 'gray area' nature of his Church, Paladins are likely to be largely seperate from the activities of the rest of the Church, and only engaged in missions appropriate to their code.

Basically, if a God empowers Paladins, which includes all their strict code/lawful baggage...it's highly unlikely that he or his Clergy are going to turn around and order them to go do something in direct violation of their ethos. It would kind of defeat the purpose.

I'd guess conflict most often arises from Paladins being aware of the more shady activities being carried out by other members of the church.
That being said I do think Hoar is kind of the odd-man out in terms of Gods who can have Paladins but whose dogma/Church don't fit. A Paladin of Hoar would seem likely to find himself in nearly constant opposition to the activities of the rest of the Church.



I'm a bit curious about this. As far as I'm aware there is no requirement for Paladins to be anti-death penalty. Unless the Paladin had reason to believe that they were going to be unjustly executed (which seems unlikely in any LN/XG Church), I don't see why he would have an issue with turning a prisoner over to the Clergy.

True, but not every paladin would relish destroying an undead creature that was once a redeemable human being. Frey is a walking model of the excesses of human ambition pushing someone past the point of no return; it is (at least in the eyes of a paladin I play) deserving more of pity than any negative attitude towards the undead. The attempt to kill would be bundled up as both a mercy-killing and a salvation to others whose lives would otherwise be unnaturally tampered with by an individual who is living with an expired license, intoxicated on eldritch power. A slaying done with no small amount of heartache.

Of course, other paladins would curse Frey to damnation before cracking his skull open.

I won't get too deep into this right now, but my general view on paladin duties is this:

First to God.
Second to Alignment.
Third to Church.
Fourth to Chivalry, Honour, Cultural Conventions and whatever. This is the least important tier, and such things as rules for honourable duels, attitude towards slavery and just government, the choice of weapons and other tactics employed in service to the cause are highly subjective and dependant on the paladin's environment.

If the expected Lawful Good alignment of all actions and the will of the patron god came to conflict, I think the paladin should always choose the latter. However, this shouldn't be a very common occurance: gods who expect their champions to constantly breach their own codes would sooner sponsor them with different kind of holy power, like that of a Divine Champion, and likewise a aspiring paladin is likely to choose a different career if he foresees constant and unavoidable conflict and transgressions in his calling. Paladins of Hoar are a fine example: while they any LG Hoarite can technically take the class, there are some environments where it would be practically impossible to uphold the calling. In a good-spirited church where Hoar was seen as the noble dealer of poetic justice, his paladins would encounter few problems. In a Lawful-Evil-dominated temple somewhere in Chessenta, where Assuran was worshiped as the vengeful god of retribution, his paladins would face extreme difficulties. It's not just game rules that say how characters could work, but also the real environment they exist in.

_________________

[quote="Yurell"][quote="divinesaint"]He recounted to me an example of a paladin that was by all intents and purposes Chaotic Good. He sometimes even tortured people to get the information that he needed. He felt that he was still following his Paladin's code because he was saving lives through the actions that he was taking.[/quote]

That's the role of a Greyguard. A paladin does that and a paladin will Fall, it's against their code.[/quote]

ummm...what the heck? GREYguard?... It's blackguard...

_________________
My favourite sniper loadout: Huntsman, jarate, bushwacka.
Team Fortress 2 is FREE TO PLAY!

Greyguards are a Prestige Class for particularly accomplished paladins, so trusted in their faith and judgement that they no longer have to atone for whatever breaches to their code are necessary for the cause.

_________________

I've always hated the Grayguards, at least to the extent that they maintain both their Paladinhood and a LG alignment in spite of using, per the book itself, the same tactics as Blackguards, just in a "good cause".

Particularly nonsensical given that even though it's only for the most trusted and accomplished paladins, other Paladins and most of the Clergy tend to view them as weak and bordering on corruption/heresy.

Grayguards seem to function on the basis of everyone else doubting the judgement of their own deity.

But I guess it was a natural intermediary step to Paladins becoming just a regular unrestricted class in 4e.

On the contrary, I think it makes perfect sense. The Paladin class itself doesn't make sense in any other context than that of the classic Paladin of Torm. Virtually every other deity will have certain expectations in some situations that go against the general standards of a paladin. This double loyalty is unbearable and unbased: the paladin's power comes from his god, and from his god only. It is not due to some mystic resonance with the cosmic powers of Lawful and Good, that's not at all the basis of divine in the Realms. Why does a god choose to subject his champion to rules that restrict him from fully furthering the god's cause? The god would be just as capable of granting identical divine powers to someone who served only the god and no other standard, and it would be much better for everyone.

Greyguards don't employ "Blackguard methods" or anything of the sort. They still do the good thing, fulfill their ultimate purpose as champions of their god and church. They're Jack Bauer, the epitome of Lawful Good (in purpose) who are guided by forces higher than artificial regulations. They're the ones who will beat that crucial information out of a villain to save the world, or make the grim decision of sacrificing a village to prevent the destruction of the kingdom, when no one else can. They don't do it lightly, they don't do it because they can or because they enjoy it. They do it because they have no other choice. They put their ass on the line and make the greatest sacrifice of principles to achieve what is right.

Needless to say, I hate the paladin class as an alignment-restricted base class with a fiery passion.

_________________

A Cleric can do the same thing, without violating his alignment/an established code of behavior.

The alignment and behavior restrictions are what, imho, makes Paladins a unique class. They are the knights in shining armor who uphold an impossible ideal while everyone else makes compromises.

Without that, they're just clerics who specialize in melee.

This is I think an often overlooked element of the paladin. They are both fundamentalist religious zealots and fundamentalist humanists.

I saw the statement made earlier that only a Paladins god can 'fall' them. This is not true, the paladin can perceive and hence enact their own fall from grace. A personal crisis of faith caused by doubt and guilt can just as easily bring low a paladin.

As to the alignment question; the ultimate judgment lies not with the paladin but with their god, the being who moves heaven and earth. I would assume that a paladin would feel it presumptuous in the extreme to veer from the natural notions of 'the Good' which their patron has implanted upon their soul.

They are lawful because they follow the tenants of their faith, they are Good because they are compassionate humanists. A paladin could never be a Relativist or an Existentialist. There is god and there is 'the Good' and there is them trying to join them, that is how I've always perceived it.

Personally I think the paladin should be the hardest class to play, the main reason I've never made one on Amia is that I would try to waste even more DM time in passing judgment over my actions and interactions.

_________________
Jess Incognito:- Ah, but the phoenix may fly only when its feathers are grown...

Olaf Grudgebringer: Stroppy Cleric or Morradin

Krunk (Underdark): Stay back! He's a bit mad.

the_incognitos@live.com

This pretty much sums up all I was trying to get at earlier in this thread. I more than likely just sucked at doing it.

My take on it: Paladin is a challenge of absolutes and limitation, which makes it awesome when done right.

_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf

This is precisely my beef with them. They're a "unique" class, somehow special and different. OK, that might be cool to some. I get that. But it's illogical and unbalanced game design, IMO. Why should one alignment be so different from all the others? If Torm is capable of granting his loyal champions awesome powers, why does Hoar have to make some compromise with this mysterious "alignment" and why is Mask completely unable to sponsor champions with similar powers? It doesn't make a lot of sense in a world where alignments and ideals can't grant divine power and don't have the kind of supernatural effect they do in other settings.

It's based on a stereotype, the knight in shining armor, and that makes it a poor base class, IMO. A divine champion free of alignment restrictions should be the base class, and individual churches/alignments should have several specialized Prestige Classes such as the Paladin.

_________________

Blackguards are evil, Greygaurds are good but not bound by those annoyig 'ethics'-things



I disagree with that, as a Paladin will Fal if the stop being LG, no matter how much their god loves them.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Hence my grief with it being the gods that actively make the fall. The only reasonable reason I can come up with was that in a sunning display of cooperation the gods agreed on a series of code that these followers would obey. Either that, or the gods are idiots.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Paladins will also Fall if they stop fulfilling their god's dogma and serving the patron's best interests, no matter how LG they remain. Both are important factors, but I daresay your deity's approval weighs more if you have to make a choice. Well, it does when I DM, but there can be other views. If the conflict is too great to settle between patron and alignment, you'll Fall whichever you choose, so it's pretty moot.

(And in fact, I wager Paladins will also eventually fall if they continuously work against the church who is their mortal master, and ignore cultural codes of chivalry and honour, no matter how LG and god-loved they are.)

_________________

Each to their own, but I find it rather weird that one would critisize the (quite reasonable) basis of the entire game setting and the role of the gods in it, rather than a single odd class which doesn't fit the system and has caused more debate than anything else in D&D, ever since it was first introduced.

It's pretty clear that the way gods work in FR doesn't fully mesh with the core idea of paladins. It's possible to settle the problems with semi-satisfactory compromises, but if I had to choose between abolishing the paladin class as is, or the divine rules of Realmspace, I'd personally opt for the former without a moment's hesitation.

_________________

It's because I look at the game from an n-universe perspective. From an in-universe perspective I can see these paladins having to obey restrictive and unnecessary rules. If you could come up with a better reason, I would love to hear it (probably change my opinion too) - so I'm not criticising the system, I'm looking for solutions to a problem in-universe.

An example of this:
Out of Universe: Death Star should have melted when it fired.
In-Universe: Death Star didn't melt when it fired, why didn't it?

The former looks at the 'game' from an external viewpoint and criticises it, the latter looks at what is happening, and treats it as the truth and work on interpretations from there.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Except that we, as DMs and players, have to decide OOC how to interpret the books and therefore, "what happens in-universe."

Instead of assuming some undocumented, unpreceeded and unlikely agreements between gods, it's better to assume that alignment isn't the be-all of paladinhood. That gods are fully capable of granting similar power to anyone, apart from perhaps some feats of courage and nobility that are due to the paladin's own unwavering faith and devotion. They just generally choose not to, because they like having Paladins for good PR. But if it truly became a critical question, they could expect the paladin to fulfill their commands regardless of alignment, and not be cosmologically forced to strip the paladin of his powers. (And this is how it goes in-universe, because we don't necessarily Fall paladins who aren't completely LG in all actions, as long as they're loyal to the faith. Vengeance is never universally good, I daresay, but we don't Fall Hoarites for extracting it.)

But then, I'd rather just not define it too thoroughly. There's no need to make up awkward explanations IC, since we all know that the problem exists on an OOC level. If something makes no sense and thinking about it will only ruin the magic, I guess ignorance is a bliss. There's absolutely no point wondering why Death Star didn't melt when it fired, it's just fun to watch the fireworks.

_________________

Except they could still have paladins and other people of their own alignment with these powers. And I know if I was a god, that's what I'd choose - less to restrict the in carrying out my will. For example, a Paladin loses his powers if becoming LN or NG - if his god is LN or NG, whyever would he strip the paladin of his powers?

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Because Paladin was not designed for NG and LN gods, and it doesn't make sense in FR. It's as simple as that. There's no reason to explain it in-universe and thus give the inconsistency even more weight and authority. It's best ignored and bent as much as is possible within the basic frames we're set. (If I DMed alone, for example, Paladins wouldn't have that alignment restriction, or you could at least make a special request for one who didn't. Since I don't, I will have to live with what the other DMs can accept.)

You can wonder why Death Star didn't melt, but as I said, it's not the point of the film and only makes for awkward situations.

_________________

And thus it boils down to personal opinion of people who play and people who DM. I'm in the camp of "Paladins of different gods behave differently", whatever that entails.

I don't think a Paladin who adheres more strongly to Lawfulness should be punished, as opposed to one who adheres more strongly to being Good (and let's remember that Law embodies very different things depending on where in the world you are). Both are parts of one creed and the balance cannot be always perfectly even. I'd say the fun in playing a Paladin in the first place is not when he's the perfect beacon of hope, but when he struggles, doubts his decision, comes in contact with these negative sides that are inherent in every being. IMO a God is much more patient than the Paladin himself. The God might be aware of this inner dispute without actually doing anything about it, and he'd only swing the hammer if the Paladin had actually already sunk and buried himself morally and spiritually. In the case of a happy end, after all, it's better for the Paladin to have grown with experience instead of having his power-cord chopped off right in the middle of the lesson.

That's why wiggle room is good. No other class is being watched as mercilessly as the Paladin class. You hardly EVER see one around. Guess why that is, and maybe accomodate them just a little bit more.

Edit: And just to clarify, this accomodation I'd reserve for good examples of the class. There are bad examples, and those IMO should have taken the Paladin class away from them to begin with.

Which brings us right back to the "They just ... Fall" argument that I proposed earlier because there's no reason why their gods would make them Fall.
Maybe there's something odd with the Weave. Maybe Ao decided to be a bastard, but it does give at least some in-universe explanation without resorting to the gods all colluding or taking leave of their senses.



I find the analysis of the film to be one of the most interesting parts, and it certainly tells you which characters have a modicum of intelligence.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

... the Death star didn't melt because of construction rules applicable to that universe's lore. Why is this coming up in a Paladin discussion? O_o

_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham

It's a comparison of an in-universe explanation (high specific heat capacity or great efficiency) vs an out of universe explanation (the author didn't want it to melt, so it didn't).

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Yurell, it seems like your arguing your point simply to argue it.

The reality of the situation is :

A Paladin will fall when a DM decides he should.

'Nuff said?

Regards,

_________________

"Come under the flag of truce, and brook no treason... for mineself is Death, and care not whom knows mine touch."
- Frey Asaid'De Majere

I'm arguing my point because it affects how the characters ICly react to it.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

I've always accepted that the paladin's standing as a paladin comes almost completely from the god, rather than any blanket excuse for a "Paladin's Code" you'll find out there. A god sets the "Code" of law the granted vessel must follow, and that's it. It's only the god that gives them the boons in the first place, why in the hell should it be governed by anything other than the god as to how they vessel maintains the power? I say "The god giveths, and the god takeths away."

The more correct term for the class should be "Paragon". As in, a near flawless model of their god on Toril, a mortal who tries to align everything about themselves to the way of their god's(their views, their wants, even the company they keep). This is different from a cleric in this:

A cleric recieves the power from the god to further what they interprit as the god's goals, and as long as they do such to a reasonable extent, they stay in good standing. The other expectation for which the cleric recieves his divine powers is the assumption that he will continue to be a source of -daily- worship for the god, as well as continue to bring others into the worship. Think of it as the god making an "investment" of sorts.

A paladin on the other hand shapes themselves to further their god's goals, and is thus rewarded by that god's specific favor so long as they continue to further the goals exactly as the god wishes, and carry themself in a manner befitting of the god's. Their mimicry of the god itself is the only reason they recieve their powers, after all. No reason to keep doling it out once they turn away from their part of the bargain, and thus, they Fall. This, in contrast to the cleric, is more of a "leasing" or "lending" of the power. They get to keep it so long as certain conditions are met.

This is not to suggest that there is absolutely no "wiggle room" without the paladin falling. Some LG dieties are actually more vengeful than the others, or just have multiple aspects of themselves enough to the point where a paladin could be emulating one or the other at one specific time. The gods of FR are in a way like the gods of celtic and hellenistic culture: they are larger than life, but they still occasionally stir to human emotions, thoughts, etc. They're not static machines that have a carved-in-stone Yes or No answer to every question. Note: maybe MOST of the questions, but by no means all.

My point is, for some gods, a paladin will have a slightly wider "straight-and-narrow" than others. Is it wrong for a paladin to "loose his cool" upon witnessing the massacre of a village and go charging after the villian eating the remains of the orhans with his back turned? For some pallys, yes. For others, it's simply "rigtheous indignation". And a lot of the time, it will just have to depend on the specific situation and a judgement call of the DM, weighing out what "good" was acchomplished, versus the percieved infraction, all in respect to the deity's tolerance for such... it's like dancing naked in a closet-ful of razors, really, there's room, but you never now just how much...

Now when it comes right down to it, there would be nothing stopping any deity or greater power from ordaining their own paladins or "paragons", more correctly. But more than likely, they would not endow them in the same manner, even within the same alignments. A "paragon" of Cyric mike get extra divine damage everytime it sneak attacks or ambushes, as this is what makes the god all warm on the inside. A paragon of Bane might get a party buff to his commerades every time he commands them forcefully, or corporally. A god could invest how much ever of his power into mortal vessels as he's giddy to, but in the end, its probably not going to look exactly like the base class "Paladin" for more than 1 or 2 of them.

But in a multiplayer game, where RP is not detailed into the hardcodings of each class other than just clicking the right "alignment" at character creation, I can understand why there is only the LG paladin in NWN, and maybe even in Core D&D. If you opened it to where all gods could grant just the pure NWN paladin class bonuses, you'd have a drab, bland mess of them. "You're telling me I can get one of, if not the strongest melee class in the game if I just find a god that fits the way I wanna play and check the right box at creation?? Sign me up!"

The concept of a "Holy Shining Knight" is a zeitgeist to the point of cliche in fantasy settings. It's an easy idea grasp, and if you have even the weakest understanding of western morality, you get what sort of concept for "Good" youre supposed to be going for. It works, and its fun to play, usually, if done right, and you don't ask too many questions.

I just wana throw out an example....


So lawful good paladin of...oh Corellon...kills a drow...drow deserved it.

A. Follows his god's will...bloody thing shouldn't be on the surface anyway.

B. Got rid of an evil being, and made the world 'a better place' in his eyes.

Rewards coming now for following the laws of his god +smiting evil?

...or is it murder punishable?

_________________
Night is just another day without light.

Well, in that particular case, "following the laws of his god" is "smiting evil", as in such a case evil is defined as a "drow who deserved it." Now, whether or not the drow "deserved" anything, depends on where, who, what, when, why, for what reason, and who's DMing. Either way, it's still the god that decides what's "murder" for his paladins or, "smiting evil". Killing is killing, undead, evil, what have you. It's your god/god's laws/god's mood that makes it "Good" and "Right".

But isn't wanting clarification on it really just a fear of being wrong?

Wanting clarification is fear that I don't know something my character should.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Well, these are things characters wouldn't have a clue about. When a Paladin falls, it's not a public spectacle. It's something that goes down between him and his god, and no one else. His clergy might never find out he fell in the first place, let alone there reason.

Taking these things into the game is metagaming, IMO. A paladin knows IC how he's supposed to act: in goodly and loyal service to his god. The metaphysical mechanics of "falling" should be hidden from both the characters and the players.

_________________

Surely the paladin would know whether she's supposed to uphold the ideals of her god, or some arbitrary 'lawful goodness'? For example, if the dogma of a god declared one thing, except that thing was opposed to either lawfulness or goodness, surely she'd know what sort of choice she's faced with? And whether it's her god that cast her out for following their teachings or not.

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

Surely, she wouldn't. What would be the point of playing a Paladin and investing in Wisdom in the first place, if you had all the answers served on silver platter?

_________________

Or the teachings of your order and the better part of your life dedicated to becoming a paladin and acquiring said knowledge?

_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player

يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل

A little fear and genuine ignorance will do you well. Paladins get taught a lot. And you can most certainly assume you were taught an answer to that question, so you can come down on whatever side of the fence you want to. But we're telling you there's no guarantee that's the truth.

[quote="IronAngel"][quote="Sadrin"]
The alignment and behavior restrictions are what, imho, makes Paladins a unique class. They are the knights in shining armor who uphold an impossible ideal while everyone else makes compromises.
[/quote]

This is precisely my beef with them. They're a "unique" class, somehow special and different. OK, that might be cool to some. I get that. But it's illogical and unbalanced game design, IMO. Why should one alignment be so different from all the others? If Torm is capable of granting his loyal champions awesome powers, why does Hoar have to make some compromise with this mysterious "alignment" and why is Mask completely unable to sponsor champions with similar powers? It doesn't make a lot of sense in a world where alignments and ideals can't grant divine power and don't have the kind of supernatural effect they do in other settings.

It's based on a stereotype, the knight in shining armor, and that makes it a poor [i]base[/i] class, IMO. A divine champion free of alignment restrictions should be the base class, and individual churches/alignments should have several specialized Prestige Classes such as the Paladin.[/quote]

Well the divine champion is for the rest of the good and neutral alignemnts, and blackguard is for the evil ones...

_________________
My favourite sniper loadout: Huntsman, jarate, bushwacka.
Team Fortress 2 is FREE TO PLAY!

Perhaps a better analogy would be the "shabbas goy", where a Jew hires a Christian to do things on the Shabbat that the Jew himself is forbidden to do by his religion on that day.

_________________

~Sharess on AmiaWiki~
Priestess, politician, prostitute
"[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer Bolt
AmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)

Let's see.. Divine Champions, a generic Prestige Class (and it's for Evil too, as you can see if you check the real non-NWN description). Blackguards, a generic Prestige Class. Paladins, uhm... an alignment-specific base class, the martial side of the clerical coin, with unique abilities unattainable to devout champions of other gods. Starting to see the asymmetry?

As I said: Divine Champion should be the base class, Paladins should be one of many odd-ball Prestige Classes with no special status over the others.

_________________

My paladin of Bahamut is a paladin because he swore to serve Him after interpreting the partial lifting of a curse as Divine Providence - because no matter how many times he tried in the past, it never worked.

Other than that, he does not know for sure what exactly would be the intentions of Bahamut. Well, other than keeping an eye on evil-aligned dragons, dragonblooded and dragonkin and intervening if they become a trouble. And yet, offer some degree of redemption - like renouncing to whatever evil god s/he follows, because he believes that evil is not made by the blood, but by the actions.

Whether or not his interpretation is right and deserving of a Fall, is not for me or he to decide, but the DM.

Considering I am currently on a break, but "Off-Amia" he is walking with a CE drow shadow dragon disciple and a former Vhaeraunite priest, if I come back to the server I would not be surprised if such an action brought about his Fall.

At the moment, though, my character does not think it a problem.

EDIT: Oh, right. Forgot to mention. Quoting Iron so people know what I am talking about, but it is kind of directed at Yurell.

_________________
BlackDahlya

Once Upon A Time Played
Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath