Would you allow this paladin in your game? (new fiction added 11/11/08)

The Sigil said:

PREMISE 2: The priests of the religious order represent the legitimate authority of that order (if they did not represent the deity in question, they would not receive spells, etc., no?)
).

Click to expand...

The Premise that Priests hold Authority over an order of Pallys is possible, but not on i consider a very likely one, i consider it unlikely.
The Premise that a Priesthood, who mistakenly made a missinterpretation in the teachings of their god, would cut of from divinesupport, if the god would even get "aware" of this, is especially by a LG god, very unlikely.

COROLLARY: "Respecting legitimate authority" means "obeying the instructions - including code of conduct" given by that authority within the scope of its authority.

Click to expand...

If the god accepted the oath of CoC, and found that the possible changes of the CoC are righteous, there is no other authoritie he needs.

Brennin Magalus said:

Someone brought this up previously:

"Few have the purity..."

Click to expand...

Would you allow a cowardly Barbarian?

This excerpt from the paladin description cannot be reconciled with a paladin who goes a-whoring.

Click to expand...

Sure it can, he's immune to disease, right? *rimshot*


Anyway, joking aside and with a note to the "and so forth" end of the honorable behaviour line. Looking at it some ways, Cedric's patronage of brothels may actually be the more honorable option when compared to say wooing a succession of (non- "working") women, loving them, and leaving them. Restricting himself to professional ladies only, he's not going around breaking hearts or giving false impressions. Both parties fully understand the nature of their transaction; money in exchange for service rendered. Thank you for your patronage, please visit us again the next time there's a need.


There's nothing against a paladin having relations. It's just that given Cedric's pragmatic view on how most paladins end their careers, he does what he can to avoid romantic entanglement because he doesn't want to hurt the person he loves, and who loves him, when and if something happens to him.

sword-dancer said:

Cedric isan example of a Pally who had seen that the war he fights in is lost.

Click to expand...

Perhaps not lost so much as stalemated. That was my reading of it, anyway.

Here's a little bit more on Cedric, picking up from the point where the original post ended. Bear in mind that the original idea was never completely fleshed out, so I'm just making these up as I go along (last 5 minutes, to be precise ). So let's not be expecting Shakespeare here. And without further covering of my ass, here goes:

Through others' eyes, pt. 2

Cedric nodded as Magnus completed the story. "Very well. I will leave today." He rose to his feet and took a step away from the table, before stopping and raising the flagon in his hand to his lips and draining its contents. With a contented "Aah!" and a loud belch, he placed it back on the table and then quickly headed for the bar.

Reaching the bar, Cedric quickly said to the waiting barkeep, "I'm off. Be seeing you." The two men shook hands before the paladin headed for the door, a bemused Magnus following him.

"So he's gone again?" asked one of the regulars at the bar.

"Yeah," said the barkeep, picking up an empty mug and beginning to clean it. "Right on the dot. Every month, it's exactly the same. He'll ride into town at the start of the third week and put up at Catherine's. He'll come here once daily at exactly the same time. He'll have seven ales, never more or less. After exactly one week, he'll leave. And the same the next month. I swear, that man's either a machine or a force of nature - I'm still not sure exactly which."

...

Outside, Cedric took a deep breath and ran his fingers through his hair, making it very slightly less unruly than before. "You can head back to the Abbey," he said to Magnus. "Bob and I..."

Magnus looked even more puzzled than his brief interaction with Cedric had already made him. "Bob?"

"Yes," said Cedric, with a deadpan expression, though the twinkle in his eyes gave him away. "Bob is my horse."

Magnus choked momentarily, before managing to sputter, "Your celestial steed, granted by the grace of the High Lord, is called BOB?!"

"Well," said Cedric, "Actually he likes to be called Beobarius the Magnificent, but that's too bloody long for me. So Bob it is."

...

Beobarius raced across the plains of Elysium at incredible speed, enjoying the play of the celestial sunlight on his shoulders and the feel of the wind in his mane. The other horses galloped behind him, but none came any closer. Any watcher would have realized that even among the heaven-born horses of the herd, he stood out as unique, but there was none to see.

A faint prickling was the only sign, but Beobarius recognized it immediately. Cedric was calling! Incredibly, the celestial warhorse actually lengthened its stride, pulling away from the other horses. A tunnel of light that only he could see opened up before him, its walls flecked with the palest of blue. The sound of distant trumpets came to the horse's ears as it entered the tunnel and it whinnied gladly in response. To any watcher, the animal seemed to simply disappear in mid-stride.

Beobarius raced along the tunnel, even though he knew that time within its boundaries was only an illusion. Whether he walked or galloped or even came to a stop, he would emerge at exactly the same time. But his friend was calling, so Beobarius ran. As he did, a saddle and the accoutrements of war miraculously appeared on him. His previously unshod hooves now rang metallically on the floor of the tunnel.

A small dot of light appeared at the end of the tunnel and then swiftly the walls peeled away, to reveal the middle of a street, where Cedric and an armored young man stood. Beobarius stepped out of the tunnel and onto the ground beside Cedric, drawing amazed stares from the people passing by.

Magnus stared at the warhorse in shock, as Beobarius happily nuzzled his owner and was rewarded with a pat. His eyes ran along the bony flanks, the spindly legs, the tattered ear. "Thi...s is your horse?"

"Yes," said Cedric, with a smile. "Pretty, ain't he?" In a mock-serious tone, he said, "Come on, Bob - show the nice man how you sit up and beg."

Beobarius bared his teeth in what passed for a grin with him and then took a swift bite at Cedric. The paladin barely dodged and then instantly swung himself up into the saddle. "Good try, Bob" said Cedric, honest appreciation in his tone, "Better luck next time." For a moment Beobarius considered bucking him off - there was a nice midden not too far away, after all - but decided to leave it for another time.

Looking down, Cedric smiled at Magnus and said, "As I said, head back to the Abbey - fast. I'll get to the temple as soon as I can. Tell Father Shikuna to send word to the closest group of templars to meet me there."

His words brought Magnus back to himself. "Should I not come with you? Father Shikuna said that going alone will mean..."

Cedric's smile disappeared. "Yes," he said quietly, "I know. But there is no time and somebody has to be there." He looked down at the downcast young man and said more kindly than before, "If I return, I will speak to you. Thank you for your message." Without even a movement from him, Beobarius turned away. As the horse headed away, Cedric called back, "Watch your step, Sir Magnus."

Magnus watched him ride away for a few seconds. Then he shook his head, still trying to make sense of the man he had been sent to meet, before taking a step. There was a 'squelch' and he looked down, to discover what Cedric's departing words had meant. Magnus had just stepped in celestial horse-poop.

The Sigil said:

Needle point here...


The phrase in the SRD (don't have the PHB handy) is (emphasis mine):

"Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."

The phrase "and so forth" is explicitly set forth and thus the list itself admits that is *not* exhaustive but is exemplary. I think we have to figure out what items fall under the "and so forth" in order to complete the list (clearly, there must be at least one additional item - and probably more - not on the list as written or the phrase would not be needed). Of course the problem with that is finding something we agree on as the "and so forth" item(s) that need to be on the list per the Rules as Written.

So yes, I guess we disagree on that point (exhaustive vs. exemplary) but I think I have enough ammunition to lend credence to my argument based on the RAW.

--The Sigil

Click to expand...

A hit, a palpable hit ! As you say, the nebulous area would be in deciding what the "and so forth" means, and obviously no two games will have exactly the same take on it. Do you think it would be safe to say that the definition thereof depends on a mix of the given society, the established religion (if there is one) which the paladin belongs to, and the deity the paladin worships (if he does one)? I think Ankh-Morpork Guard puts it neatly in the post following yours.

Perhaps I was reading a bit more than I should have into his "I think I've earned my wine women and song" comment, but it seemed to me to be an angry, "hey, I put in my 9 to 5, and after that I can gratify myself." Again, probably a failing of text as properly conveying shades of meaning.

Click to expand...

Much as it may hurt my literary pretensions, I agree about how that section reads. If this was a fully fleshed-out character in play, that speech would be a combination of Cedric being a little pissed at Magnus' sudden accusation and also him (quite amusedly) emphasizing one part of the point more strongly than he might otherwise to mess with (and seek to expand) the younger man's worldview a bit. As written, it lacks that insight into the character's motivations.

Brother MacLaren said:

Perhaps not lost so much as stalemated. That was my reading of it, anyway.

Click to expand...

Glad to hear it. That's how it was intended.

IMO, it neither makes him more of a paladin nor muddies the waters--it simply continues the hollywoodization of the story with the implicit intent to make prostitution seem like a good, shiny, happy thing. If you want to write a story and conclude it "and this is the moral: prostitution is a neutral--and possibly a good--thing, and debauchery can be both lawful and good" you can do that, but it no more demonstrates the point than creating an order of Holy Torturers who are, by DM/author fiat Lawful Good, would demonstrate that torture is lawful or good.

However, as to the story itself: In some ways, it makes the situation worse for Cedric. Cedric's speech to Magnus is most obviously interpreted as exhibiting defensiveness, hostility to external standards, and a sense of entitlement. The most reasonable way to interpret Cedric's relationship with the brothel based on the original story alone is simple hedonism. Cedric has decided that, if the battle against evil is winnable, he won't live to see it and has decided to invest his energy in seeking pleasure when he has the opportunity to do so rather than wholeheartedly focussing upon the struggle or (so it appears) giving it any more attention than is required. (Sir Cedric, from the beginning seemed to me to approach paladinhood as his job--the thing that he does when it's required--rather than who he is).

If Cedric does not consider the nature of his business in the brothel as entirely hedonistic, then his angry speech is disingenuous. It's not just about the pleasure he deserves and the battle he thinks he can't win. By misleading Magnus as to his true motives, he encourages Magnus to either entirely reject Cedric and to tighten the strings of his "unnecessary traditions" in order to avoid falling into the position of Sir Cedric or he encourages Cedric to take him at his word and adopt pure hedonism without whatever mixed motives and effects this part implies there might be. It's one thing if that is the result of an authentic defensive reaction. It's another thing entirely if it isn't. And, it seems to me that the most authentic defense of a mixed motive version of Sir Cedric would contain at least some clues as to his true motives. In other words, even if it is granted that this story is in some way exculpatory, that raises a new question of honesty and judgement.

Anyway, the title of the second part: "Through the Eyes of Others" is misleading. Even, accepting the story at face value (which I don't--control of the story is too important a factor in a question like this to be left to an interested party to expand at will to the exclusion of other interested parties), it is still only the story through the eyes of others who were positively affected by Sir Cedric. There is no mention of the man in town who saw that Sir Cedric obviously has no problem with brothels and was thereby enabled to overcome whatever reluctance he might have otherwise had (and Sir Magnus's reaction indicates that there is at least some social disapproval of prostitution and debauchery in this culture) to frequenting the less holywoodized (but cheaper) brothel down the street. There's no mention of the drunk on the verge giving up the bottle who sees Sir Magnus putting away the beers and decides that, if it's good enough for a knight, it's good enough for him. There's no mention of the girl who sees the glamorous clients that these prostitutes get and is thereby encouraged to make choices she will later regret and may never be able to reverse.

shilsen said:

I figured if might be time to start fleshing out Cedric's story a little bit, perhaps with little insights of how others see - or have seen - him. Here's a little titbit. I wonder if it makes him more of a paladin or simply muddies the waters further:

Through the eyes of others, Pt.1

Click to expand...

Elder-Basilisk said:

IMO, it neither makes him more of a paladin nor muddies the waters--it simply continues the hollywoodization of the story with the implicit intent to make prostitution seem like a good, shiny, happy thing. If you want to write a story and conclude it "and this is the moral: prostitution is a neutral--and possibly a good--thing, and debauchery can be both lawful and good" you can do that, but it no more demonstrates the point than creating an order of Holy Torturers who are, by DM/author fiat Lawful Good, would demonstrate that torture is lawful or good.

Click to expand...

Making prostitution seem good, shiny and happy wasn't an implicit or explicit intent. Prostitution can be (and often is) something in between the hollywood version and the mix of slavery and depravity which you seem to characterize it as. Anyway, fusangite already made that point very well earlier, so I won't repeat myself. And just for the record, Catherine and the situation in her brothel is actually modelled on a couple of real-life women I know about.

Anyway, the title of the second part: "Through the Eyes of Others" is misleading. Even, accepting the story at face value (which I don't--control of the story is too important a factor in a question like this to be left to an interested party to expand at will to the exclusion of other interested parties), it is still only the story through the eyes of others who were positively affected by Sir Cedric. There is no mention of the man in town who saw that Sir Cedric obviously has no problem with brothels and was thereby enabled to overcome whatever reluctance he might have otherwise had (and Sir Magnus's reaction indicates that there is at least some social disapproval of prostitution and debauchery in this culture) to frequenting the less holywoodized (but cheaper) brothel down the street. There's no mention of the drunk on the verge giving up the bottle who sees Sir Magnus putting away the beers and decides that, if it's good enough for a knight, it's good enough for him. There's no mention of the girl who sees the glamorous clients that these prostitutes get and is thereby encouraged to make choices she will later regret and may never be able to reverse.

Click to expand...

Good point, but people misinterpreting a paladin's actions is a factor for every paladin, I would think. For example, the standard D&D campaign/game/fiction doesn't consider the people who are inspired by the paladin's shining example to go out there and get themselves killed by trying to be heroic, esp. since they lack the god-given abilities of the paladin.

It seems to me that a great deal of this conversation revolves around the morality of associating with prostitutes. Which brings me to a question: How many of you have known prostitutes? And I don't mean the sort of knowing that means you've given them patronage - I mean the sort where you've had them over for dinner or some such. Seems to me a lot of people are throwing around judgement on what it means to be around or to actually be prostitutes, without anything other than academic knowledge.

I will say that, while I have never had cause or call to hire one, I have known several - including the mother of one of my former DMs, who was a $1000/night prostitute (and brazen with it - she used to arrange "dates" on the phone in front of said DM and his gaming friends) - and while I know there are horrible crimes committed against young women in bad situations (I've known some), I can tell you there is an entirely different type of the oldest profession that is considerably less coerced or, arguably, immoral. (Against the rules of a specific religious code is an entirely other situation, but since we don't know the rules of Cedric's order, that part is irrelevant for the moment, until Shilsen decides to clarify those rules.)

As far as further references in fiction go, if any of you have seen the tv series "Gunsmoke", I've got to ask you two questions: 1. Would Marshall Dillon make an acceptable Paladin? and 2. Please describe all of Ms. Kitty's occupational activities.

Great character, shilsen. You obviously understand the core components of a paladin, and how they shouldn;t be viewed dogmatically (i.e. sex=evil)
Tom Cashel and Elder Basilisk have it right also, mostly. (great hearing from people who truly understand the class, BTW)

shilsen said:

I was doing a writeup for a paladin character concept I had, and was curious how other DMs would react to it.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm not a "DM", but you've (probably) read enough of my posts on paladins that I should be OK to chime in.

(Note, I'm only responding to your first post.
Also, I appreciate Piratecat opening this thread back up. It's nice to see a thread with good discussion not get closed because of people who care more about religion than about the paladin class in a fantasy roleplaying game.)

Cedric is very close to being a perfectly-fine paladin in my book.
There are only a couple problems.

a) The sleeping with whores bit.
It's not a problem that he's womanizing, or that he likes sex- there's nothing in the paladin description that requires him to be chaste. The problem is that he's knowingly hanging around people with no moral code.
The prostitute-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche notwithstanding, most prostitutes are not good people. They sell themselves, and others if they had the chance, for a living. That is not a group that is worthy of his company.
Further, he shouldn't have to go to whores if he believes he deserves the company of a woman. He's likely a very charismatic guy, and if he's still alive, he probably has just done good deeds for women. It's highly likely that there would be many a woman (not a whore) that would be willing to reward their knight with a night (IYKWIMAITYD).
The problem then is what does he do about protection? How does he prevent many offspring from being born with no father present, and likely orphaned (if he believes he'll die one day soon)?

b) The drunk bit.
There's no problem with him casually drinking, IMO - as long as he's still in control, and not reducing his capabilities.
I just don't get why he's ACTING drunk (as evidenced by him steely-nerved and alert when talking to the young knight).

c) The cursing.
This is straight out.
By cursing, he is not displaying the reserve and control that is inherent in a paladin. He is not disciplined in speech, and all paladins must be disciplined.

Lastly, I don't see why a paladin like Cedric would accept a knight-hood from whatever order you mentioned.
As I see it, he would not answer to "Sir Cedric", nor would he put any stock in it. If they want to give him a title, he'd view it an internal ceremonial title.
I have played paladins that do not believe in Paladin Orders before.
It is NOT required for a paladin to be a member of a group.

This Cedric as you described him in the first post seems to me to be an individualistic paladin, who has his head on straight about what it really means to be a paladin. In fact, I've debated for years, advocating a similar approach to what you've taken with Cedric.