Another Paladin Thread: Throw Rocks!

[Numion]

"...always trusts..."

A Paladin who always trusts is not going to live very long in D&D-land. The Code you propose would lead into an unplayable character. "Yes siree, I'll be a good demon from now on, oh yes".

It seems quite common on RPG boards to see DMs who for whatever reason set the Paladin up for a fall from the start, so you're certainly not alone.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

The OP Responds:

The altercation between the OP and Pally over speaking unknown languages. THe OP encourages the pally to take a swing if he/she has the stones.

I responded with harsh words, after she verbally threatened me in front of my associates.

The OP feels bad about the Pally killing one orc alone but has no compunction about ambush killing a group of orcs.

I have no issue with ambushing an armed mercenary patrol. I do have an issue with killing a fleeing (unarmed) prisoner in cold blood.

I get the sense that the paladin was feeling marginalized from the get-go and saw her duty as clear. Everything I pick up from the OPs posts are negative about the character, i.e. the altercation over languages, calling her a 'foreign rube'. The paladin did what paladins do without being swayed by bully.

01. We conducted our interrogation openly.
02. My character really does know the area and how to deal with locals.
03. The paladin has maintained her distance from the party since starting this campaign.
04. The paladin is not subtle and/or slick.
05. Who's the bully? The wizard who's low on spells or an armored Aasimar paladin with a drawn weapon (esp. in melee range)?

I will readily admit that I personally don't like Dewey's character (Wyndess). However, I do like Dewey as a person and a player; I'm willing to work with him (metagame) to ensure party cohesion.

Also, I know that Nigel (CN) does not need to like someone to work with them. He's a professional.

We'll reach an understanding before next game ... I'm certain of it.

-Samir

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Harper Justice:

The party is commissioned to wipe out the bandit threat by the local authority. They have been given the rights of High Justice.

This is the Moonsea. The Harpers are a secret society of non-Evil vigilantes ... not High Justice, and most certainly not the local authorities (although that's probably a good thing).

-Samir

 

[Once a Fool]

A Paladin who always trusts is not going to live very long in D&D-land. The Code you propose would lead into an unplayable character. "Yes siree, I'll be a good demon from now on, oh yes".

It seems quite common on RPG boards to see DMs who for whatever reason set the Paladin up for a fall from the start, so you're certainly not alone.

The paladin who is attempting to understand and live by this code is being played. But, you must take "trust" in context. It is not a stupid, blind trust, but a trust that mercy is, in fact, the right choice, even though it may not seem like it.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Truth ....

It is not a stupid, blind trust, but a trust that mercy is, in fact, the right choice, even though it may not seem like it.

Agreed. Nigel is (CN) with (CG) tendencies; in his heart ... he really wants to do right, but often finds himself taking a pragmatic and/or mercenary approach.

What burned me about the paladin confrontation was very simple: Nigel actually did something noble and good ... and she destroyed it.

At the time, I really wanted to frag her for doing that.

-Samir

 

[Thanatos]

Agreed. Nigel is (CN) with (CG) tendencies; in his heart ... he really wants to do right, but often finds himself taking a pragmatic and/or mercenary approach.

What burned me about the paladin confrontation was very simple: Nigel actually did something noble and good ... and she destroyed it.

At the time, I really wanted to frag her for doing that.

-Samir

The problem is, your idea of good and noble is likely not quite like her idea of good and noble.

 

[Thanatos]

A paladin without mercy is a future blackguard. Mercy is the chief characteristic of a good alignment. Any character who has not yet learned that, only wants to be good, at best.

Alhandra, the PHB example, is on track to fall, unless she learns better.

Fights evil without mercy, it doesn't say she doesn't have mercy.

Why? Because GOOD does not want to vanquish EVIL, it wants to CONVERT it. If GOOD does not convert EVIL, because it has vanquished it, GOOD has FAILED.

Er, maybe in yoru campaign worlds, but I am pretty sure that in D&D, its about good vanquishing evil, not converting it. In D&D not all evil can realistically be converted and I agree...when good tries it fails.

For my current campaign, I lifted the paladin code from the NIV Bible

Replace "Love" with "A paladin" (because, I think, even in the midevial French Romances, a paladin was, in fact, a lover) and we have a very interesting code.

"...it keeps no record of wrongs...always trusts...always hopes...Love never fails."

Now, the last line is the crux of it, of course. Love never fails to convert, if the paladin perseveres. The code does not allow for failure in that.

Thats definitely setting up a paladin for failure. I don't see how that could even be remotely played in D&D.

...But, I also believe that a paladin's code exists to give a paladin guidelines, until they can figure out on their own what it's supposed to mean. In my campaign, a paladin showing no mercy to a helpless prisoner of war would have major ramifications, though they might not be recognizable as such for quite some time. At the very least, the darker powers that be would certainly mark the paladin as a potential candidate for the blackguard class. Then they would take care to be persuasive.

Again, setting a paladin up for failure -- if the paladin is straying, they should be warned by the DM, which means the DM should know what the guidelines of the code are for the paladin to follow. Paladins are called to service, so its not unlikely they would get some kind of heads up by the DM before doing things that could be potentially harmful to their class.

Also, this orc was not a prisoner of war, it was an escaping bandit that had been judged by the paladin.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Yup ....

The problem is, your idea of good and noble is likely not quite like her idea of good and noble.

Definitely ... thus a metagame discussion begins (on our group ProBoard and/or the telephone) to find common ground.

-Samir

 

[Once a Fool]

Fights evil without mercy, it doesn't say she doesn't have mercy.

Mercy is valueless when it is given to those who don't need it.

Er, maybe in yoru campaign worlds, but I am pretty sure that in D&D, its about good vanquishing evil, not converting it. In D&D not all evil can realistically be converted and I agree...when good tries it fails.

No, no! I said good fails when it vanquishes evil instead of converting it. Evil vanquishes itself, it only needs to be thwarted and taught the error of its ways. That is a paladin's job, though most people give preference to the thwarting part.

Thats definitely setting up a paladin for failure. I don't see how that could even be remotely played in D&D.



Again, setting a paladin up for failure -- if the paladin is straying, they should be warned by the DM, which means the DM should know what the guidelines of the code are for the paladin to follow. Paladins are called to service, so its not unlikely they would get some kind of heads up by the DM before doing things that could be potentially harmful to their class.

Hmmm. My assumption in running games is that paladins must often choose between moral and military victories.

Also, this orc was not a prisoner of war, it was an escaping bandit that had been judged by the paladin.

A difference of semantics. But why did the paladin assume the right to judge? That is NOT a class feature. If it were, they would be Neutral!

My point is, the paladin class is all about learning what is right for the paladin!

 

[Thanatos]

Mercy is valueless when it is given to those who don't need it.

Mercy is valueless when you give it to a foe that uses it to slit your throat a day later when your guard is down as well. Mercy is not valueless to innocents in need though nor to a foe that is misguided, but not evil.

No, no! I said good fails when it vanquishes evil instead of converting it. Evil vanquishes itself, it only needs to be thwarted and taught the error of its ways. That is a paladin's job, though most people give preference to the thwarting part.

No, good triumphs when it vanquishes evil. Conversion is neither always possible or realistic. Some evil simply cannot be converted and trying to do so only causes good to fail (such as trying to convert and devil or red dragon - its just not going to happen unless the DM decides it is). I disagree that evil vanquishes itself on a whole, it can, but its not always true. A Paladins job is to punish evil according to the code..thwarting & teaching it the error of its ways isn't in the wording anywhere that I am aware of...but thwarting evil is easily doable by killing it.

Hmmm. My assumption in running games is that paladins must often choose between moral and military victories.

I don't see how one has to precude the other.

A difference of semantics. But why did the paladin assume the right to judge? That is NOT a class feature. If it were, they would be Neutral!

My point is, the paladin class is all about learning what is right for the paladin!

Paladins of Tyr would pretty much be the perfect ones to judge according to campaign material. Other then that, their god called them to service to do a multitude of things, including "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" -- which implies a certain level of divine right in accordance with their class and its ability to mete out justice.

To assume that only those who are neutral can judge is a false assumption and doesn't really jive with how aligntment mechanics work or how the paladin is presented.

As long as its within the precepts of its alignment, faith and code, then yes...but the paladin should really already reasonably understand or know whats right for it. But thats also what the DM is for, helping to clarify when you aren't sure or giving you a heads up when you are moving beyond what his vision is as well.