What *is* it about paladins that makes people nutty, anyway?

[Torm]

Yes, but zealots, by their very nature, are opposed to compromise, which was my point. You can be a zealot for ANYTHING...but you won't approve of a contrary opinion.

On the contrary. I INSIST that you compromise, or I'm gonna smite you.

An aside to ForceUser: I kinda get your point, but I also begin to think that you're one of those people who plays a "Paladin" as a self-righteous nosy-neighbor. An exemplar of a Good faith would have more patience with those who are trying in earnest to understand his ways.

 

[ForceUser]

How do you define "spiritual"?

I defined it above.

"How can you tell they aren't spiritual?" "Because they don't like paladins."

Not quite. I recgonize such folks not by they fact they dislike paladins, but by the answers, assertions, and opinions they give regarding issues of morality, spirituality, religion, etc. It's not that hard, for instance, to distinguish between persons with pronounced religious beliefs and persons who does not often consider matters of faith, even on a board like this. Comments slip through, much as the moderators strive to keep such talk out, especially in paladin threads.

If people who aren't spiritual can't possibly roleplay a spiritual person, how do you explain that people are able to roleplay violent, homicidal characters, even if they've never engaged in violence, much less killed anyone? How can any of us possibly play a character who uses magic, since none of us can even remotely begin to understand what that would be like? Should I lock up my belongings if one of my friends plays a rogue, or is it more reasonable to believe that we are capable of adopting beliefs and behaviors we have never personally experienced when we roleplay?

Your reasoning is sophistic. The one constant upon which all humans can generally agree regardless of culture is that murder is wrong; thievery is a close second. Understanding magic is as simple as playing a video game--press "A" and cast a fireball. Spirituality is a much more complex idea than any of these things.

 

[Torm]

Oh, btw, to my list of 4 reasons above, I will add:

5. People like to talk a lot about Paladins on this board because it gives them an excuse to talk about religion and pretend it is on topic (and frequently it IS, but that's beside the point, if you grok me) - even more so than with Clerics, because with Paladins there is more moral absolutism involved.

 

[ForceUser]

Oh, so people who don't like paladins have no system of belief that encompasses love, compassion and respect for life?

Yeah, you're probably right. My bad.

This would be the heated debate part of which I warned. No matter how one's comments are phrased, someone always finds a way to get offended when you start jawing about spirituality (or paladins, for that matter).

So, in response to the above--no, and and you shouldn't infer otherwise. In fact, I wouldn't infer anything. Take my comments at face value.

 

[rounser]

morality, spirituality, religion

One of these things is not like the others, though.

To spin us back towards D&D morality, though, and actively confusing morality, "lawful good" and what your deity stands for, isn't it possible that two LG deities with paladins have different opinions not only on what constitutes paladinly behaviour, but also what constitutes "lawful good" behaviour in line with their doctrines?

Think of a LG defender/wargod who believes in pursuing good on the battlefield as well, versus a LG god of personal sacrifice, mercy and humility. I can see them disagreeing on expectations of what is good paladinly behaviour, or even LG behaviour.

 

[ForceUser]

To spin us back towards D&D morality, though, and actively confusing morality, "lawful good" and what your deity stands for, isn't it possible that two LG deities with paladins have different opinions not only on what constitutes paladinly behaviour, but also what constitutes "lawful good" behaviour in line with their doctrines?

Think of a LG defender/wargod versus a LG god of personal sacrifice and humility. I can see them disagreeing on expectations of what is good paladinly behaviour, or even LG behaviour.

I think their codes and methods would differ, but not their core values--compassion, respect for life, etc. This would be the spot where clearly-defined codes would be useful for resolving such issues in-game.

 

[Corsair]

I love paladin threads.

1) Problem: People who play/DM paladins don't actually read the rules. This doesn't apply in all cases, but in enough to make it point #1. Lets consider everything that the "Code of Conduct" heading:

A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. 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.

A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities

According to this, the only way to lose the paladin class abilities is willingly committing evil acts. I've seen DMs take away class abilities for much less than that. They make the argument that a paladin wasn't lawful or good. Well do those DMs change other players alignments the first time they do something not exactly what it says on the sheet? If so, the first time a barbarian or bard makes a deal and honors his word, whoops, suddenly you should have fighters with no feats and rogues with perform ranks. And don't get me started on monks or NG druids who commit just one chaotic act!

2) DMs and Players need to hash out the code AHEAD OF TIME. That "and so forth" is a big problem.

3) Take the god into account. Different paladins should have different codes.

--------------------

In one game I play in, we have two paladins and a warmage. Paladin #1 is me, a werebear paladin of the goddess of courage. I kick evil butt first, ask questions later. That is my job, thats what my goddess demands of me. The second paladin is more of a diplomanator exalted paladin (actually heading for Saint and doing a darn good job in that department). He follows the goddess of wisdom. Lastly our warmage is a CG "blast the evil guys with the biggest baddest spell he's got!" kinda guy. He and Paladin #2 don't always see eye-to-eye, but they are friends. They both chastize cheerfully each other whenever their chosen methods fail. My paladin is somewhere in between the two of them. If paladins don't too too much preaching and trying to convert their companions, and their companions don't constantly try to harass the paladins, everyone can get along just fine!

 

[rounser]

but not their core values--compassion, respect for life

Hmm, you've pointed out another thorny one. One of D&D's central doctrines is the concept of "killing things and taking their stuff", usually justified by "they attacked first, we just arrived on their doorstep to trespass (ho hum, I wonder why they attacked)".

I'd suggest that a functioning LG D&D deity has to have a certain streak of Crom in him or her in order to serve this idiom, because strictly speaking it's very hard to justify in moral terms, without resorting to "they're goblins, they're evil, we're doing a community service", which is another "D&D ethics" view which has to be catered for by said long-suffering LG deity...

 

[Dwarf Bread]

By your comments I can tell that many of you have little or no understanding of actual spirituality in your own lives.

Spirituality speaks to people of many denominations and beliefs. It is thought to include a system of beliefs that encompasses love, compassion and respect for life.

I don't see the need for inference in this case. You claim that people who are paladin-haters have little or no understanding of spirituality, which you then define as "...a system of beliefs that encompasses love, compassion and respect for life."

As long as we're talking about inferrence, thought, I think that your statement:

Spirituality is a much more complex idea than any of these things.

coupled with the assertion that you're able to determine the level of this complex variable in people you've never met via comments that slip by moderators on a messageboard regarding a roleplaying game is an example of inferrence gone wild.

But maybe I'm being a sophist.

 

[ForceUser]

An aside to ForceUser: I kinda get your point, but I also begin to think that you're one of those people who plays a "Paladin" as a self-righteous nosy-neighbor. An exemplar of a Good faith would have more patience with those who are trying in earnest to understand his ways.

Not at all. I recognize the difference between righteousness and self-righteousness--that difference is humility. Which my above post notably lacks.

To quote a gaming buddy--I'm the most humble person I know!