The_Universe
First Post
Nope. No chance. Not as a Paladin, anyway - could be a great character, but just not a Paladin. Doesn't fit the "code" in the RAW, and certainly wouldn't fit the code for most of the Paladins in my game.Sejs said:
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Would you allow this paladin in your game? (new fiction added 11/11/08)
- Thread starter shilsen
- Start date
St. Cedric of the Cathouses....St. Cedric of the Little Flowers.... I love it.
I wonder why some D&D players get all wound up over the Paladin class? Sure, its a more rigid archetype than say, mage. But aren't all D&D class supposed to represent archtypes? A Paladin has to not only to act right, but think right, yet its fine to play mages like they're field-artillery pieces instead of scholars and wise-men. In fact, most mage threads around here are about making mages into better field artillery pieces, not Gandalf the White, or Sparrorhawk...
Cedric is a great character concept. He's simple, you can sum him up in one sentence "A kindly, fatalistic, whore-mongering Paladin". The mechanics are fine (and irrelevant). He's got plenty of built-in conflict (cue the pimps, heavily-armed confessors, succubai, and his paladiniacal rival, Sir Hubert, Bane of Hussies and Trouncer of Temptresses...).
Speaking as a DM, what's not to love?
And shilsen, any chance you know of a game in Philly that could accomodate both Sir Cedric and my own Sir Gaulstaff? That could be amusing.
I wonder why some D&D players get all wound up over the Paladin class? Sure, its a more rigid archetype than say, mage. But aren't all D&D class supposed to represent archtypes? A Paladin has to not only to act right, but think right, yet its fine to play mages like they're field-artillery pieces instead of scholars and wise-men. In fact, most mage threads around here are about making mages into better field artillery pieces, not Gandalf the White, or Sparrorhawk...
Cedric is a great character concept. He's simple, you can sum him up in one sentence "A kindly, fatalistic, whore-mongering Paladin". The mechanics are fine (and irrelevant). He's got plenty of built-in conflict (cue the pimps, heavily-armed confessors, succubai, and his paladiniacal rival, Sir Hubert, Bane of Hussies and Trouncer of Temptresses...).
Speaking as a DM, what's not to love?
And shilsen, any chance you know of a game in Philly that could accomodate both Sir Cedric and my own Sir Gaulstaff? That could be amusing.
Torm
Explorer
I've seen a lot of discussion in this thread about how you can't have a Paladin who frequents brothels. It has me thinking:
I doubt many would argue that a Paladin who was in sworn service to a king or other authority, rather than a deity, was not really a Paladin - it specifies that such is possible in the PHB: "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." Doesn't say anything about service to a deity, specifically - although admittedly that is a popular choice of authority for Paladin characters.
That said, in a society where brothels are legal, it seems to me that you could even have a Paladin in service to a brothel! A warrior who respects the madame, helps her insure that operations are done honorably (in good faith), protects the women and, in some cases, clients who may be attacked during patronage, investigates and punishes those responsible for harming either outside of his presence, and possibly extends that to the families of either from time to time, at the madame's bidding.
Such a Paladin would, at the very least, be expected to be around carnal matters, and it could be argued that partaking of those things would improve his knowledge of situations he might have to investigate, and his bond with those he is in service to.
I could see such a Paladin being described as empowered by his very service, or, if a deity is desired, either Myself (it is still a Duty) or possibly Sune or Her analog in a campaign.
I do believe, though, that I would find something else to bestow on this Paladin instead of a companion animal - one would want to keep the phrases "Holy Mount" and "Special Mount" as far from the gaming table as possible.
I doubt many would argue that a Paladin who was in sworn service to a king or other authority, rather than a deity, was not really a Paladin - it specifies that such is possible in the PHB: "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." Doesn't say anything about service to a deity, specifically - although admittedly that is a popular choice of authority for Paladin characters.
That said, in a society where brothels are legal, it seems to me that you could even have a Paladin in service to a brothel! A warrior who respects the madame, helps her insure that operations are done honorably (in good faith), protects the women and, in some cases, clients who may be attacked during patronage, investigates and punishes those responsible for harming either outside of his presence, and possibly extends that to the families of either from time to time, at the madame's bidding.
Such a Paladin would, at the very least, be expected to be around carnal matters, and it could be argued that partaking of those things would improve his knowledge of situations he might have to investigate, and his bond with those he is in service to.
I could see such a Paladin being described as empowered by his very service, or, if a deity is desired, either Myself (it is still a Duty) or possibly Sune or Her analog in a campaign.
I do believe, though, that I would find something else to bestow on this Paladin instead of a companion animal - one would want to keep the phrases "Holy Mount" and "Special Mount" as far from the gaming table as possible.
Last edited:
The Sigil
Mr. 3000 (Words per post)
I have one very simple "acid test" for whether or not a given character concept can be a paladin that has saved me much grief...
"Do you (the player) feel the need to justify the character's actions?"
Everything about this character - from the write-up to the fact that it was submitted for a vote to the fact that you're challenging the paladin class by saying "there's nothing in the PHB that says I can't do it this way (a classic rules-lawyer technique to follow the letter but not the spirit of the rules) - says, "yes, I need to justify the character's actions."
And of course the answer to the acid test is: "if you feel the need to justify the way the character is acting, he is absolutely not paladin material."
A fascinating character? Yes.
A beautiful example of smart role-playing? Absolutely.
A great thought-provoking look at the life of a paladin? Darn straight.
A fallen paladin, disillusioned with his lot? Sure.
A faithful paladin with all the perks that accompany that? As Sir Cedric would say, "**** no."
However, it should also be noted that I find Sir Cedric "morally wanting" as a paladin on more fronts than just the "acid test." Does a paladin IMC have to be a perfect paragon of holiness? No. Drinking and swearing as Sir Cedric does could probably get by - provided the paladin recognizes and acknowledges these as weaknesses/faults in his character.
Part of being a paladin is not "being" a paragon of lawful-good-ness so much as "attempting to be a paragon of lawful-good-ness" - one of the principle themes throughout literature is the "flawed hero" and that's okay... but as someone trying to be a paragon of virtue, a paladin can have flaws (he's human), but he shouldn't revel in them (he's supposed to represent virtue, not vice). Sir Cedric revels in his moral flaws. Sir Cedric does not acknowlege his vices as faults that ought to be corrected (heck, he could go to the grave swearing and that's cool, provided he's not proud of it and keeps getting upset with himself for slipping), and that's a problem for me. It's not that he isn't a paragon of lawful-good; such a standard is impossible to bear. My problem is that he's no longer even "trying to be a paragon of lawful-good-ness" - and as such he falls short of meeting the paladin's code* (see end of my post).
I don't see a paladin, as a dedicated foe of evil, as someone who will not only accept, but revel in evil in his own nature; rather, I see him as someone who is disappointed by his own imperfection and while he knows he's not perfect, and may not revile himself because he knows he is flawed, he certainly doesn't embrace his own evil nature. In fact, in classic fantasy literature, it is usually the moment when the paladin ceases to struggle overcome his flaws and embraces them instead that he falls from paladinhood.
For instance, Sir Lancelot was one example of an archetypal paladin, even to the point of the "lay on hands" ability - and in the Arthurian legneds, so long as he struggled with his weakness (his appetite for Guinevere), he kept his paladinhood and honor; but when he finally gave in to his weakness, he fell from grace. Note that it's not the "affair" per se with Guinevere that caused the fall - he, along with many of the other knights, was somewhat promiscuous if I recall the legends correctly; in fact, if memory serves, Galahad was his son by an illicit relationship - but in Lancelot's "giving up the struggle with self," he lost his honor.
Sir Cedric, by the fiction piece, appears to have given up the struggle with self to overcome inner weakness and appetites he acknowledges are wrong. Over and above the "acid test" that tells me he's not paladin material.
(I know, I know, "prostitution, etc. is/isn't evil because of moral absolutism/relativism" but the original piece had the tone that prostitution was not seen as "good" and while Cedric acknowledges this, he doesn't care... that's another rant entirely - my point is, in the fiction piece, Cedric seems to acknowledge he has moral flaws from his own point of view but embraces them instead of rejecting them, and that doesn't "jive" with my thoughts on paladinhood.)
Would I allow the character in my game? Yes (perhaps minus the sexual elements depending on the other players, as others have suggested).
Is the character a paladin in my game? No.
Slightly OT - The thread title is misleading... it suggests the character IS a paladin without room for debate - when it should be asking "is the character a paladin." You've "led" your audience to the conclusion you obviously want - to vote that he is a paladin - by your framing of the question, so the Yes/No data is flawed.
*WITH REGARD TO "DOES THIS VIOLATE RULES-AS-WRITTEN PALADIN'S CODE?"
Remember the little bit about "acting honorably" in the paladin's code? Yes, it's honorable to "fight the good fight" - but that consists of fighting it on all fronts. You can't choose only to "fight the good fight" without (i.e., physical combat with undead, demons, devils, etc.) and surrender the "good fight" within (embrace your vices) as Cedric has and claim you're fighting the good fight... he's not honoring his beliefs by not trying to live them. He's not honoring his "calling" as a paladin (in fact, he seems to despise it a bit). He's not honoring himself by trying to rise above his weaknesses.
I know, "in his campaign brothels MIGHT be..." - but re-read the fiction piece. It's implied that brothels are not an honorable place and Cedric knows it. It's implied that swearing and drinking are not honorable pastimes and Cedric knows it. If he's not acting honorably, ESPECIALLY if he knows it and tacitly acknowledges, and even MORE ESPECIALLY if he embraces the practices and shows no desire to change, then by definition he's not living up to one of the points of the paladin code!
--The Sigil
"Do you (the player) feel the need to justify the character's actions?"
Everything about this character - from the write-up to the fact that it was submitted for a vote to the fact that you're challenging the paladin class by saying "there's nothing in the PHB that says I can't do it this way (a classic rules-lawyer technique to follow the letter but not the spirit of the rules) - says, "yes, I need to justify the character's actions."
And of course the answer to the acid test is: "if you feel the need to justify the way the character is acting, he is absolutely not paladin material."
A fascinating character? Yes.
A beautiful example of smart role-playing? Absolutely.
A great thought-provoking look at the life of a paladin? Darn straight.
A fallen paladin, disillusioned with his lot? Sure.
A faithful paladin with all the perks that accompany that? As Sir Cedric would say, "**** no."
However, it should also be noted that I find Sir Cedric "morally wanting" as a paladin on more fronts than just the "acid test." Does a paladin IMC have to be a perfect paragon of holiness? No. Drinking and swearing as Sir Cedric does could probably get by - provided the paladin recognizes and acknowledges these as weaknesses/faults in his character.
Part of being a paladin is not "being" a paragon of lawful-good-ness so much as "attempting to be a paragon of lawful-good-ness" - one of the principle themes throughout literature is the "flawed hero" and that's okay... but as someone trying to be a paragon of virtue, a paladin can have flaws (he's human), but he shouldn't revel in them (he's supposed to represent virtue, not vice). Sir Cedric revels in his moral flaws. Sir Cedric does not acknowlege his vices as faults that ought to be corrected (heck, he could go to the grave swearing and that's cool, provided he's not proud of it and keeps getting upset with himself for slipping), and that's a problem for me. It's not that he isn't a paragon of lawful-good; such a standard is impossible to bear. My problem is that he's no longer even "trying to be a paragon of lawful-good-ness" - and as such he falls short of meeting the paladin's code* (see end of my post).
I don't see a paladin, as a dedicated foe of evil, as someone who will not only accept, but revel in evil in his own nature; rather, I see him as someone who is disappointed by his own imperfection and while he knows he's not perfect, and may not revile himself because he knows he is flawed, he certainly doesn't embrace his own evil nature. In fact, in classic fantasy literature, it is usually the moment when the paladin ceases to struggle overcome his flaws and embraces them instead that he falls from paladinhood.
For instance, Sir Lancelot was one example of an archetypal paladin, even to the point of the "lay on hands" ability - and in the Arthurian legneds, so long as he struggled with his weakness (his appetite for Guinevere), he kept his paladinhood and honor; but when he finally gave in to his weakness, he fell from grace. Note that it's not the "affair" per se with Guinevere that caused the fall - he, along with many of the other knights, was somewhat promiscuous if I recall the legends correctly; in fact, if memory serves, Galahad was his son by an illicit relationship - but in Lancelot's "giving up the struggle with self," he lost his honor.
Sir Cedric, by the fiction piece, appears to have given up the struggle with self to overcome inner weakness and appetites he acknowledges are wrong. Over and above the "acid test" that tells me he's not paladin material.
(I know, I know, "prostitution, etc. is/isn't evil because of moral absolutism/relativism" but the original piece had the tone that prostitution was not seen as "good" and while Cedric acknowledges this, he doesn't care... that's another rant entirely - my point is, in the fiction piece, Cedric seems to acknowledge he has moral flaws from his own point of view but embraces them instead of rejecting them, and that doesn't "jive" with my thoughts on paladinhood.)
Would I allow the character in my game? Yes (perhaps minus the sexual elements depending on the other players, as others have suggested).
Is the character a paladin in my game? No.
Slightly OT - The thread title is misleading... it suggests the character IS a paladin without room for debate - when it should be asking "is the character a paladin." You've "led" your audience to the conclusion you obviously want - to vote that he is a paladin - by your framing of the question, so the Yes/No data is flawed.
*WITH REGARD TO "DOES THIS VIOLATE RULES-AS-WRITTEN PALADIN'S CODE?"
Remember the little bit about "acting honorably" in the paladin's code? Yes, it's honorable to "fight the good fight" - but that consists of fighting it on all fronts. You can't choose only to "fight the good fight" without (i.e., physical combat with undead, demons, devils, etc.) and surrender the "good fight" within (embrace your vices) as Cedric has and claim you're fighting the good fight... he's not honoring his beliefs by not trying to live them. He's not honoring his "calling" as a paladin (in fact, he seems to despise it a bit). He's not honoring himself by trying to rise above his weaknesses.
I know, "in his campaign brothels MIGHT be..." - but re-read the fiction piece. It's implied that brothels are not an honorable place and Cedric knows it. It's implied that swearing and drinking are not honorable pastimes and Cedric knows it. If he's not acting honorably, ESPECIALLY if he knows it and tacitly acknowledges, and even MORE ESPECIALLY if he embraces the practices and shows no desire to change, then by definition he's not living up to one of the points of the paladin code!
--The Sigil
Last edited:
i voted "undecided" back when this was a four-page thread. now up to 8 pages, i'd change my vote to "yes." two reasons:
1. if he doesn't violate RAW, then it's fine. most paladins are way too stereotypical sticks-in-the-mud, and Mallus's reference to wizards as field artillery pieces as opposed to scholars reinforced this view. it's all variations on a theme.
2. this is a FANTASY game. anything is possible. i like *some* realism in my fantasy. if i wanted a truly realistic game, then i wouldn't be playing d&d.
p.s. i wonder how different the poll results would be if we could remove the "i wouldn't allow it because of my younger players" results. i mean, that's kind of obvious. who would run a game with such mature themes and young, impressionable kids?
1. if he doesn't violate RAW, then it's fine. most paladins are way too stereotypical sticks-in-the-mud, and Mallus's reference to wizards as field artillery pieces as opposed to scholars reinforced this view. it's all variations on a theme.
2. this is a FANTASY game. anything is possible. i like *some* realism in my fantasy. if i wanted a truly realistic game, then i wouldn't be playing d&d.
p.s. i wonder how different the poll results would be if we could remove the "i wouldn't allow it because of my younger players" results. i mean, that's kind of obvious. who would run a game with such mature themes and young, impressionable kids?
Sigil,
That was one brilliant post! You're right. What I should have paid more attention to is the reaction of the other person in the story. He, not the paladin, functions are the indicator of the moral standards of the society in which the paladin in situated.
Your statement about the need to struggle against feelings and behaviours one knows to be wrong is also helpful. The paladin, as written, does seem to suspect that he is not living up the the highest-possible standard.
Thanks for that great write-up. I'm so glad the thread stayed open so I could read it.
That was one brilliant post! You're right. What I should have paid more attention to is the reaction of the other person in the story. He, not the paladin, functions are the indicator of the moral standards of the society in which the paladin in situated.
Your statement about the need to struggle against feelings and behaviours one knows to be wrong is also helpful. The paladin, as written, does seem to suspect that he is not living up the the highest-possible standard.
Thanks for that great write-up. I'm so glad the thread stayed open so I could read it.
If we analyze per the PHB description of a paladin.... with selected excerpts.
"Few have the purity and devotion..."
Cedric is lacking in both... A rough edged paladin still needs a purity of purpose, and some sort of devotion.
.. "those few are rewarded"..
Hence recommending fighter/cleric to maintain the concept..
"Even a mundane mission ...is an opportunity..to demonstrate bravery"
Brave and consigned are not the same thing. He is consigned, but not very brave.
"Becoming a paladin is answering a call..."
Some have ventured that Cedric is forced to act, that is not the same as answering a call. As a cleric/fighter he can still answer the compulsion to act, and perform all the tasks listed in the character description.
"Code of Conduct: 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."
The issue of prostitution has to be handled per the class description, because we are asked in general if the character is acceptable. Rule zero always applies, but as a general look at paladins indulging in prostitutes without any guilt about doing so is not quite right. Considering the manners and temperament of most who would, the number of conflicts caused by him protecting the girls would almost outway the benefit of having him. Especially if it affected overall business. The average madame cares about the health of her girls, but the profits more so. Turnover is a given in that industry.
That being said, I think his endorsing the business contributes to the delinquency and harm of the staff, and his failure to act in any circumstance where someone is threatened/harmed would be grounds for losing his powers.
Legalized prostitution can be lawful, but is rarely good. A high class establishment would have temple priests of some pro-sex deity to care for the girls, they would not cater long to a surly paladin... Therefore he has to be acting from the lower class establishments..bringing in all the above conflicts.
"Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."
In this case moral code is not adequately defined. Without a specific deity or pantheon brought into play we can not tell if he SHOULD be morally outraged by the conduct. Given the controlling nature of the sex industry/slavery implications, associating with a house of ill repute does not examplify purity or devotion. Its been mentioned that his bleak outlook shows little faith...
All in all I can not see anything that justifies him being a paladin.
The character concept is acceptable, but hopefully has room for growth. Perhaps over time he can redeem his lack of faith. "No one, no matter how diligent can become a paladin through practice. The nature is either within one or not". You are effectively creating a fallen paladin out the gate. Questing for/finding a cause for redemption would be a pretty epic goal for this character. A sharp player can tease his adventuring group with glimmers of who Cedric could be.
Eventually, after finding a cause and potentially risking self-sacrifice you could acchieve paladinhood and as a DM I would gladly exchange previous classes for paladin levels with the caveat that should he fall into old practices, the old character sheet comes back out.
Overall players fail as paladins because they give in to the baser instincts. Geez, my paladin has to go along or I have to kill the party. Heck no! LEAD!!! Inspire! Be a hero! Guilt them in to doing the right thing! Don't obsess over killing the enemies of your faith too much, that is your calling after all.
But for all the people clamoring about how a devout paladin is boring because its so stereotypical... can't we say the same for all the chaotic neutral badass attitudes today? Sorry, I am in the game to have a good time, not get away with things I know better than to do in real life. (Same players HATE it when you apply realistic reactions to said behaviors in game...)
"Few have the purity and devotion..."
Cedric is lacking in both... A rough edged paladin still needs a purity of purpose, and some sort of devotion.
.. "those few are rewarded"..
Hence recommending fighter/cleric to maintain the concept..
"Even a mundane mission ...is an opportunity..to demonstrate bravery"
Brave and consigned are not the same thing. He is consigned, but not very brave.
"Becoming a paladin is answering a call..."
Some have ventured that Cedric is forced to act, that is not the same as answering a call. As a cleric/fighter he can still answer the compulsion to act, and perform all the tasks listed in the character description.
"Code of Conduct: 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."
The issue of prostitution has to be handled per the class description, because we are asked in general if the character is acceptable. Rule zero always applies, but as a general look at paladins indulging in prostitutes without any guilt about doing so is not quite right. Considering the manners and temperament of most who would, the number of conflicts caused by him protecting the girls would almost outway the benefit of having him. Especially if it affected overall business. The average madame cares about the health of her girls, but the profits more so. Turnover is a given in that industry.
That being said, I think his endorsing the business contributes to the delinquency and harm of the staff, and his failure to act in any circumstance where someone is threatened/harmed would be grounds for losing his powers.
Legalized prostitution can be lawful, but is rarely good. A high class establishment would have temple priests of some pro-sex deity to care for the girls, they would not cater long to a surly paladin... Therefore he has to be acting from the lower class establishments..bringing in all the above conflicts.
"Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good."
In this case moral code is not adequately defined. Without a specific deity or pantheon brought into play we can not tell if he SHOULD be morally outraged by the conduct. Given the controlling nature of the sex industry/slavery implications, associating with a house of ill repute does not examplify purity or devotion. Its been mentioned that his bleak outlook shows little faith...
All in all I can not see anything that justifies him being a paladin.
The character concept is acceptable, but hopefully has room for growth. Perhaps over time he can redeem his lack of faith. "No one, no matter how diligent can become a paladin through practice. The nature is either within one or not". You are effectively creating a fallen paladin out the gate. Questing for/finding a cause for redemption would be a pretty epic goal for this character. A sharp player can tease his adventuring group with glimmers of who Cedric could be.
Eventually, after finding a cause and potentially risking self-sacrifice you could acchieve paladinhood and as a DM I would gladly exchange previous classes for paladin levels with the caveat that should he fall into old practices, the old character sheet comes back out.
Overall players fail as paladins because they give in to the baser instincts. Geez, my paladin has to go along or I have to kill the party. Heck no! LEAD!!! Inspire! Be a hero! Guilt them in to doing the right thing! Don't obsess over killing the enemies of your faith too much, that is your calling after all.
But for all the people clamoring about how a devout paladin is boring because its so stereotypical... can't we say the same for all the chaotic neutral badass attitudes today? Sorry, I am in the game to have a good time, not get away with things I know better than to do in real life. (Same players HATE it when you apply realistic reactions to said behaviors in game...)
Similar Threads
