D&D 5E So what's the problem with restrictions, especially when it comes to the Paladin?

[DEFCON 1]

I'd be happy to see not only alignment but stat restrictions comeback too for paladins.

That only works if you don't allow Point Buy.

Once you can buy your stats however you want... stat restrictions become meaningless because you'll just buy them in such a way as to be able to play the class.

I imagine the reason for doing stat restriction originally in the game (back when you had to roll stats) was to cut down on the number of Paladin player characters we'd ever see. But over time, the need to have "less Paladins" ceased to exist, once the game had been around for so long that everybody had seen Paladins up to that point anyway.

 

[Imaro]

This is a common outlook, but isn't it a bit of a paradox, tho?

No, I don't think it is...

If the crux of the paladin's dilemma is that he inevitably has to pay a price for breaking his code, the moral of the story is that paladinhood is a failure.

If paladinhood is a failure anything and everything based on rules, laws,etc. are a failure due to the corner cases or unforeseen situations they will invariably fail to cover. Superman is a failure, Batman is a failure, the knights of the round table are a failure and so on... since nothing is 100%

Explaining: the paladin may be breaking the code for 2 reasons.
He fails to comply to it - he acts in self-interest against the code, to gain something or avoid some unwanted effect. Bottom line: he's not much of a paladin. He's failing. That can be fun, but it should be a choice, not something hardcoded into what it means to be a paladin.

Wait...so there's no choice involved in falling from paladinhood when the conditions are hard-coded into the class?? Color me confused...

Alternatively, the code doesn't stand the test of actual application. Ie, the paladin is put in front of the dilemma of doing the right thing or following the code. Another common situation. Here is the code that is tarnished in the process. If the paladin did good in breaking the code... it isn't much of a code to begin with, no? If my paladin broke his code because he refused to put to death a 5 years old girl who was possessed by a demon, and risked lives and a potential holocaust by saving her through a lenghty quest, he is bound to question the code. He will take his punishment and then probably move away from paladinhood.

Why would your paladin be punished for performing a lengthy quest and saving the girl as well as the people she endangered?? Unless his code states he must slay vs. save possessed innocents, not seeing why her death would be required. Now if he knew she was possessed and took no action to save her or the people she endangered then yes, I could see it... but then if you did that you wouldn't be much of a paladin.

The bottom line is that it's fine to want to play a paladin to play a tormented hero who has to struggle with his ideals, but it's equally fine to play a paladin to be Fantasy Judge Dredd and never have to question once your perspective on life.

Why not just play a fighter with a god complex... what exactly differentiates the two concepts? I mean the paladin is the one class with the possible exception of the cleric (as well as the monk and barbarian to a much lesser extent) that actually gets to interact heavily with the concept of alignment through his mechanics... why take that away when there are so many other classes that alignment in no way affects?

 

[Balesir]

Well I can honestly say for me and my group... do whatever you want with no consequences isn't a hard choice.

I don't think I said there would or should be no consequences - merely that they shouldn't be mechanical ones that are based on someone's unguided decision.

Doesn't the DM create and arbitrate most things in the game world?

Ideally no, but that's a very different debate.

IMO, if this is Steve's campaign then he's in the position to define good/evil/law/chaos in it (and contrary to how you are presenting it... these don't have to be Steve's particular views).

All that may be so, but the point is that all having a DM imposed nerf based on their views and understanding/opinion achieves is letting us explore the said DM's views and understanding/opinion. And I don't find that at all interesting as the topic for roleplaying. For a friendly chat, fine, but for an RPG, meh.

Now he should of course lay out these views for the players pre-campaign, and once that is done then you have the information you need to determine whether you want to explore those issues and hard choices (play a LG paladin) or not (play one of the numerous classes that don't interact with alignment on that level).

So you explore what the DM (any DM) thought s/he said and/or actually meant when s/he said whatever was said at the campaign start. It all amounts to the same thing; all you are exploring is one person's thought processes. I want a game that is the conjugation of several peoples' thought processes, because that's when you get actual interesting stuff happening.

With a paladin, it's about what you are willing to sacrifice (atonement, permanent loss of power, etc.) when your idealized code is put to the test in the real world.

So make some rules that address this without requiring one individual to decree the price by fiat. Maybe have the Paladin roll to lose the power each time it's used; now you have a truly known consequence (it's uncertain, but it is a clearly known quantity) and must consider when it's worth risking the future use of the power for the issue at hand right now.

 

[CAFRedblade]

The Paladin should have example codes for each alignment, with guidelines and advice to talk things out with our DM on what parts can/should be changed to apply to both the character and world the group is using.

I remember that 2nd ed. had some details in the Paladin kit ( I believe ) book for setting up a code of conduct and how to tailor them to your use.

 

[Sunseeker]

If the Paladin has any alignment restrictions, it should be based on the god that they follow. A paladin of a god of artists and philosophers will have a different set of values and codes than a paladin of a god of dogmatic religion. Even if both are gods of goodness, laws, and order, the two could be vastly different in appearance. What is "good" and what is "law" depends on the culture in question, it's hugely unrealistic to expect every society in a D&D game to fall neatly into the 9 alignment system.

 

[drothgery]

I imagine the reason for doing stat restriction originally in the game (back when you had to roll stats) was to cut down on the number of Paladin player characters we'd ever see.

... which was kind of silly. If you don't want people to play paladins, why not, err, not put them in the core rulebook?

 

[Kobold Stew]

I remember playing AD&D wanting to roll a Paladin and never having the numbers. When you were playing a character with a LG moral code, the 12-year-old me couldn't find it in myself to fudge it (i.e. cheat). I never saw anyone honestly meet the numbers for an illusionist and want to play one.

 

[Balesir]

I remember playing AD&D wanting to roll a Paladin and never having the numbers. When you were playing a character with a LG moral code, the 12-year-old me couldn't find it in myself to fudge it (i.e. cheat).

Oh, now there's a nice moral dilemma - does it compromise your Paladin's goodness if you cheat to get the attributes you need to play her??

Beats "does the GM think I'm too evil, yet?" hands down, IMO

 

[Manbearcat]

A paladin ethos system that codifies specific beliefs/oaths and then rewards the player with a thematic boon when they suffer or "choose the hard way" due to adhering to their code is easily enough done. Its just that the alignment system fails spectacularly at this while doubling down on adding table issues. Systems out there already produce this play at a highly functional level without wonky table overhead and arbitration squabbles. The GM can set up situations to specifically challenge the Paladin's ethos portfolio; perhaps 3 oaths (an example of one might be below).

Ironclad Loyalty

<Gain thematic resource> - When you back your friend's play when it challenges another oath.

<Gain thematic resource> - When you come to your friend's aid and it puts you in physical peril.

<Gain thematic resource> - When you espouse your ideology despite compelling evidence to the contrary.

 

[Gorgoroth]

Some cues from the wikipedia page of Ultima IV remind me of this discussion:

Virtues




The codex symbol shows the relationship between Virtues and Principles, using eight colored lines and three colored circles.[3]
The eight virtues of the Avatar, their relationship to the three principles of Truth, Love and Courage and how the gameplay has been designed around them are as follows:


Honesty: Truth
When purchasing goods from blind merchants the player is required to enter the amount they actually wish to pay. Although the player has the option of paying less than the merchant has asked for, this will mark the player as dishonest. Stealing gold from chests owned by others (i.e. all chests found in towns, villages and castles) will also penalize the player. This Virtue is embodied by Mariah the Mage.
Compassion: Love
By using the Give conversation subject, a player can give beggars alms and in doing so demonstrate compassion. This Virtue is embodied by Iolo the Bard.
Valor: Courage
Valor is displayed by the player defeating enemies in combat and not fleeing in a cowardly fashion. This means that when retreat is necessary, the player should be the last party member to leave the field of battle. This Virtue is embodied by Geoffrey the Fighter.
Justice: Truth and Love
Not all of the hostile creatures in Britannia are evil and the player must avoid unprovoked attacks on those that are not. If attacked, he should resort to driving them away rather than killing them. Out of the eight virtues, this one requires the most finesse to embody and is a particularly good example of balancing ethical dilemmas. The player's party must stand their ground for Valor, yet drive their foes away without killing them. This Virtue is embodied by Jaana the Druid.
Honor: Truth and Courage
By completing quests (finding sacred items) and exploring dungeons the player demonstrates their honor. This Virtue is embodied by Dupre the Paladin.
Sacrifice: Love and Courage
If the player goes to a place of healing while in good health, the player can make a blood donation and sacrifice some health in doing so. This Virtue is embodied by Julia the Tinker. In the NES port she was replaced with a male character named Julius.
Spirituality: Truth, Love and Courage
Meditating at shrines, consulting the seer, and achieving enlightenment in the other virtues enhances the player's spirituality. This Virtue is embodied by Shamino the Ranger.
Humility: None, though it is considered the root of all virtue.
The player demonstrates their humility during conversations. A boastful response to a question results in a penalty, a humble response results in a bonus. This Virtue is embodied by Katrina the Shepherd.

All that said, I think the D&D version of the paladin needs to strictly or not so strictly enforce a set of rules, varying by deity, sure, but e.g. I was in a group today including a LG fighter who stole a suit of armor from a murdered knight, that was on display in a tradeshop, and then when he was caught covering up his crime he ran away. So many virtues trampled on. But that's fine, he has no divine retribution for his sins. A paladin ABSOLUTELY should have. It's too bad if you don't realize it at the time, you should know that stealing is unlawful, even if it's stealing pilfered goods from unscrupulous merchants, because your god should see / know everything. Atonement and punishment go hand in hand, there can be no dramatic arc of the fallen hero archetype. The Dark Knight had to "fall" before he could rise. And that was a ruse. In a paladin ethos, it would be akin to Superman losing his powers if he killed someone out of lust for power or with disregard to what's right and true, or Spiderman losing his until he Mary Jane was threatened and he had to get his head back on straight. I love those story arcs. And I definitely would want to see paladins have good powers that people would salivate over, but not be willing or able to sustain it due to the moral code it enforces. I can literally see adults all the time playing D&D unable to follow this simple code! They almost always revert to the selfish, covetous bastards they are, lurking in their souls.

Playing a paladin is not easy for most people, and nevermind the stat requirements, it was the RP requirements that felled them. In DDN it's probably too tough to change the class entirely to a fighter instantaneously, but having their divine powers simply cease to function until they atone should be do-able. E.g. Divine Smite, or Bless Weapon or whatever, none of that offensive capability should work without it. Maybe he can lay hands on the weak for a while, but not himself. If he does something consciously evil he should be able to turn over to the dark side, so to speak, and begin worshipping the evil deity and resume play as an anti-paladin, or perhaps go through warden first, though the nature flavour doesn't mesh well to me.