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

[Balesir]

How does playing a paladin with no mechanical restrictions in any way enhance this type of morality play? I mean what makes him more interesting or a superior choice to any class that is roleplayed as devoted to a code/deity/alignment/etc.?

The fact that I enjoy playing such a paladin! A character who is a moral exemplar, who holds him- or her-self to the highest standards, who actually has hard moral and ethical judgements to make is a great concept for a character!

A character who spends an imaginary lifetime second-guessing what the gods/the "powers of good"/the DM thinks "lawfulness and goodness" means? Not so much.

If the second one appeals to you, good for you - go for it. Give the GM an actual, physical nerfbat to hit you with each time they think you got it wrong, if that's what appeals to you, but I don't want that forced down my gullet. Same with "Detect Evil" and all that tripe. As an optional module? Fine. If it's in a separate publication so I can avoid it? Even better (but not essential). But as a core game "fact" - it'll be too hard to excise it from the game for it to be worth the bother.

 

[Imaro]

The fact that I enjoy playing such a paladin! A character who is a moral exemplar, who holds him- or her-self to the highest standards, who actually has hard moral and ethical judgements to make is a great concept for a character!

A character who spends an imaginary lifetime second-guessing what the gods/the "powers of good"/the DM thinks "lawfulness and goodness" means? Not so much.

If the second one appeals to you, good for you - go for it. Give the GM an actual, physical nerfbat to hit you with each time they think you got it wrong, if that's what appeals to you, but I don't want that forced down my gullet. Same with "Detect Evil" and all that tripe. As an optional module? Fine. If it's in a separate publication so I can avoid it? Even better (but not essential). But as a core game "fact" - it'll be too hard to excise it from the game for it to be worth the bother.

You didn't really answer the question... Your first paragraph could apply to any character class that is dedicated to something... again, what makes a paladin without mechanical restrictions different in play from any other class that dedicates itself to something?

EDIT: Balesir, please tone back the hyperbole it would make your points easier to take seriously... "a lifetime second-guessing what the gods/the "powersofgood"/the DM thinks "lawfulness and goodness" means... Many on the side of the discussion for paladin falling mechanics have already advocated discussion and even joint creation of the paladin code and/or what the alignments mean. Some have even advocated meta-game and in-game warnings.

 

[Mournblade94]

The fact that I enjoy playing such a paladin! A character who is a moral exemplar, who holds him- or her-self to the highest standards, who actually has hard moral and ethical judgements to make is a great concept for a character!

A character who spends an imaginary lifetime second-guessing what the gods/the "powers of good"/the DM thinks "lawfulness and goodness" means? Not so much.

If the second one appeals to you, good for you - go for it. Give the GM an actual, physical nerfbat to hit you with each time they think you got it wrong, if that's what appeals to you, but I don't want that forced down my gullet. Same with "Detect Evil" and all that tripe. As an optional module? Fine. If it's in a separate publication so I can avoid it? Even better (but not essential). But as a core game "fact" - it'll be too hard to excise it from the game for it to be worth the bother.

I don't think most players second guess the DM. That is why they are willing to take on the challenge of playing the Paladin who is the moral exemplar.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

T


That's not the strawman. The strawman is, "well, actions have consequences." Which nobody disagrees with, and nobody is arguing against, but it's at least the third or fourth time it's been posted on this thread as if it's conclusive.

-O

But it is. If a policeman walks down the street and starts murdering people, he will be stripped of his powers and is no longer a policeman. The only difference is society strips his powers, not his deity.

 

[jonesy]

But it is. If a policeman walks down the street and starts murdering people, he will be stripped of his powers and is no longer a policeman. The only difference is society strips his powers, not his deity.

By saying 'walks down the street' you've narrowed your example down to such an extent that it no longer properly applies to what you are comparing it to. A policeman doesn't get stripped of his powers if he starts murdering people, only when he gets caught. And what is murder in that example depends on what the people reviewing his actions who have the powers to remove his powers consider murder. Real life is complex as hell, yo.

 

[herrozerro]

By saying 'walks down the street' you've narrowed your example down to such an extent that it no longer properly applies to what you are comparing it to. A policeman doesn't get stripped of his powers if he starts murdering people, only when he gets caught. And what is murder in that example depends on what the people reviewing his actions who have the powers to remove his powers consider murder. Real life is complex as hell, yo.

Not to mention, if a civilian did the same they'd be stripped of their status and incarcerated as well.

 

[Sunseeker]

The DM's in this case are going to always find SOMETHING to mess with players. yes the Paladin alignment enforcement is easy pickings, but I do not think a rule, even one that is easily ignored for a table, should be eliminated because it can be abused by poor DM's.

I think a poor, often abused rule which adds nothing mechanically relevant to the game, is good enough reason for it's removal.

 

[Sunseeker]

I don't think most players second guess the DM. That is why they are willing to take on the challenge of playing the Paladin who is the moral exemplar.

Morally? Hell yes I'll challenge the DM.

 

[Imaro]

I think a poor, often abused rule which adds nothing mechanically relevant to the game, is good enough reason for it's removal.

So tell the players of paladins in your games they cannot fall unless they choose to and let those of us who enjoy the mechanic continue using it... This could be done trivially in any of the earlier editions, so problem solved.

EDIT: Or is the point that we all have to play the way you want to play?

 

[Sunseeker]

So tell the players of paladins in your games they cannot fall unless they choose to and let those of us who enjoy the mechanic continue using it... This could be done trivially in any of the earlier editions, so problem solved.

EDIT: Or is the point that we all have to play the way you want to play?

Should I ask you the same question?

Or has it already been established that telling people to "play how they want" makes 99.99% of all conversations on this forum pointless?