*Archtypical Paladin Quandry* The 'Are you a Paladin?' Question.

[delericho]

I don't understand this. Are wizards ignorant of the fact that they are wizards?

A Wizard may well refer to himself as a wizard, arcanist, mage (or archmage), sorcerer, warlock, dweomerweaver, master of mysteries, or any one of a hundred other terms. Indeed, a Wizard with Spell Focus in a given school might refer to himself as illusionist, abjurer, conjurer, diviner, evoker, enchanter, transmuter or necromancer, despite not being a true specialist in that school.

Do rogues not know that they practice the more stealthy arts, and thus may be considered thieves, or "rogues"?

Rogue, thief, burglar, trickster, scoundrel, scout, con man...

Do fighters not know they are warriors?

Fighter, warrior, militant, martial artist, sellsword...

Similarly, the Paladin may refer to himself as a paladin, knight, champion, paragon, or many other things. It's only in the PHB that the word 'Paladin' has the specific meaning used to refer to members of the class. In the game world, it's a title that individuals may or may not belive applies.

A good example of this, actually, comes from "Order of the Stick", where Miko is a Paladin/Monk in game terms, but in the setting she is refered to as a Samurai. Rich Burlew has a whole strip about that: here.

 

[Ryngard]

Yeah in my campaign world being a Paladin with the class isn't the same as joining The Paladins, an order of magic-using holy knights who sacrifice for the greater good and plans of the goodly gods.

I had a Paladin in this world. His name was Sir Frederick and he was a Knight-Errant who traveled the borderlands with the sole purpose to help the poor and weak. He didn't call himself a Paladin. He was just Sir Frederick. He was from a noble family and he was knighted. He learned how to channel divine magic along the way. He was going to be approached by The Paladins but would have not accepted their invite as he wants to have free reign to adventure to protect.

But alas, Sir Frederick died to the hands of an Ogre with Wizard class levels.

 

[hopeless]

Reg: Paladin and honesty

No offence but from my point of view having the Paladin answer honestly would hve endangered his comrades, their mission and more importantly might leave him in the hands of a foe capable of turning him and maybe everything he knows to the villain's advantage.
Now you're saying he HAS to answer honestly?
In my view it would depend on whether he has a Intelligence AND wisdom score below 6... I liked those answers regarding roleplaying it, but I wouldn't have had guards asking, I would have had someone (or several someone's) stationed with items allowing them to detect good and law on anyone entering something like covering them in a sheath of silver and white for LG and whilst not all of them will be Paladins they would be kept under scrutiny whilst they were inside after all it would take then is a lackey of the villain with Telepathy or as the dm in the Faerun cmapign I had been involved in any demon or devil with the ability to speak with anyone in range being also able to read their minds (Which is why my cleric picked up a Ring of Mind Shielding the first chance he could).
I assume they're talking about the City State of the Invincible Overlord?
Glancing at that was almost as scary as either the Midnight setting or the Book of Vile Darkness (once I read enough of it to realise how stuffed players would be if the dm didn't understand d&d isn't Call of Cthulhu although Ravenloft might actually complain at that!)

The closest to that kind of meta gming was when my LN cleric was asked for protection by the henchman of a then deceased villain after he had tried to takeover his master's settlement to which I told him that had he not committed himself to that task i migth have agreed to which the dm then decided I had agreed to his request and ignored the fact that i hadn't.
At least in that example the dm was probably ignorant of the fact a Paladin is required to be humble as well as respectful of others, I've met some who believe they should be played as fanatical idiots with no respect for their comrades even after they had saved his life!
In case you're wondering that player was the same dm I described above and whilst other threads have indicated he isn't alone in this misconception you have to understand that this explains why such a situation as that set by the example is quite possible.
At worst the dm should have warned him if only to insure he doesn't use it as an excuse when the villain imperils an innocents life when he could save that innocent without endangering himself or his comrades with his actions but thats a story for another time.

 

[painandgreed]

It's a mute point because whatever BBEG is having this done also has a cleric behind the person asking the question with Zome of Truth up.

 

[pawsplay]

No, unless they have entered the keep for a nefarious purpose, which would be an alignment violation in itself. I would assume paladins lie all the time, just in a very lawful manner, like Jedi.

They would lie:
- to protect the weak
- to avoid harming someone
- to fulfill their obligations
- to battle evil
- to provide succor to someone in need
- because it is convenient and harms no one

They would not lie:
- as a breach of personal trust
- to exploit someone
- to gain an advantage over a person who intends no evil
- to avoid fulfilling some kind of obligation
- to serve evil
- to succor the wicked
- because it is convenient, although it harms someone

"His word speaks only truth" simply means a knight is not an oath-breaker or a untrustworthy person. It does not preclude stating something that is factually incorrent. Someone's "word" is their trutworthiness, and "truth" is derived from troth, which is an oath or something trusted in (like betrothed, promised to be married).

Generally speaking, there is nothing to preclude a paladin from lying to enter an evil overlord's stronghold, provided he is there for an innocent purpose, and does not intend harm to people who wish him no harm, and has not sworn not to do so.

If not sneaking into someone's keep to kill them is a custom of the land, which it is most places, and the evil overlord observes the custom, then the paladin would have a special burden to show his decision is the best or only practical way to perform his duty to uphold good. Most likely, this is going to result in an alignment warning on the Lawful axis, but apart from any other violations, is probably not enough to warrant an immediate alignment shift.

 

[pawsplay]

It's a mute point because whatever BBEG is having this done also has a cleric behind the person asking the question with Zome of Truth up.

However, the paladin's alignment and thoughts are undetectable.

 

[painandgreed]

However, the paladin's alignment and thoughts are undetectable.

Which doesn't do diddly squat against mind-affecting compulsions.

 

[erucsbo]

But are we talking Vault of the Drow, or Rel Astra (LE city-state amid the chaos of the fallen Great Kingdom in Greyhawk)/the City-State of the Invincable Overlord (pretty similar to Rel Astra but in a different setting)?

I think we're talking something more like the Vault of the Drow -- totalitarian (e.g., Stalinist, Nazi, or Taliban) evil that won't allow any other opinions -- rather than Rel Astra -- authoritarian (e.g., 1970s Latin America or current day "Communist" China) evil that doesn't much care what you think as long as you don't openly resist.

In a totalitarian situation as described, I think the "lawful good isn't lawful stupid" principle comes to the fore. But even totalitarian regimes have resistance movements . . . and while the paladin is unlikely to luck out and find the White Rose or Red Orchestra in charge of the city-gate interrogation, the DM might well let the paladin meet them in the overlord's dungeons, and escape, conveniently under the home of the man whose walls are otherwise impenetrable. Bwahahaha!

Any paladin who approaches the gate of the Vault openly (UNLESS INSTRUCTED TO DO SO BY THEIR GOD) rather than getting the scout/rogue/ranger to find a way to sneak the party in deserves what they get (imho). - That would be a case of lawful stupid. But as the poll question did not specify - it is left up to conjecture. The bit about a speedy trial followed by execution (rather than public torture and denigration or being thrown in to the arena for a public spectacle) indicates to me that it is more of a subjugated people than a truly evil society - else why the pretense of a trial.

I think that this thread has highlighted the disparate views of how people approach the legitimate playing of paladins and further reinforces the need to ensure that players of paladins (and clerics) spend time talking to their DMs (and visa versa) about the responsibilities and acceptable behaviours that are going to be applied to the class(es).

Paladin training should encompass how to handle situations dealing with evil prisoners, baby (defenseless) monsters, recognition of legitimate authority, information extraction procedures, etc. And the paladin should be telling everyone else in the party these things before they arise, so that you don't run in to the absurd situations of trying to dupe the paladin in to leaving the room after capturing the goblin so that it can be tortured, or arguing semantics over whether or not the letter of the code has been breached. Let the Paladin pray and ask for guidance - then have them make a Knowledge Religion roll (DC10) to know the appropriate behaviour their god expects. Any DM who isn't out to screw the paladin over should be more than willing to say what their god expects as righteous behaviour and whether or not exceptions exist.

 

[Xyanthon]

So many paladin threads. I'd have to say No, I wouldn't strip a paladin of his/her powers for something like that. It just seems that too many people try to enforce a code upon a paladin that goes beyond what one could expect as reasonable behavior and thus render that paladin pretty much unplayable as a character class. I think it is unreasonable for a paladin to continually be forced in to situations which in essence are be stupid and die or lose status as a paladin. Yes, there are and should be strictures that apply to this class, but I think a little bit of reason should be used when trying to adjudicate these situations.

 

[Michael Morris]

grimwell that is simple a brilliant answer. Why, I'm tempted to turn the ENWorld rep system on so I can rep you, but then Russ and Piratecat whould hang me up by my toes.