Bad Paladin... or My First Paladin thread...

[Mallus]

Paladins are the embodiment of a god's ideals. They're born as exemplars of their god's doctrine.

What if the god's ideals included mercy, and more importantly, grace. The belief that God's love/blessing/etc. is given to those who don't deserve it. In fact, who can nothing to deserve it.

What if the God chose a paladin not as an exemplar, but as an example of His or Her mercy, of how grace isn't earned, it given?

(Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before... At this point I should mention I'm not trying to evangelize, and I'm not, in fact, a Christian. This is just a thought-experiment and, to me, a cool character concept.)

 

[John Morrow]

So this is the Paladin I want to play... opinions?

1) I'd advise you to play him as a cleric, where you've got more alignment flexibility within the rules. The D&D cleric is designed as a warrior priest and has a good attack progression and good access to armor and weapons.

2) A paladin is designed to serve as an exemplar. That's why they must have only one rigid alignment rather than a choice. He's supposed to not only be a role model but inspire others toward Goodness (e.g., Aura of Courage). In fact, that's one of the primary reasons why the class was retained and not simply folded into Fighter. This character cannot serve in that capacity.

3) Allowing the character to be a paladin without doing the hard work to be a paladin strikes me as being just wrong on several levels. First, why should the character ever improve himself if he's got all of his powers and works just find the way he is? Second, it reeks of unearned rewards and wanting the goodies without the limitations or consequences (e.g., "Doesn't everyone who works hard deserve an 'A'?", "Why can't I just default on this credit card?", etc.). Third, let's just say that faith, in a religious sense, means a lot more than just "I believe X exists" or "I really admire the ideals of X".

 

[Mallus]

Every peasant in medieval France had faith. When God called Joan of Arc answered.

Well put. So he's Joan of Arc... a big, fat, lying drunken Joan of Arc. A man of tremendous faith who was called. And doesn't live up to his faith's espoused ideals.

What about his faith made him a Paladin? Well, he has more than a bushel of priests do. But not the will. He's a bit like a crunk version of Martin Luther. Spends less time theologizing, and more time drinking beer. But for his faith, a god chose him to be a paladin.

 

[diaglo]

one of the WotC adventures has a good example...

iirc Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. outside the Welcome Wench.

 

[TheEvil]

Mallus, let me offer the first dissenting opinion.

:\ Boy, first I get ignored by Mallus, now even other people are failing to acknowlege my post. Properly put, you are the second dissenting opinion.

 

[Mallus]

2) A paladin is designed to serve as an exemplar. That's why they must have only one rigid alignment rather than a choice. He's supposed to not only be a role model but inspire others toward Goodness (e.g., Aura of Courage). In fact, that's one of the primary reasons why the class was retained and not simply folded into Fighter. This character cannot serve in that capacity.

He's not an exemplar. He's a example of his god's grace.

Why can't he serve as a shining beacon of his gods' ideals? I see him as being easier to identify with, because of his flaws. He's as low and petty as the worst man, he's the guy who tried to seduce your wife and cheap you at cards, the yet when the time comes he'll lay down his life in service of righteousness.

3) Allowing the character to be a paladin without doing the hard work to be a paladin strikes me as being just wrong on several levels. First, why should the character ever improve himself if he's got all of his powers and works just find the way he is?

Because he's conceived as an interesting personality to roleplay? I'd deny myself the fun of the character if I didn't play out his path toward greater holiness.

Second, it reeks of unearned rewards and wanting the goodies without the limitations or consequences

He's really not conceived as a way to work the rules. If I wanted to make a power-character, I wouldn't be using a Paladin, that's for sure.

What I want is an interesting character to play. Doesn't this guy sound like a challenge?

 

[bodhi]

Having read the first dozen or so replies, here's my two cents.

There are strong game reasons not to start off as a paladin. The paladin gains certain advantages, at certain costs. If you don't pay the costs, the advantages are unbalancing (jsut how much depends on campaign specifics).

Going the route of a fighter who eventually becomes a paladin can reflect the character striving towards an ideal. He gets no blessings until he starts living the code, and not just wanting to.

That being said, I think your idea has a lot of roleplaying and story potential. Surprise! He is chosen. Perhaps almost against his will. You can do the whole "What, me? You must have the wrong guy." routine. Joan of Arcadia is a modern example that includes the "I just want to be normal" thread as well. For this take, I like TheEvil's idea of slowly gaining access to your paladin abilities, as you do better and better, rather than getting them all "for free" up front.

As always, I think a lot depends on the flavor of your campaign, and how tightly it adheres to the RAW.

 

[Mallus]

For a short game, you are probably better off with a multi-classed Favored Soul/Fighter. Favored soul gives you the 'divine endorsement' without getting into what a paladin is. Anther option might be the alternate alignment paladins from UA.

Sorry, didn't mean to ignore. Thanks for your dissent...

As to your response... I could make him another class, but I wanted to most iconic chosen-by-God character class available, the one with the most mythic overtones, and that's the Paladin.

As for alignment... he's the good soul that's overpowered by, in his case, copious amounts of flesh. By the book Paladins look dull to me, because you can't engage in any kind of moral struggle with them... they exist in a binary state, on or fallen, and that seems like a huge missed oppourtunity [if I wanted to play a bit, I'd pick up Tron:d20].

He's not CN, he's awful at being LG... at least to begin with.

 

[John Morrow]

He's not an exemplar. He's a example of his god's grace.

I think that could better be served through the miracles he could perform as a cleric. A paladin, as a class, is designed to be an exemplar or role model. As we both agree, this character isn't. I'm not saying that a god couldn't empower a character through grace alone. I'm simply saying that a paladin does not seem to be the right vehicle for it. I understand your point but it just doesn't feel right.

Why can't he serve as a shining beacon of his gods' ideals? I see him as being easier to identify with, because of his flaws. He's as low and petty as the worst man, he's the guy who tried to seduce your wife and cheap you at cards, the yet when the time comes he'll lay down his life in service of righteousness.

What I'm not seeing here is the the dedication to righteousness and I think that's because you are talking about active and willful sins rather than passive sins of weakness. It's one thing for a sinner to allow himself be pressured into getting drunk at a party and another thing for a sinner to scour a city looking for a bottle of whiskey. It's one thing for a sinner to be coerced into helping his friends steal some chickens and another thing for a sinner to be the mastermind for a string of bank robberies. It's one thing for a sinner to fall to the charms of a married woman who wants to bed him but quite another thing to actively seduce a woman who is married. I'd find the idea more plausible if he were a passive rather than active sinner. I don't think that the idea of an active sinner is compatible with either a personality that would lay down their life for righteousness or a deity's grace.

Because he's conceived as an interesting personality to roleplay? I'd deny myself the fun of the character if I didn't play out his path toward greater holiness.

Yeah, I've heard that argument before. I've never had a shortage of new character ideas and honestly feel that some are better than others.

He's really not conceived as a way to work the rules. If I wanted to make a power-character, I wouldn't be using a Paladin, that's for sure.

You started out by saying, "I've been thinking about playing my first Paladin, but I couldn't imagine a paladin that I'd want to roleplay." That suggests that you wanted to play a paladin (as a class) first, but didn't like the catches involved with playing the traditional sort. So you decided to imagine a character concept that would gives you the ability to play a paladin without being an exemplar. It may not be playing the rules in a traditional min-max sense but it still seems to be wanting to play a character class without the negatives.

But since you aren't looking for a power-character, why not see if you can't swap out the traditional paladin restrictions with some other catch that helps your character on his path to righteousness? For example, perhaps your character's paladin abilities come and go as he sins and repents, without having to go through a formal atonement process. In other words, his god lets him be a paladin only so long as he's acting like a paladin.

What I want is an interesting character to play. Doesn't this guy sound like a challenge?

It all depends on how you play him. If it's just an excercise in running a character that can't resist his vices, not really. If you actually play through the struggle of resisting his vices, it could be. What do you think would make it so interesting?

Of course if you really want a challenge, I'd suggest going back to the drawing board and figure out how to play a traditional paladin by the book that you'd have fun playing.

 

[Mallus]

The paladin gains certain advantages, at certain costs. If you don't pay the costs, the advantages are unbalancing (jsut how much depends on campaign specifics).

I think idea that a paladin trades off class 'advantages' for behavioral restrictions is a myth.
Paladin 'abilities' are more like liabilities, mechanics-wise. A mix of ftr/bar/rog beats --literally-- a paladin almost every time.

That being said, I think your idea has a lot of roleplaying and story potential.

Thanks.

Surprise! He is chosen. Perhaps almost against his will. You can do the whole "What, me? You must have the wrong guy." routine. Joan of Arcadia is a modern example that includes the "I just want to be normal" thread as well. For this take, I like TheEvil's idea of slowly gaining access to your paladin abilities, as you do better and better, rather than getting them all "for free" up front.

Yup, that's exactly what he's supposed to be, the unwitting Peer of Charlemange... But as to gaining his abilities slowly, as a 'reward'... 1) Paladin abilites just aren't that good... its like a double-penalty, and 2) the whole underpinning for this is a 'grace paradigm' not a 'reward paradigm'... he never deserves the power (and love) his god gives him. He can never be worthy. He changes his ways over time as he comes to realize that, to feel the enormity of the gift freely giving to him. Not because he gets kewl powerz out of the deal.