Breaking the stereotype of the chaste paladin

[Vocenoctum]

But a Rogue 2/Sorceror 5 does not model an archetypal bard better than a Bard 7. There are the inappropriate powers like evocation spells and sneak attacks, there is the absence of bardic music, there are none of the divination and enchantment spell advantages. So no -- a Sorceror/Rogue does not model a bard better than a Bard.

It is harder to make that argument about a Fighter 2/Cleric 5 vs a Paladin 7 if one is modeling non-chivalric holy warriors.

I think the Perform skill is more of the bard than anything. Weaving spells into the music is as easy for a sorcerer as it is for a bard.

I'm repeating myself again: I'm not telling you what your priorities should be. I'm telling you what I think you should do if you share my priorities.

Right, that was my point. If someone shares your opinion, they will agree with your opinion. If you only see the paladin archetype as the grail knight, then all the rules of the grail knight apply. The thing is, you seem to present the opinion that anyone that doesn't assign Grail Knight as the paladin archetype is somehow not interested in a deep cultural basis for the paladin in the setting.

As for your point about the horses, it depends which story but I think what is being put across here is the idea that the mount is part of what identifies a person as a Paladin. The idea -- being mounted is part of what makes you who you are -- is the clearest of all the mechanical indicators that Paladins represent a chivalric archetype.

I haven't read the book (3 something and 3 hearts?) mentioned earlier in this thread which is apparently the basis for the mount. For myself, I can understand why a smiter of evil must be mobile.
In fact, providing a mount is redundant to a chivalric type. They'd already have a mount and I don't really think any one specific horse retained it's position as favored mount for 10 years.

The Mount ability of the paladin is actually more useful to a paladin that is NOT a member of the knightly social ranks, but I don't think that's how it was intended. (The 3.5 special mount seems particularly good for my Halfling Guerilla Paladin idea.)

The mechanic that is invaluable for grail-type stories in the Paladin is the fact that the character's power is inextricably linked to his moral virtue. For this reason, the Paladin is vastly better than the fighter for building grail knights in mechanically representing this realtionship through the code.

I think it's better represented by Exalted feats. Having more feats lends more powers, and the Vow feats add to your responsibility at the same time gifting you with more ability. It means the knight that has sworn the Vow of Celibacy is indeed more "holy" than the knight who just has a vow of obedience. It allows for the individual knights of the round table more as well. (Not all really had the same vow in practice as it were.)

 

[shilsen]

I think our positions are much closer than I anticipated. I also see Spenser as occupying a liminal position within the chivalric/grail corpus but had not previously thought through the implications of this. In retrospect, it all makes sense -- of course post-Reformation Protestant texts would allow for non-celibate Paladin models. In fact, the argument I've been making in this thread should have predicted this. I simply failed to think through the fact that the literary genre we were discussing continued past 1517.

Happens to the best of us. Spenser didn't exactly do a great job at predicting some of the problems his consideration of fissures in the chivalric code would cause for his own epic.

Although I would not use the Paladin class but instead construct my own core class or prestige class for the holy warriors you describe in your first paragraph, you make an excellent case for a non-celibate Paladin in the second. I had not previously considered the Faerie Queen in this way and am quite happy to yield to your opinion that this is a mythologically legitimate model for the Paladin that does not include celibacy. Well done!

Thanks. I'm taking a Ph.D. preliminary exam on the Renaissance on Tuesday. Here's hoping that I'm as successful at persuading the examiners as I was with you.

 

[fusangite]

I think it's better represented by Exalted feats. Having more feats lends more powers, and the Vow feats add to your responsibility at the same time gifting you with more ability. It means the knight that has sworn the Vow of Celibacy is indeed more "holy" than the knight who just has a vow of obedience. It allows for the individual knights of the round table more as well. (Not all really had the same vow in practice as it were.)

Are these in the core rules? I've never heard of them.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Are these in the core rules? I've never heard of them.

Book of Exalted Deeds. For the Gooder than Good Goodie Goodies.

 

[Agback]

Even in an medieval Setting a pally may be an commoner, a foot soldier, a sailor, or an outrider.
Also he could be an diplomat, judge, Mentor.

Mine was a doctor.

 

[Agback]

I haven't read the book (3 something and 3 hearts?) mentioned earlier in this thread which is apparently the basis for the mount.

Three Hearts and Three Lions, by Poul Anderson. It is also the main source for Law and Chaos and for regenerating trolls.