Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5395207" data-attributes="member: 35909">Sure.  But the "example of good" seems to be at issue, some have much more strict rules on that than others.Compassion and Pursue Good naturally conflict with Law and Defeat Evil.  Especially when a DM expects a Paladin to aply the former to a foe who's been disabled in combat but otherwise had no intentions to stop attacking.  That's just not fair.As for purity...since that's the ONLY area where prostitution and drugs can be labeled as a problem...I could see an argument for mind-altering drugs.  But regular stimulants/depressants and consenual sex?  There's nothing inherently impure about those that would prevent a Paladin from following the path of good. Why is killing a helpless opponent who was made helpless through direct combat wrong?  It's ok for the mage to turn him to ashes with a fireball, but if he instead puts him to sleep it's wrong for you to stab the evil bastard through his heart? Destroy Evil by any means that isn't evil or illegal (like performing a coup de grace, so long as you're not in an area ruled by legitimate authority that requires sending offenders to the jail rather than offing them yourself): Yes.  It's more wordy than yours, but far more accurate.  No one thinks it's ok for a Paladin to do something blatantly evil to defeat evil. Better now. So a typical setting isn't Christian, and yet you think a typical Paladin follows christian ideals?  Say what?  I'd say unless you're explicitly playing that sort of setting, which is VERY different assumptions than the rules are made for, Paladins don't have that real world religious baggage.  It's, you know, more consistent. And I agree with you.  I don't even really care if it's considered an act of mercy.  Paladin's under no obligation to take alive someone who never surrendered or hadn't tried to fight.   Objection!Do you mean classical as in prior editions?  Because lots of things changed over time.  The whole True Neutral back-stabby switch sides every round so that no one maintains an advantage interpretation went away, for example.  As for literary inspirations, those also expand and change over time and are dependent on the group to determine.  If I were playing a Paladin, I'd probably use Kanetsugu Naoe's depiction in the Samurai Warriors video game series as a role playing reference, for instance.  No Paladin I've ever played, will play, or have seen played adhered to those exact virtues.  Because...wait for it...that religion doesn't exist in the game and there's usually at least three flavors of "Lawful Good" gods or LG-adjacent gods for Paladins to pick from. This list is so clearly ridiculously unrealistic to expect of any D&D character, it's silly to even reference in regards to the inspiration for the Paladin code.  IMO, referencing it only hurts your own argument. Yes, they are.  As you posted, the actual Paladin code (the text before about purity is nice and all, but ultimately it's fluff and flavor text) that determines the rules:"A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if he ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents. - 3.5E PHB, pg. 44" First of all, have to be LG, not willingly commit an evil act, and respect legitimate authority.  The last item can cause a little trouble in defining what makes an authority legitimate, but for the most part, you can just assume that if the authority is not doing evil and has fair rules and justice system, there should be no issues.  After that...Act with honor: This is the only category that drugs and sex can be placed, and possibly the coup de grace issue.  But why is consensual sex dishonorable?  Just how broad do you want to cast the net?  Is using the wrong fork at a formal dinner, or not bothering to learn the proper etiquette before the dinner dishonorable?  Same with drinking.  I guess it boils down to "how much of an ass can a Paladin be before it becomes so dishonorable that it violates his code?"  I don't see how discreetly having relations with another willing person or drinking in moderation could possibly dishonor the Paladin.  As for CDG...is it dishonorable to kill a helpless person, when he's been diabled in that way through your side's abilities?  Why not step it up and say a Paladin has to announce himself before attacking and his party can never get a surprise round, then?  Maybe because these are precise game terms/conditions and if the designers ever WANTED a Paladin to be so restricted, they could have easily said so.  You can play your Paladin as one who'd never fight someone with an advantage if you want to.  But it's unfair to force someone to when the rules never require it.Help those in need: Nothing really at issue here.  Is the ONLY part of the code even vaguely close to caring about mercy.  Not for weakened enemies, though.  For those in need.Punish those who harm inoocents: If anything strengthens the whole coup de grace "judge, jury, and executioner" attitude.  While punishing can mean lots of things, if you're in an area that allows no vigilante justice at all, may actually cause conflict for the Paladin.  Not with his "sense of mercy," though!And that's it.  Nothing else at all in the code.  If you can't fit X restriction to the above 3 things, it doesn't belong by RAW.I think we both want Paladins and others with codes to not be arbitrarily punished and constantly under DM microscope, overall.  We just differ on some specifics.</blockquote>

Verification