EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
There absolutely is. Among the things the Paladin is supposed to do is avoid any association with people who aren't also LG. That alone primes things for a serious problem. The fact that the Paladin instantly, and permanently (barring a special spell AND literal divine intervention), loses ALL their supernatural powers for even the tiniest violation--all while the actual TENETS of the oath are completely invisible to the players, so they don't know whether they're breaking the rules or not, directly leads to these problems.There is absolutely nothing in 3e doing what you suggest. 3e defines good, defines LG, and defines what a Paladin should and should not do, in the extent of its expectactions.
Okay, now you're literally getting personal and aggressive for no reason. Doubly so when, as I've said repeatedly, I don't think the Paladin has a problem!But the archetype has not roots there. I have even shown that thinking every crusader was heavily armored is another historical misconceptions. Axe to grind?
But if you think the Crusades, and things like the holy orders associated therewith, weren't even slightly an influence on the Paladin, I'm sorry, you're just wrong. Period. They very clearly were an influence, and it is reasonable to ask, "Should we be okay with that?" My answer is yes--but for very different reasons from yours, which (by and large) I have not felt were particularly great. And this one, making it deeply personal for no reason, simply reinforces that belief.