Nightchilde-2
First Post
I suggest they either buy or read the section in the Book of Exalted Deeds on what is good. That's usually all it takes. 
DM's and their Paladins
- Thread starter The_Gunslinger658
- Start date
Arrgh! Mark!
First Post
Galahad? He's a arrogant pig stuck so far up his own virtue he can't see the light of day.
No, the proper paladin is hard to come by. Perhaps Castiglione defines him, but thats perhaps. The oldest, bald samurai from Seven Samurai defines a paladin quite well, as does the youngest in his way. I'd say Arthur, but gone about doing evil things.
The Knight from the Canturbury tales also fits the bill.
No, the proper paladin is hard to come by. Perhaps Castiglione defines him, but thats perhaps. The oldest, bald samurai from Seven Samurai defines a paladin quite well, as does the youngest in his way. I'd say Arthur, but gone about doing evil things.
The Knight from the Canturbury tales also fits the bill.
Voadam
Legend
I took over running a campaign that has a paladin PC in it.
The player is real gung ho on the paladin concept and thinks the LG requirement and code restrictions are the coolest things in D&D. He has a bunch of ideas of good and evil and has had interesting in-game conversations, conflicts, and debates with my PC when I was playing.
I'm not out to ruin his fun but I don't plan on ever calling him out on alignment issues or adherence to the code. I don't DM to judge whether a PC is playing his character "right" or not. I want PCs to get into their characters and have them develop as individuals, not ask me "is this OK?" or "How should I handle this" The point is for them to run their own characters in roleplay, not to follow a script I write for them. Their choosing to follow codes is very cool, but I don't want to be judging their actions, I just want to present interesting situations and plots for them to interact with.
If I had the campaign to begin from scratch I would remove PC alignment and paladin mechanical rp restrictions entirely while keeping the rp notes in there as flavor.
The player is real gung ho on the paladin concept and thinks the LG requirement and code restrictions are the coolest things in D&D. He has a bunch of ideas of good and evil and has had interesting in-game conversations, conflicts, and debates with my PC when I was playing.
I'm not out to ruin his fun but I don't plan on ever calling him out on alignment issues or adherence to the code. I don't DM to judge whether a PC is playing his character "right" or not. I want PCs to get into their characters and have them develop as individuals, not ask me "is this OK?" or "How should I handle this" The point is for them to run their own characters in roleplay, not to follow a script I write for them. Their choosing to follow codes is very cool, but I don't want to be judging their actions, I just want to present interesting situations and plots for them to interact with.
If I had the campaign to begin from scratch I would remove PC alignment and paladin mechanical rp restrictions entirely while keeping the rp notes in there as flavor.
The_Gunslinger658
First Post
I dunno, alot of you DM's out there have a very regimented outlook on Paladinhood IE play them like fanatical followers of church and state, convert by the sword or die by the sword.
In my FR campaign, Paladins are have a bit more leeway, players can model their paladins as old western Lawmen, Dirty Harry type, or the traditional Knight of the Church. Basically make paladins enjoyable to play without the yoke of dogma around thier neck.
BTW I agree, Judge Dredd is not a very good example of a paladin.
Humans as Paladins only: To me this is what made the class so special, plus it gives the game a bit of the 1E feel. Heck I even toyed with the idea of level limits for non-humans.......but lets not open that can of worms.
Scott
In my FR campaign, Paladins are have a bit more leeway, players can model their paladins as old western Lawmen, Dirty Harry type, or the traditional Knight of the Church. Basically make paladins enjoyable to play without the yoke of dogma around thier neck.
BTW I agree, Judge Dredd is not a very good example of a paladin.
Humans as Paladins only: To me this is what made the class so special, plus it gives the game a bit of the 1E feel. Heck I even toyed with the idea of level limits for non-humans.......but lets not open that can of worms.
Scott
Arrgh! Mark! said:
Arrgh! Mark!
First Post
Yul Brinner? Well...yeeessss. But there are some differences between the two movies, you know
Kemrain
First Post
Tell that to Tull.Ovinomancer said:
Pendragon, I think you've had the best idea of a Paladin so far. A friend of mine was ragging on me for playing Rogue-type characters too often. Said I needed a change and told me that he'd never seen me play a Paladin. I told him he was wrong, and reminded him about the Jedi I played in our last Star Wars game. He conceeded.
If I played a Paladin in a DnD game, I'd be asking myself whenever I had a moral quandry on my hands, "What would Yoda do?"
- Kemrain the Padawan.
Veritas
First Post
I've actually never had anyone try to play a Paladin in any of my games, or any of the games I've been in... *I'm* the only person who's tried it, and my DM thought I did a great job. My character risked her armor and other metalic equipment when she attacked the villain's rust monster pet to keep it from ruining the rest of the group's stuff (they were running from it). Her sword was made of crystal, so it was immune, but she did lose her armor in the deal. The DM said that was the most Paladin thing he'd ever seen a player do... it was perfect. I just said "Well, someone's gotta do something, and I attacked without a second thought to my material possessions.
The character ended up sacrificing herself to defeat a possessed knife (I think this was a published 2e FR adventure, but I can't remember). To stop the knife's murder spree it was necessary to stab it into the heart of someone pure, and well... she fit the bill, so she sacrificed herself for the good of everyone. She came back later in the campaign as some kind of valkyrie kinda being in the service of Tyr. I thought it was fitting.
I've played Star Wars for awhile though, and anyone playing a Jedi in them was and is informed that I am very strict with dark side points. Under the old d6 rules, I gave out dark side points on more than one occasion for boosting your lightsaber damage when attacking normal troops, since it was overkill and unnecessary.
I even gave a dsp for a Jedi player using Affect Mind on someone to fudge with their memory just because they didn't want to go through the motions of asking the proper people for authorization about getting ahold of some equipment. The player made the assumption that they wouldn't be able to get what they wanted through normal channels, and used affect mind to get what they wanted... sounded like the epitomé of "quick and easier path", so I dinged him with the dsp. The player argued with me over email for a solid week and then quit the game.
Now, the player had been very troublesome in general, and this wasn't the first arguement I'd had with him, sometimes over hyper-trivial things (to my perception), so I didn't see it as a huge loss for him to leave, just so you know I wasn't being a complete ass. He still had a very skewed idea of what being that good was all about..
The character ended up sacrificing herself to defeat a possessed knife (I think this was a published 2e FR adventure, but I can't remember). To stop the knife's murder spree it was necessary to stab it into the heart of someone pure, and well... she fit the bill, so she sacrificed herself for the good of everyone. She came back later in the campaign as some kind of valkyrie kinda being in the service of Tyr. I thought it was fitting.
I've played Star Wars for awhile though, and anyone playing a Jedi in them was and is informed that I am very strict with dark side points. Under the old d6 rules, I gave out dark side points on more than one occasion for boosting your lightsaber damage when attacking normal troops, since it was overkill and unnecessary.
I even gave a dsp for a Jedi player using Affect Mind on someone to fudge with their memory just because they didn't want to go through the motions of asking the proper people for authorization about getting ahold of some equipment. The player made the assumption that they wouldn't be able to get what they wanted through normal channels, and used affect mind to get what they wanted... sounded like the epitomé of "quick and easier path", so I dinged him with the dsp. The player argued with me over email for a solid week and then quit the game.
Now, the player had been very troublesome in general, and this wasn't the first arguement I'd had with him, sometimes over hyper-trivial things (to my perception), so I didn't see it as a huge loss for him to leave, just so you know I wasn't being a complete ass. He still had a very skewed idea of what being that good was all about..
jester47
First Post
IMC, I made Paladins the PrC as detailed in the UA. Anyone that is interested, I ask that they read at least one Solomon Kane story. If they want to start off as a holy warrior they get to start off as devoted fighters or war clarics and have to follow the Code (It should look familiar):
1. A paladin may not injure an innocent or, through inaction, allow an innocent to come to harm.
2. A paladin must obey orders given it by military, civic and church leaders except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A paladin must protect his or her own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
This and the way I handle alignment should make the Paladin playable.
Aaron.
1. A paladin may not injure an innocent or, through inaction, allow an innocent to come to harm.
2. A paladin must obey orders given it by military, civic and church leaders except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A paladin must protect his or her own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
This and the way I handle alignment should make the Paladin playable.
Aaron.
