Do paladins work in most games?

[Elf Witch]

After everything that has happened in our game the last few sessions and reading the many threads on paladins I have a question. Giving the restrictions placed on them are they playable in most adventuring parties?

I am finding it rather diffcult in my one game because the paladin and the rest of the party often lock horns on what to do next or what do in a given situation.
I know I get frustrated and so does the player playing the paladin.

I am starting to think that if I ever DMed I would not allow a paladin umless the party was made up either all lawful good or lawful neutral types and they all basically had the same goals for their characters.

I really think a lot of fun is being spoiled for everyone in the game including the player playing the paladin. I have had to ask myself why he chose to bring this character in with the party having several amoral types and a leader who at his best was lawful neutral at his worse lawful evil. I had doubts when it happend I even spoke to the DM and expressed them and it seems that my doubts are being fulfilled.

 

[reiella]

After everything that has happened in our game the last few sessions and reading the many threads on paladins I have a question. Giving the restrictions placed on them are they playable in most adventuring parties?

I am finding it rather diffcult in my one game because the paladin and the rest of the party often lock horns on what to do next or what do in a given situation.
I know I get frustrated and so does the player playing the paladin.

I am starting to think that if I ever DMed I would not allow a paladin umless the party was made up either all lawful good or lawful neutral types and they all basically had the same goals for their characters.

I really think a lot of fun is being spoiled for everyone in the game including the player playing the paladin. I have had to ask myself why he chose to bring this character in with the party having several amoral types and a leader who at his best was lawful neutral at his worse lawful evil. I had doubts when it happend I even spoke to the DM and expressed them and it seems that my doubts are being fulfilled.

I think your last paragraph sums up why you have the problems.

It isn't because your party isn't all LN or LG, it's because the party has many amoral types. And yes, that is trouble for a paladin, after all, a paladin is expected to adventure with folks who share at least some moral standings. There are a number of situations where a paladin would simply be incompatible with a party, due in part to their stringent alignment. Just as monks can have trouble fitting in with a more chaotic party, a barbarian fitting in with a bunch of aristocrats, or a wizard fitting in with a bunch of magophobes. It is more common of an occurance for a paladin and clerics of similiar gods I imagine.

 

[TiQuinn]

I find the paladin class to be innately disruptive and divisive, even with groups that are basically comprised of "good" alignments. I've just seen or heard too many examples of games that have gone to the brink of dissolving (or past it) simply because of in-fighting. It requires a lot of communication between the player and the DM. It requires good roleplaying and a clear understanding on what the paladin stands for, and what he doesn't stand for. And sometimes, it requires both the player and the DM to think about whether or not pushing certain issues in relation to the paladin are making the game and the experience for the other players better. I don't know...maybe I've just never seen a paladin played well. However, I got to think: How great can this class be if SO many people have horror stories involving them?

 

[Orius]

It isn't because your party isn't all LN or LG, it's because the party has many amoral types. And yes, that is trouble for a paladin, after all, a paladin is expected to adventure with folks who share at least some moral standings. There are a number of situations where a paladin would simply be incompatible with a party, due in part to their stringent alignment.

I'd agree. This is reallya situation that should be avoided at the beginning of a campaign. If the players go off and create characters that aren't going to work well together, you're going to end up with problems later on.

 

[reiella]

Hmm, after contemplating for a bit, I really can't fairly answer the question since I don't know much about most groups. My immediate post was more reactionary to a seperate problem than to the topic .

It's my experience at least, that most of my groups 'want' to be generally good guys and heroes. A paladin in those typical situations wouldn't be bad, and the moral conflict that may occur (occasionally/rarely) would only help to define the characters and their differences.

 

[Haradim]

As much as I like Paladins, I must admit I don't think they are a good idea in most groups.

From all I've read, and what I've experienced first hand, most players don't want to have to 'sacrifice' their freedom in action to accomodate the Paladin in the party. Regardless of their own alignments, they pretty much want to be able to do anything (even Evil things) their character wants/needs to do (in their opinion), without fear of criticism from party members. Most players are encouraged to avoid any kind of inter-party conflict at any cost, and thus, they don't want to have to deal with the Paladin first before they get on with the game. This is fair enough; I don't think most players are playing to deal with inter-personal/ideological drama, so it's often best to not have to deal with individuals that are supposed to be rather fortified in a particular mindset.

To add to that, though, many people are openly antagonistic towards Paladins, due to the reputation surrounding the class, and possibly out-of-game attitudes toward what a Paladin is generally supposed to stand for (ie, Goodness, and often, a religion). There are DMs who enjoy little more than making the lives of Paladins utterly miserable, and players are often quite willing to do everything in their power to cause the Paladin to fall (even if only to get rid of the rules the Paladin - and sort of by extension, the rest of the party - has to obey). It's common to hear stories of how LG or N characters will knock out a Paladin before they do something against his CoC, or how they will distract him while the Rogue goes and kills the prisoners, and so on; such players will then expect the Paladin player to ignore all transgressions, thus making the Paladin character a running joke.

It doesn't help that many Paladin players, it seems, have no real idea of how to play them, aside from the unfortunate stereotypes of 'it's Evil - kill it!!' and 'it's against the Law/my religion/my honor - you, my friend, must now die!!'. Some intentionally try to turn it into a joke, and others just don't realise what the class is actually about; DMs often won't tell players these things (as they themselves don't know).

At the end of the session, due to misunderstanding, pre-judging of the class, and people more than happy to destroy someone's character to have fun/get rid of what they see as a roadblock to their characters or the game, it ultimately makes Paladins a very poor choice in most games. You need a player who knows what they are doing, a group that is actually willing/mature enough to handle such a character, and a DM who knows where Paladins fit in their world, and can describe to the Paladin's player how they are supposed to act.

Unfortunately, most groups don't seem to have these traits, and thus, Paladins simply keep getting more and more difficult to play, simply because nobody believes it's possible to 'play one correctly' - even if it's often the rest of the group that proves the biggest problem with regard to playing a Paladin.

That's my bit, anyway.

 

[Nifft]

I like Paladins.

IMC, I separate alignment into Conduct and Sponsorship. A Sponsor is someone who gives you power, like a Cleric's God or a Cultist's Demon. Conduct is what you do -- it has no effect on your alignment descriptor, but it may tick off your Sponsor (if you have one).

In my current game, a Paladin has participated in a deal with a Night Hag to get information about an upcoming assault on a major city by Demons. The Night Hag wanted to make some further deals, to mutual profit, but the Paladin refused to participate.

To his God, he's done Good. He saved a city and did not give in to temptation.

I'm not going to screw with him for having not killed the Night Hag. However, she (and any other peaceful, [Evil] NPC) will continue to try to tempt him -- and the rest of the party -- into [Evil] actions.

-- N

 

[doghead]

I play a paladin in one game. I don't know what the alignment of the other players is. I haven't checked and I'm not going to ask. I'll go off what they do. So far they seem like decent adventuring folk.

I believe that there is a Code. I havn't read it. My character is a paladin of a nature deity, the master of natural cycles, rebirth and decay, that sort of thing. (ironically, its chaotic - should be lawful I think) We have only just started, so his paladiness hasn't really come into play. But he sees his duty to support his deity's goals (lawful) and protect others from suffering and harm (good).

Personally, I prefere the idea of allowing paladins to be any alignment. They are the knights of their faiths, whatever that is. LE paladins are pretty much the same as LG ones, but vice versa - Smit Good, Aura of Evil. Chaotic paladins are dedicated to creating chaos - Smit Lawful?

But anyway, I would be cautious about allowing a paladin into a game I was running. I would have to be fairly confident of the player's ability to co-exist with the party, to play the restictions in a creative way. It can be done, but it can be difficult. It would also be a plus if the player(s) accepted that if they can't find a way to do it, the paladin will part company with the group.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I've had a few paladins myself, only problem I had was an arguement when one of the other players wanted to break into a warehouse where he suspected someone suspiscious may be hiding. I said we should go get the authorities, and did so, but he was pretty peeved. He broke in anyway, nearly getting killed by a trap, but hey, whatever.

BUT, in another game, there's a LN cleric of a god of justice, and she has had many more problems caused by our chaotic manners. The person is changing out the PC for other reasons, but the friction was a part of it. I never tried to antagonize her, but at the same time, the DM uses her alignment as a tool to involve us in adventures.

As a DM, my only real "problem" came from a Druid that decided she'd never enter a city. The campaign up to that point involved traveling to that city, and they would be there a couple weeks before setting out. When they arrived at the city, she refused to enter. There were some other difficulties, and she left the game that night.

So, if your character is created in a vacuum, you'll have problems. If the party of rangers, rogues and general Sneakiness is joined by the fighter in full plate, or the Bard League for Peaceful Negotiation is joined by the Barbarian, Gore the Slayer of Children, things will go wrong.

 

[Nightfall]

Paladins work in groups where goodness, and occasionally lawful/honorable behavior can be tolerated or at least welcomed. In places where none of these are a factor, you get the usual problems.

Which is probably why when I centered the campaign around Silas, my first online paladin, the group worked well. (Course they all were relatively good natured in some respected. Even the gnoll who thinks he's kind of Ghenghis Khan of Termana. ) But in a group say where one is a High ranking High Magus and the rest are kind of following his lead, to upset authority, I don't believe it would work as well.

But like most say Paladins work best in the groups that can best interact with them.