Do you use an explicitly stated paladin code?

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
Or do you just go with the "implicit" one everyone theoretically knows is how paladins behave? (Obviously, this is less applicable in older editions, when there was a paladin's code in the PHB -- 1E, at least, I don't remember if 2E had one).

If you use an explicit code, does that cut down on "paladin issues?"
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I use the code as given in the PHB (3.5e). I've never had a Paladin problem, but then I have had very few Paladins played in my campaigns.
 

The 3e paladin class has an explicit code listed in the PH, I'm not seeing a difference except in specifics compared to prior editions (no magic item limits, etc.)
 

Voadam said:
The 3e paladin class has an explicit code listed in the PH, I'm not seeing a difference except in specifics compared to prior editions (no magic item limits, etc.)
Given the amount of debate over correct paladin behavior (see any recent OotS thread), I'd say that's not explicit enough. :p
 

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
Given the amount of debate over correct paladin behavior (see any recent OotS thread), I'd say that's not explicit enough. :p

Or people are just being obtuse because it's a message board. It wouldn't be the first time that has happened here.
 




I don't go with an implicit one people think should be there, only the explicit one that is. And given that it is open to interpretation, I am very generous in how I let my players play paladins and interpret the code. Mechanical supernatural evil can taint them causing loss of good powers, but their codes are mostly self imposed (both players who played paladins in my games loved the code aspect of the class) and players do not accidentally fall in my game losing their powers based on how I feel they are acting honor wise.
 

Remove ads

Top