Hijacked Thread in need of closure.

[Lela]

This thread will get shut down if it doesn't begin to skew away from the more political stuff. I'm not threatening - I'm not a mod - just suggesting, because I've seen this kind of thing happen before.

Though, I hope you admit, this has been one of the most peaceful discussions that even touched on RL religion and polotics. Quite amazing really.


[Edit: WOOHOO, Daylight Savings time just hit, according to my computer anyway. Yayness. Now it won't suck so much when I get up.]

 

[jgbrowning]

Maybe she'll change the name back?

In hopes of getting our thread's name back i again post the two questions that i think are the hardest to answer concerning paladins.


1. Why does Pelor care if his paladins lie, if by doing so they promote good? Why would he take away their power?

2. Why would a Paladin of Wee Jas lose his abilities if he passed by a peasant being attacked by a demon, because the paladin was ordered by his king to go with all haste and report to someone?

I want good ingame logic how these two gods can have paladins, but those paladins will lose their powers if they behave in a manner that MATCHES their gods belief system. Please dont respond that the paladins lose their abilities because they are LG... we know that were trying to see if there is a good reason why it has to be that way... Also please don't respond with how things work in your campaign cause everyone has the right to do whatever they want (and more power to you)... Were just trying to find an answer that would work as a general game/rules question.


thanks!
joe b.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

You ARE tenacious.

 

[Lela]

Re: Maybe she'll change the name back?

In hopes of getting our thread's name back i again post the two questions that i think are the hardest to answer concerning paladins.


1. Why does Pelor care if his paladins lie, if by doing so they promote good? Why would he take away their power?

2. Why would a Paladin of Wee Jas lose his abilities if he passed by a peasant being attacked by a demon, because the paladin was ordered by his king to go with all haste and report to someone?

I want good ingame logic how these two gods can have paladins, but those paladins will lose their powers if they behave in a manner that MATCHES their gods belief system. Please dont respond that the paladins lose their abilities because they are LG... we know that were trying to see if there is a good reason why it has to be that way...

joe b.

Care to give me FR gods that would work the same? I could help you better that way.

 

[jgbrowning]

You ARE tenacious.

only when i think its important. i think this is a big bad hole in the system and should be filled.

there is of course, a damn good chance that im an idiot.


joe b.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

The way I see i is like this. D&D has it's own fantasy milieu made up of archetypes loosely based on those from medieval European history and legend. The paladin is the holy warrior/knight archetype. There are no archetypes along the lines of the paladin for other alignments to be found in medieval European folklore. The evil equivalents, for example, are fallen knights, which are modeled quite well with the blackguard.

So, you might say, what? Well, look at it like this - D&D is, essentially, its own sub-genre of fantasy. The archetypes it has developed for itself over the decades help make it what it is. d20, on the other hand, is the truly "generic" version of the game. d20 is where altering the core classes, either by exclusion or inclusion, should really occur. What I'm getting at is this - getting rid of the paladin in D&D (as opposed to d20) would be akin to getting rid of the jedi in Star Wars. Some will contend that D&D is "generic" fantasy, but it really isn't. It's essentially its own fantasy setting. That's why d20 is a better place to try to effect such changes.

 

[jgbrowning]

Re: Re: Maybe she'll change the name back?

Care to give me FR gods that would work the same? I could help you better that way.

we'll what i was looking for was not the gods dogma or anything like that.. what im trying to fix on is ANY god that is LN or NG. just substitute any god who holds that alignment and then try to justify

1. why they'd only grant paladin powers to people who dont exactly match their beliefs.

2. why they CANT grant paladin powers to people who DO match their beliefs.

and

3. why would they punish those they granted the power to when they behave in ways that MATCH the gods alignment.


i honestly think there's no way of rectifiing such problems without breaking the LG paladin taboo..

joe b.

 

[Lela]

there is of course, a damn good chance that im an idiot.

Aw, you're just mostly Chaotic. Don't like tradition in anyway. Either that, or you find yourself too much like the Paladin and don't like it.

Then again, there is of course, a darn good chance that I'm and idiot.

 

[Lela]

Re: Re: Re: Maybe she'll change the name back?

we'll what i was looking for was not the gods dogma or anything like that.. what im trying to fix on is ANY god that is LN or NG. just substitute any god who holds that alignment and then try to justify

1. why they'd only grant paladin powers to people who dont exactly match their beliefs.

2. why they CANT grant paladin powers to people who DO match their beliefs.

and

3. why would they punish those they granted the power to when they behave in ways that MATCH the gods alignment.


i honestly think there's no way of rectifiing such problems without breaking the LG paladin taboo..

joe b.

Actually, I have a way (it works for me anyway). But I'm in great need of sleep and have to work in the morning, so I'll have to post it later.

 

[jgbrowning]

The way I see i is like this. D&D has it's own fantasy milieu made up of archetypes loosely based on those from medieval European history and legend. The paladin is the holy warrior/knight archetype. There are no archetypes along the lines of the paladin for other alignments to be found in medieval European folklore. The evil equivalents, for example, are fallen knights, which are modeled quite well with the blackguard.

So, you might say, what? Well, look at it like this - D&D is, essentially, its own sub-genre of fantasy. The archetypes it has developed for itself over the decades help make it what it is. d20, on the other hand, is the truly "generic" version of the game. d20 is where altering the core classes, either by exclusion or inclusion, should really occur. What I'm getting at is this - getting rid of the paladin in D&D (as opposed to d20) would be akin to getting rid of the jedi in Star Wars. Some will contend that D&D is "generic" fantasy, but it really isn't. It's essentially its own fantasy setting. That's why d20 is a better place to try to effect such changes.

Beautiful! I hadn't thought about this aspect of it... hrm...

What if lucas said there were "gray" jedi? The jedi that believe that good will perish before evil and that evil will kill itself so the only "true" path was balance? Would that hamper the Star Wars universe.. or expand it?

i think this is more of what im suggesting by allowing the paladin class to open up to other alignments. You'd still have your Good paladins (though we dont really have a core class evil paladin) but Star Wars does... hrm...

still don't fix the rules though....

joe b.