Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Anyone Unhappy About Non-LG Paladins?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Savage Wombat" data-source="post: 6335342" data-attributes="member: 1932"><p>My point includes the case that one side thinks the definition is malleable and the other does not.</p><p></p><p>]</p><p></p><p>No, my argument boils down to that the "inclusive" side does not understand that they are not, in fact, inclusive of the other side's position. You continue to think in terms of "I define my character and you define yours" - when my point is that, when the D&D book writes up a paladin class for everyone to use, they will either annoy one side or another. I think you believe your rule "makes everyone happy" when in fact it does not.</p><p></p><p>I have at no time stated a position on who and how this tension between character concepts should be resolved - only that it exists and the official rules will have to come down on one side or another.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This actually demonstrates my point - that you think it's only the other side that "wants it my way". Everyone thinks their way is correct - you're trying to deny that there's even a reasonable dispute.</p><p></p><p> </p><p>I don't do twitter. Here's your sentence:</p><p></p><p>My position is that a paladin class defined as allowing any alignment is not inclusive of a paladin archetype that requires LG alignment - and that you are mistaken in thinking that this solution should satisfy everyone.</p><p></p><p>Put another way:</p><p></p><p>Your position, from your arguments, is (LG Paladin) is a subset of (Paladins of any alignment). I am pointing out that, to the people who favor alignment restrictions, (Paladins must be LG and only LG) is NOT a subset of (Paladins of any alignment).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Savage Wombat, post: 6335342, member: 1932"] My point includes the case that one side thinks the definition is malleable and the other does not. ] No, my argument boils down to that the "inclusive" side does not understand that they are not, in fact, inclusive of the other side's position. You continue to think in terms of "I define my character and you define yours" - when my point is that, when the D&D book writes up a paladin class for everyone to use, they will either annoy one side or another. I think you believe your rule "makes everyone happy" when in fact it does not. I have at no time stated a position on who and how this tension between character concepts should be resolved - only that it exists and the official rules will have to come down on one side or another. This actually demonstrates my point - that you think it's only the other side that "wants it my way". Everyone thinks their way is correct - you're trying to deny that there's even a reasonable dispute. I don't do twitter. Here's your sentence: My position is that a paladin class defined as allowing any alignment is not inclusive of a paladin archetype that requires LG alignment - and that you are mistaken in thinking that this solution should satisfy everyone. Put another way: Your position, from your arguments, is (LG Paladin) is a subset of (Paladins of any alignment). I am pointing out that, to the people who favor alignment restrictions, (Paladins must be LG and only LG) is NOT a subset of (Paladins of any alignment). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Anyone Unhappy About Non-LG Paladins?
Top