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
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6336006" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I made a version of this point upthread, and am going to repeat it in this post, as to me it seems pretty fundamental to the discussion.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I understand the other position. As I explained 100 or so posts upthread, I think it rests on an unstated premise, that equates "The rules do not preclude a player from writing any alignment on that part of the sheet after writing "paladin" on the class part of the sheet" with "In the gameworld, paladins are not held to any particular (perhaps narrow) calling."</p><p></p><p>I think it is helpful to articulate that premise, as I think it brings out more clearly what the real substance of the disagreement is. For instance: I read the rules as a set of instructions to (prospective) players. Further steps are needed to establish what is, and what is possible, in the gameworld. From the fact that the rules don't instruct all players of paladins to play LG characters, nothing follows about what is, and is possible, in any particular gameworld.</p><p></p><p>A rulebook that does not direct players who build paladin PCs to also build LG PCs is quite inclusive of a paladin archetype that requires LG alignment. It just requires an additional step to be interpolated, along the lines of a GM saying "Because in my gameworld paladins examplify a LG archetype, if you are building a paladin PC that PC must also be LG".</p><p></p><p>It is only if that step is somehow problematic - eg because the GM in question wants to treat the rulebook not just as a series of instructions to players but also as an exhaustive account of the gameworld - that I can see how any lack of inclusion might arise. (Though I can't say that I really understand <em>why</em> that step would be problematic.)</p><p></p><p>I find this very hard to follow. If you ride into town wearing bright armour, heal wounds and disease with a touch, and throw the town bully into the watering trough, isn't that some indication of your moral bent? Perhaps you're a villlain masquerading as good, but then that is possible even if all paladins must be LG (evil clerics can wear any armour and cast healing spells, after all).</p><p></p><p>You don't think the fact that the 4e paladin heals others by giving of him-/herself, or is at his/her best when valiantly defending his/her friends from harm, speaks to being the epitome of goodness?</p><p></p><p>Also, given that 2nd ed AD&D calls out such Knights of the Round Table as Gawain and Lancelot as paladin exemplars, I'm not sure on what basis you say that in D&D they would not be paladins. (In DDG Gawain was a fighter but Lancelot, Galahad and Arthur were all paladins.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, just for the sake of clarity - various pronouncements from canonical D&D rulebooks concerning exemplars of LG paladinhood don't count?</p><p></p><p>So where, then, is the concpetion of the LG paladin to be found, if not in those rulebooks?</p><p></p><p>But are you saying that new players will have trouble doing this if the rulebook doesn't tell them what alignment they should make their paladin character? You don't think they'll work out that if they want to play a knight in shining armour, they're probably looking at a character more good than evil?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6336006, member: 42582"] I made a version of this point upthread, and am going to repeat it in this post, as to me it seems pretty fundamental to the discussion. I understand the other position. As I explained 100 or so posts upthread, I think it rests on an unstated premise, that equates "The rules do not preclude a player from writing any alignment on that part of the sheet after writing "paladin" on the class part of the sheet" with "In the gameworld, paladins are not held to any particular (perhaps narrow) calling." I think it is helpful to articulate that premise, as I think it brings out more clearly what the real substance of the disagreement is. For instance: I read the rules as a set of instructions to (prospective) players. Further steps are needed to establish what is, and what is possible, in the gameworld. From the fact that the rules don't instruct all players of paladins to play LG characters, nothing follows about what is, and is possible, in any particular gameworld. A rulebook that does not direct players who build paladin PCs to also build LG PCs is quite inclusive of a paladin archetype that requires LG alignment. It just requires an additional step to be interpolated, along the lines of a GM saying "Because in my gameworld paladins examplify a LG archetype, if you are building a paladin PC that PC must also be LG". It is only if that step is somehow problematic - eg because the GM in question wants to treat the rulebook not just as a series of instructions to players but also as an exhaustive account of the gameworld - that I can see how any lack of inclusion might arise. (Though I can't say that I really understand [I]why[/I] that step would be problematic.) I find this very hard to follow. If you ride into town wearing bright armour, heal wounds and disease with a touch, and throw the town bully into the watering trough, isn't that some indication of your moral bent? Perhaps you're a villlain masquerading as good, but then that is possible even if all paladins must be LG (evil clerics can wear any armour and cast healing spells, after all). You don't think the fact that the 4e paladin heals others by giving of him-/herself, or is at his/her best when valiantly defending his/her friends from harm, speaks to being the epitome of goodness? Also, given that 2nd ed AD&D calls out such Knights of the Round Table as Gawain and Lancelot as paladin exemplars, I'm not sure on what basis you say that in D&D they would not be paladins. (In DDG Gawain was a fighter but Lancelot, Galahad and Arthur were all paladins.) Again, just for the sake of clarity - various pronouncements from canonical D&D rulebooks concerning exemplars of LG paladinhood don't count? So where, then, is the concpetion of the LG paladin to be found, if not in those rulebooks? But are you saying that new players will have trouble doing this if the rulebook doesn't tell them what alignment they should make their paladin character? You don't think they'll work out that if they want to play a knight in shining armour, they're probably looking at a character more good than evil? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Anyone Unhappy About Non-LG Paladins?
Top