Lawful Stupid Paladins (Got your Attention?)

[Kargin el Tomath]

On another note, i have to say that if you really want to call yourself a roleplayer, then play a Lawful "Stupid" Paladin to it's fullest. Not only will you entertain the other players but you will also find yourself trying to figure ways out of situations that you would have never thought of before.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

I liked everything that you wrote but this. Why? It just makes no sense what so ever.

If a Paladin has just kicked down a door then he has no idea who is on the other side. The orc there could be evil or it could be the LG nice to his grandmother orc who has come to visit his relatives. So your Paladin is killing someone based on racial assumptions. That is evil to end.

On the other hand if you sneak in to kill a known villian then you are merely using the most effective and least dangerous method to defeat obviously a foe you know is evil and should be destroyed.

Surprised opponent: This is the one that is gray and difficult to define. If a paladin opens a door and finds a surprised orc on the other side, I think he's perfectly within his rights to cut the beast down, thanking God for his quick reflexes. On the other hand, if a paladin snuck through the shadows in order to take out a villain from hiding with surprise attacks, I'd ding him for that.

-Tacky

 

[reapersaurus]

If a Paladin has just kicked down a door then he has no idea who is on the other side. The orc there could be evil or it could be the LG nice to his grandmother orc who has come to visit his relatives. So your Paladin is killing someone based on racial assumptions. That is evil to end.

Don't let SHARK and the "Paladin-as-slayer" camp hear you saying that.

 

[cerberus2112]

Maybe an example of a "paladin" in action would be helpful. I always thought that El Cid (from the Charlton Heston movie) was the perfect example of a paladin. He dealt with tough moral choices, and always did what he felt was the right thing to do, even when it made his own life more difficult. Does anyone else have any examples from literature or history?

 

[JLXC]

I think the main problem people have with ANY Good character, especially Paladins, is that sometimes they MIGHT have to sacrifice themselves for their beliefs. Since most people in this world tout "No belief is worth dying for" they simply refuse to try to understand Good. Good people act. Good people TRY. Neutral people know what would be Right to do but lack the beliefs to actually do it.

5 men raping a woman in an alley.

Unarmed man sees it and runs to the nearest authority to get help. Neutral.

Unarmed man bravely steps up and yells "Stop that! HELP HELP!!!!" and tries SOMETHING for gods sake. Throws rocks. Bangs lids. DOES SOMETHING to distract the guys or stop them. GOOD.

Sure the GOOD guy might very well die. That's the DIFFERENCE between good and neutral.

If you THINK you are Good (so do most EVIL people BTW) then your Actions prove it. Good is not about thinking. Good is about Actions in 3E. (I argue Real Life as well) It might not be smart or safe to attempt to interfere when a group of trolls comes tearing into a town. Self preservation is the Hallmark of neutral and evil.. you CAN play those alignments! (Most do) A GOOD character would TRY to do something, even if it seems feeble, and fails.

You may think you WIN D&D by living and gaining levels and gold... that's one way to play. I feel it is the most "realistic" and therefore shallow and heartless way.

You could play D&D trying mighty deeds that sometimes fail. You may even have to roll up a new character. At least you TRIED. YMMV and usually does.

 

[JLXC]

Bump. The last thread dissapeared too fast. Come on people. Let's Duke it out!

Let's put your shades of Gray Heroes up against the Good Alignment and see how you fare! Good does not Equal Neutral. Too many people think it does.

 

[Falcon]

What might be interesting is to have us post characters from books, movies, and real life who you consider to be paladins, and why.

I am personally of the opinion that every deity and code can have a holy warrior, and that, in order to secure the graces and power that come with the particular deity or code, a paladin/holy warrior will need to determine the conseqeunces of their actions. As with every other one who preceeded them. No one is perfect, but people can try to do their best. The fallacy of the paladin tension in games is that everyone expects a paladin to be perfect. If a player honestly wrestles with the moral consequences of their actions, then they are playing a proper paladin. A DM should develop scenarios that allow the paladin several choices, not the simple cop-out of choice X is right, choice Y is wrong.

Watch Excalibur or any other movie on knights. They are continually portrayed as a human with all our foibles trying to maintain an ideal. They do the best they can.. Address the potential of the paladin; don't force them into actions of suicide or eternal repentance.

 

[Pielorinho]

JLXC, I think you have an interesting viewpoint; however, I think you're confusing "good" with "heroic." And I also think that there are plenty of really fun ways to play RPGs without being a saintly potential martyr.

Personally, my favorite characters are NOT heroic by nature. I like playing characters who believe in doing good works, but who struggle with issues like fear, selfishness, laziness, and the like. If they eventually perform a heroic task, kudos; but if they don't, well, I'll have fun getting inside their heads.

Paladins, however, are different. They don't just have to be good: they have to be heroic, IMC. Since there's no "ends justifies the means" for a paladin, they don't get to be sneaky or dishonest.

Daniel

 

[sword-dancer]

Maybe an example of a "paladin" in action would be helpful. I always thought that El Cid (from the Charlton Heston movie) was the perfect example of a paladin. He dealt with tough moral choices, and always did what he felt was the right thing to do, even when it made his own life more difficult. Does anyone else have any examples from literature or history?

Jehanne d`Arc


Literature

Storm Brighblade
Steel Brightblade

Solomon Kane
Galad WoT
Quentin Durward
Glorfindel?
Aragorn
Elendil?

Orlando/ Roland
Galahad

 

[JLXC]

JLXC, I think you have an interesting viewpoint; however, I think you're confusing "good" with "heroic." And I also think that there are plenty of really fun ways to play RPGs without being a saintly potential martyr.

Personally, my favorite characters are NOT heroic by nature. I like playing characters who believe in doing good works, but who struggle with issues like fear, selfishness, laziness, and the like. If they eventually perform a heroic task, kudos; but if they don't, well, I'll have fun getting inside their heads.

Paladins, however, are different. They don't just have to be good: they have to be heroic, IMC. Since there's no "ends justifies the means" for a paladin, they don't get to be sneaky or dishonest.

Daniel

Well to me Heroic and Good are pretty much close friends. In 3E D&D they are REALLY good friends.

You CAN play D&D however you wish, I have never stated otherwise. People do play in many Neutral based games and have a blast! My RttToEE campaign is Neutral based. They have a ball.

Just because someone is GOOD does not mean they are PERFECT. They make mistakes, they can be lazy, fight selfishness, and all around realize they are Mortals TRYING to be good. Being Good does not put you in a little box of roleplaying that dictates every little thing. You can be Interesting and Good.

Most people can't stand the HERO types anymore. It's understandable considering the world we live in.

Paladins are different for sure, but their vision of GOOD should not be so Foreign to any GOOD aligned character. GOOD is GOOD. It's pretty simple. That's what scares many I think. Simple ideas, even correct ones, are BAD. Things should be complicated!!! heh