LE Paladin in Adventurer's League

[Tyranthraxus]

Just to put your original question into Context. Ive got 2 different players with 2 different Paladins in my Expeditions games. One is a LE Paladin of Auril (who if you dont know is a pretty cold hearted Bitch whose domain is Winter). He plays the guy as very noble.. very aloof but also inflexible on somethings.

The other is a Paladin of Helm who is more your traditional LG Paladin. Just, Kind etc.

 

[Pauper]

The other is a Paladin of Helm who is more your traditional LG Paladin. Just, Kind etc.

That's cool - I'm also playing a paladin of Helm in AL, but a LE one: he's clearly a paladin of Helm, the god of guardians (his Bond is "I protect those who cannot protect themselves," which is precisely the Bond you'd expect from a Helmite) He's also clearly evil -- his hero is General Cordell of the Golden Legion, who subjugated Maztica in the name of Amn and for the greater glory of Helm, and he carries that sense of paternalism over to any situation where he perceives that the people he's called to protect are weak because of their own backward beliefs rather than some temporary lack of ability.

This calls back to a point Mephista made earlier in the thread:

2) Look beyond just the alignment. That's just a shorthand for personality - you actually have several different aspects of the personality as part of the character generation process now. What is the character's personality, the flaws and bonds?

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...in-in-Adventurer-s-League/page2#ixzz3mm5YnUZ8

Some folks still want to equate alignment with personality; the earlier thread featuring the Evil, Neutral, and Chaotic characters and their response to a call for help is a great example. If Natasha Neutral is from that mining town, and her Bond is "My city, nation, or people are all that matter." (suitable for any alignment), then instead of treating the assignment like a job, she's going to simply say, "Yes, count on me." Likewise, Christine Chaotic is going to be a lot less skittish than her description suggests if the 'problem' the mining village has is that they're being ruled by a horrible tyrant and she happens to have the Bond, "Tyrants must not be allowed to oppress the people."

By this point, that paladin referred to in the original post should be level 3 or higher, so I'm curious what happened. Sure, a Vengeance Oath seems most reasonable for an evil paladin, but an Oath of Devotion still might work if the paladin has certain personality traits to support it: "No one should get preferential treatment before the law, and no one is above the law," (representing a devotion to law) or "I seek to prove myself worthy of my god's favor by matching my actions against his teachings." (representing a devotion to whatever deity the paladin serves -- the original post suggests Bane but doesn't say so in so many words).

It's also true, as Mephista points out in the same post linked above, that just because two gods are evil doesn't make them allies -- Bane and Cyric are much bitterer enemies than even Bane and Lathander, due to the former pair's wrestling over control of the Zhentarim in previous eras (not to mention that neither god seems to have much sway over them these days). Even two Lawful Evil gods might not be aligned in their goals and views of the universe. Resources like the Third Edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting can still be useful here, even if the specific information might be a bit out of date when compared to the current setting.

 

[Tyranthraxus]

THats because Alignment does somewhat reflect personality. Its a two way street. Ones Alignment is reflected in a persons personality and personalitycan and generally does dictate alignment.

Paladins have essentially become a variable alignment Holy Warrior for their God. They are the Militant hand of their deity and are meant to embody the characteristics of their chosen God. There are always the exceptions. the Paladin of a God who was chosen to become a servant and there was no personal choice on behalf of the character in question. Its the path many Warlock players take.

 

[kalani]

I have a LE Paladin of Tiamat (Vengeance) named Taevyn Blackwyrm (my main S1 character). She is ill-tempered, forceful and demanding and has a vendetta against the Cult of the Dragon. She sees herself as the Talon of Tiamat - an inquisitor; whose role is to weed out corruption within the church of Tiamat and excise the wound (kill them), clean out the puss (their supporters), so that the dragon may grow stronger. She made it very clear on numerous occasions that it was by the Grace of Tiamat that they were spared (as she acted on behalf of her goddess to save numerous peoples).

She is convinced that the Cult of the Dragon has manipulated Tiamat, and seeks to do her harm in some fashion and is on a quest to find evidence of her beliefs. She does not believe they have suddenly changed their tune, and holds a massive grudge against them for having corrupted the Dark Queens children for centuries and transforming them into undead abominations (Dracoliches).

Ironically, she has a competitive rivalry with a LG Paladin of Bahamut. They compete with each other to prove which is the better Dragon deity, and which of the two are superior. They don't actually seem to hate each other however, it comes across more like a sports rivalry than anything.

 

[DocSharpe]

One of the reasons that an AL DM *should* engage in conversations about what players are choosing for their characters is because there's a goal of everyone having fun. While some people (for example, Kalani) have figured out ways to play an evil character in a way that is fun for other people...this is not the norm. Whether you're talking about alignments which are AL legal (such as CN and LE), character types (assassin murder-hobo), or a "concept character" (the pacifist fighter), there are choices which can be disruptive to the table. I had a table implode when the LG cleric decided to not heal the CN characters during combat because they were murder-hobos. ("I can't kill you, but I don't have to save you"..or whatever the Batman Begins quote is). After a few sessions and a few disastrous combats, the CN characters started leaving the cleric out to dry. And it degraded from there.

In the end, it is the player's choice what alignment or class/subclass to play. But as the DM (and unofficial organizer) I remind players (who are often younger and less mature) that they are playing in a group, and that it is their responsibility to figure out how their character fits into a group and why they are undertaking (mostly) heroic quests (I had a CN player complain all the way through Drums in the Marsh because his character "wouldn't be interested in saving villagers")

I still get LE and CN players, but they tend to be a lot more thought out as opposed to "CN: because that means I can do whatever I want whenever I want".

 

[Tyranthraxus]

I have a LOT of AL characters locally who are neutral in some description. Many LN, many CN.

 

[Pauper]

Yeah, I ran into a 'CN because they won't let me put CE on my character sheet' player at GenCon, and he nearly ruined the adventure for our entire table. It got to the point where my buddy's LG cleric actually walked up to him and threatened to attack him if he didn't cut out the shennanigans, and another buddy was actively trying to get his character killed so he'd have an excuse to leave the table.

Interestingly, there's a potential solution -- while the Adventurers League Players Guide says players should put aside their differences and work together, there's nothing that actually prohibits PvP in AL, unlike the previous OP campaign, Living Forgotten Realms. My gut feeling, though, is that this kind of 'vendetta justice' isn't likely to be any better, in the long-term, than it worked out in 17th century Italy or the American Old West.

--
Pauper

 

[skerritthegreen]

This is something hopefully the DM should help deal with.

 

[Tyranthraxus]

At a Convention? I dont think the DM would have time to help the player out with that. The issue here being that as DM's we can tell players a lot that they must read the Current season players guide. That they should.

And thats all we can do. We cant stand over them whilst they read the Players guide to make sure that they are actually doing so. We might get get a 'Yes , sure will' and they never do. Ive got players in my Encounters game who are level 6 and STILL do not have a Players handbook. Ive asked how they actually level up their characters and I wont repeat the answers in here (due to the fact that they are of a Pirate nature). I have actually printed out current season players guides so I know they have them but for all I know they are collecting dust in their car.

Like has been stated many times that we are not the police of AL. If people want to do the wrong thing, or the lazy thing we cannot stop them. We have to hope that they will turn over that gaming leaf and actually read what they should be reading.

I would prefer if table ownership of the Players guide was mandatory. Ie the DM could say 'Everyone here needs their own copy of the Players guide at the table' but I dont see that happening.

 

[skerritthegreen]

At a Convention? I dont think the DM would have time to help the player out with that.

If a player is going out of his way to disrupt a table at a convention, I would hope that the DM would take some action rather than force the other 5 or 6 players to suffer. Whether its just asking the player during some downtime to make an effort to be more of a team player for the fun of all involved, or simply using the tools he or she has as a DM to reign in or punish the PC. For example, the Faction contacts are in a lot of adventures. Having your faction contact ask you to work with the party might be helpful. Both the Zhents and Lords Alliance are on record as executing operatives that threaten the current 5-way factional alliance. The Mulmaster adventures always have a fairly powerful and lawful law enforcement group. If a player is disruptive at a con, you can always refer them to the event organizer as well.

The short version: RPing your PC is not a reason to make everyone else at your table not have fun.