Pathfinder 1E Paladin Alignments - More than just LG?

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

I have never played either of those two classes, nor have I ever had a group where someone played one, so I'm not sure about how they really function that well.

I see that Samurai can be ANY alignment, but they are always supposed to be HONORABLE. I see Cavaliers can also be ANY alignment, but they must dedicate themselves to a CAUSE. They can't be mixed either according to RAW, but they both have orders in which they belong to. The orders seem very strict and very straightforward to me. They must do anything that they can to follow the edicts or else they aren't a part of that order anymore and therefore lose those powers/abilities.

I'd think that a CG or NG Paladin would function in much the same way that they wouldn't be confined or conflicted by the "law" part where a LG Paladin always takes that into account. It would allow for more leeway in order to get things done (at least that's how I see it).

 

[Stormonu]

I think it would be better for the game these days if they went with a more generic name for the (un)holy crusader; just go with the class name Crusader and let the appelation "Paladin" be associated with the Lawful Good guys. One class could then possibly hold the notion of Paladin, Blackguard, Avenger, Tyrant, etc. under one umbrella.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

So it sounds like what you are saying is that the class would be "Crusader" and then the archetypes would be the Paladin, Blackguard, Avenger, Tyrant, Anti-Paladin, etc?

If that' so, then it's an interesting concept except that there are already a bunch of archetypes for Paladins and Anti-Paladins.

 

[ImperatorK]

I don't enforce alignment restrictions in my games, and if I do, it's very rarely and for a good reason.

 

[Herzog]

Note that the UA alignment variants of the paladin are also in the d20SRD

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

Note that the UA alignment variants of the paladin are also in the d20SRD

Okay cool I see them here. So they are CG (Freedom), CE (Slaughter), and LE (Tyranny). So basically it adds 2 variants to Pathfinder if you go with a 3.5 conversion since Slaughter is basically an Anti-Paladin. I like the codes that they give for reference, I'll have to model mine for the other variant alignments which would add the NG Paladin and the NE Paladin.

Anyone have any ideas on some codes of conducts for those two kinds of Paladins that I can add to my house-rules?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm not sure if a code of conduct makes much sense for a chaotic good character, but their deity may desire the following (in exchange for providing divine power):

Unprincipled Characters (CG) Will . . .
1. Have a high regard for life and freedom.
2. Keep his word of honor.
3. Lie and cheat if necessary (especially to those of anarchist and evil
alignments).
4. Will not kill an unarmed foe (but will take advantage of one).
5. Help those in need.
6. Not use torture unless absolutely necessary.
7. Work with a group, especially if profitable.
8. Never harm an innocent.
9. Never kill for pleasure.
10. Dislike authority.
11. Never betray a friend.

Copied blatantly from Palladium. I don't like it's rules at all, but it does alignments in a much clearer way than TSR and WotC ever did. There's 11 parts and you might not like all of them, but at least there's now a basis for point-by-point (dis)agreement.

Scrupulous (Good)
Scrupulous characters (NG) value life and freedom above all else, and
despise those who would deprive others of them. This type of hero is
typically portrayed in many Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson films;
the person who is forced to work beyond the law, yet for the law, and
the greater good of the people. They are not vicious or vindictive men,
but are men driven to right injustice. I must point out that these characters
will always attempt to work with or within the law whenever possible.
Many cyber-knights are scrupulous.
Scrupulous Characters Will . . .
1. Keep his word to any other good person.
2. Lie only to people of selfish or evil alignments.
3. Never attack or kill an unarmed foe.
4. Never harm an innocent.
5. Never torture for pleasure, but may use muscle to extract information
from criminals or evil characters.
6. Never kill for pleasure; will always attempt to bring the villain to
justice alive no matter how vile he may be.
7. Always help others.
8. Attempt to work within the law whenever possible.
9. Bend and, occasionally, break the law when deemed necessary.
This means they may use strong-arm techniques, harass, break and
enter, theft, and so on.
10. Distrust authority.
11. Work with groups, but dislike confining laws and bureaucracy (red
tape).
12. Never betrays a friend.

Miscreant (Evil) - equivalent to neutral evil
This self-serving, unscrupulous character is out only for himself.
Power, glory, wealth, position, and anything that will make his life
more comfortable is his goal. It matters not who gets caught in the
middle, as long as he comes out smelling like a rose. This person will
lie, cheat and kill anyone to attain his personal goals.
Miscreant Characters Will . . .
1. Not necessarily keep his word to anyone.
2. Lie and cheat anyone; good or evil.
3. Most definitely attack an unarmed foe (those are the best kind).
4. Use or harm an innocent.
5. Use torture for extracting information and pleasure.
6. May kill for sheer pleasure.
7. Feels no compulsion to help without some sort of tangible reward.
8. Work with others if it will help him attain his personal goal.
9. Kill an unarmed foe as readily as he would a potential threat or
competitor.
10. Has no deference to laws or authority, but will work within the
law if he must.
11. Will betray a friend if it serves his needs.

 

[DEFCON 1]

One thing I will say is that I personally think it should be impossible for a Chaotic Good paladin to lose his powers like a Lawful Good paladin can.

Reason being is quite simple... a code that says "you will follow these tenets or you will be punished when you don't" is by definition lawful. Rules and consequences from breaking them are lawful. Thus... a Chaotic Good paladin code cannot have rules that must be followed or else. If anything... a Chaotic Good paladin is much more of a "I'll do what I think is right" kind of person, with his own personal code of conduct.

And I think this tends to be where the break point is between people who think paladins should only be LG versus those who want them for any/all alignments. Because for many, the paladin's code and rules of conduct is what defines someone as a paladin... and as soon as you remove rules of conduct (being a chaotic individual) by definition you're not a paladin anymore.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

How about for Neutral Good Paladins and Neutral Evil Anti-Paladins?

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

One thing I will say is that I personally think it should be impossible for a Chaotic Good paladin to lose his powers like a Lawful Good paladin can.

Reason being is quite simple... a code that says "you will follow these tenets or you will be punished when you don't" is by definition lawful. Rules and consequences from breaking them are lawful. Thus... a Chaotic Good paladin code cannot have rules that must be followed or else. If anything... a Chaotic Good paladin is much more of a "I'll do what I think is right" kind of person, with his own personal code of conduct.

And I think this tends to be where the break point is between people who think paladins should only be LG versus those who want them for any/all alignments. Because for many, the paladin's code and rules of conduct is what defines someone as a paladin... and as soon as you remove rules of conduct (being a chaotic individual) by definition you're not a paladin anymore.

I'd disagree with being impossible for a CG Paladin to lose his powers. The code for one would be following the tenets/teachings/dogma of his deity. So say I'm a Paladin of Cayden Cailean who is a CG good and I'm a CG Paladin who follows him. His most revered and strict tenet is going to be something along the lines of liberating slaves. He's a god of liberation and freedom.

Now using an extreme example: if I (as the Paladin) decide to buy a slave and keep them around as a slave, there is no doubt in my mind that the Paladin would lose his powers. I'd also say if someone in my party decided to take on a slave and the Paladin didn't stop them and ignored it, that the Paladin would lose his powers.

It'll be about the domains the gods/goddesses represent in the end. Purposely or willfully going against those would result in falling from their good graces. Their holy champions need to respect and enforce these whenever they see evil corrupting them. I don't think it'd be any different than a LG Paladin other than to give some more "wiggle room" in dictating "law" as opposed to "good." It just seems that a lot of people get caught up in the enforcement of law rather than what would be considered the best "good" alternative, thus putting a lot of these LG Paladins into Catch-22's.