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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Paladin Alignments - More than just LG?
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="delericho" data-source="post: 6130157" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>I'd certainly agree with this. If nothing else, it wouldn't be fair to hold one alignment to a higher standard than another, especially given that the loss associated with falling from grace is so significant.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, I disagree here. For the Evil variants, I would suggest that they shouldn't be required to refrain from doing good, as such, but rather they should be required to actively do evil. And if a character is not evil enough (the Diet Coke of evil), then they should fall.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>At one point, I was looking at the possbilities of removing alignment from the game, but retaining the Paladin code. One of the things I considered would be that Paladins would be bound by a code made up of 4-8 specific, easily-stated oaths. (I actually lifted the code from the "Knights of the Old Code" from "Dragonheart".)</p><p></p><p>If the Paladin were to fall short of one of these strictures, the infraction would be listed as either a minor or major infraction. Of course, a major infraction would result in an immediate fall, after which the Paladin should seek an <em>atonement/</em> spell, and probably a quest to recover his powers.</p><p></p><p>However, for minor infractions, this would simply be recorded, and the Paladin continues as before. But if the Paladin should record a minor infraction on each of his strictures then, again, the Paladin would fall, and require <em>atonement</em> and a quest.</p><p></p><p>One further detail: the Paladin should not be able to use <em>atonement</em> to clear his record of minor infractions until such time as he has actually fallen. The reason for this is two-fold: firstly, it allows for the portrayal of a flawed Paladin (because once he's fallen short once on his oath of chastity, he might as well continue), but secondly because it just makes it all that little bit too easy - they can claim <em>atonement</em> when it's convenient and easy, rather than having to deal with the consequences of his character flaws.</p><p></p><p>But I never quite got around to implementing such a thing - truth is, nobody in my current group is particularly interested in playing a Paladin anyway.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 6130157, member: 22424"] I'd certainly agree with this. If nothing else, it wouldn't be fair to hold one alignment to a higher standard than another, especially given that the loss associated with falling from grace is so significant. Actually, I disagree here. For the Evil variants, I would suggest that they shouldn't be required to refrain from doing good, as such, but rather they should be required to actively do evil. And if a character is not evil enough (the Diet Coke of evil), then they should fall. At one point, I was looking at the possbilities of removing alignment from the game, but retaining the Paladin code. One of the things I considered would be that Paladins would be bound by a code made up of 4-8 specific, easily-stated oaths. (I actually lifted the code from the "Knights of the Old Code" from "Dragonheart".) If the Paladin were to fall short of one of these strictures, the infraction would be listed as either a minor or major infraction. Of course, a major infraction would result in an immediate fall, after which the Paladin should seek an [i]atonement/[/i] spell, and probably a quest to recover his powers. However, for minor infractions, this would simply be recorded, and the Paladin continues as before. But if the Paladin should record a minor infraction on each of his strictures then, again, the Paladin would fall, and require [i]atonement[/i] and a quest. One further detail: the Paladin should not be able to use [i]atonement[/i] to clear his record of minor infractions until such time as he has actually fallen. The reason for this is two-fold: firstly, it allows for the portrayal of a flawed Paladin (because once he's fallen short once on his oath of chastity, he might as well continue), but secondly because it just makes it all that little bit too easy - they can claim [i]atonement[/i] when it's convenient and easy, rather than having to deal with the consequences of his character flaws. But I never quite got around to implementing such a thing - truth is, nobody in my current group is particularly interested in playing a Paladin anyway. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Paladin Alignments - More than just LG?
Top