Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5915945" data-attributes="member: 59506">I've only just now caught up on this thread. So my apologies if it seems overlong. I came across a few posts I wanted to respond to and some assumptions I wanted to explore. Starting here:<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  First, to answer the question "why does that have to be Lawful Good..." My answer would be it doesn't, but I'll get to that later. The reason why it has been that way in D&D is because of the part of the above description that talks about being "Chivalrous". Being Chivalrous means adhering to the concept of Chivalry. So the roots of this requirement are therefore grounded in sources that far predate D&D, making it not simply just a D&D sacred cow. Since like some of those who left comments to the above post, I too like facts...so I thought I'd bring in all the facts.  So, in short, the above concept of Chivalry defines a moral outlook best modeled in D&D alignment as Lawful Good. However, I said I like all the facts...and the facts don't end with Chivalry. A problem arises when one blanketly assigns the concept of Chivalry to Charlemagnes Paladins (the origin of the usage of Paladin for the class name). That problem is: not all of Charlemagne's Paladins were Chivalrous...and not all of Charlemagne's Paladins were even Knights! Typically there are 12 Paladins of Charlemagne, though who they are varies from story to story. These stories originated in the 12th century and continued through the 15th century. Of the most common ones, along with the classic Knights like Roland (Orlando), there are also:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Archbishop Turpin (a Priest)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Ogier the Dane (sometimes a converted pagan Northman Warrior, sometimes a hostage of Charlemagne)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fierabras (a converted Saracen Warrior)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Maugris (a Sorcerer)</li> </ul>Also, although Charlemagne's Paladins are a source for the D&D Paladin class (along with the Knight's of the Round Table), aspects of it also come from the Mendicant Crusading Knight (such as Templars, Hospitalers, etc.). Such things as Detecting Evil, Laying on Hands, and limited spell use are most certainly not from the Medieval stories of King Arthur's or Charlemagne's Knights. Although, the real Crusading Knights did not have these abilities either (obviously), those powers are most certainly "Priest-like", and Crusading Knights are Warrior Priests (though also don't completely fit with the D&D Warrior Priest). A Mendicant Crusading Knight (mendicant in this context meaning forbidden to own property, like a christian monk or priest) was required to take religious vows (which were very similar to a priest or monk) including poverty, chastity, piety, and obedience. They also had to follow a very strict code of conduct in their daily and martial duties. For example, Templars originally followed a code called the Latin Rule made up of 72 rules, and that later grew to several hundred. These rules outlined things like how many horses one could have (though they still "belonged" to the order), what armor and weapons they were required to maintain (provided by the order), and even such things as how often they could eat meat, and that they should eat in silence. For comparison, the Priest class' origins come from the aforementioned Archbishop Turpin (one of Charlemagne's Paladins...), the real-life Bishop Odo of Bayeux, and fictional sources like the undead hunting clergy of movies and literature (turning undead ability)...as well as some aspects of the Mendicant Crusading Knight. However, unlike the Crusading Knight, they were originally forbidden to use weapons that shed blood (as the shedding of blood was forbidden by the religious vows of a Priest) so instead used clubs or maces (however, we certainly know better today that such weapons most assuredly do shed blood, and can inflict wounds that sometimes are much more gruesome than sword wounds...). And the Cleric (the non-Warrior Priest) was simply to model Priests of non-Christian based deities, and to get away from Armor and primarily fighting. So in summation:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Paladin<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Origins lie in the Fictional Chivalrous Knights of King Arthur and Charlemagne, and certain aspects of the Mendicant Crusading Knights such as Templars and Hospitalers.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Take their name from Charlemagne's Paladins (even though Charlemagnes Paladins also include a Priest, Barbarian Norse Warrior, Islamic Saracen Knight, and a Sorcerer).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Was required to be Lawful Good to reflect the moral code they live by, derived from the Code of Chivalry found in Medieval Europe.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Priest<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Origins lie in the Fictional Archbishop of Turpin (as opposed to the real-life person), the real-life Bishop Odo of Bayeux, and the undead hunting clergy of horror movies and literature...as well as aspects of the Mendicant Crusading Knight.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Cleric (non-Warrior Priest)<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Modelling specific non-Christian priests of other deities.</li> </ul></li> </ul><img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses    B-)" data-shortname="B-)" />  One, the D&D Paladin comes from numerous sources as described above, and isn't quite as clear cut as people always state. Second, many people don't get exactly what the D&D Paladin is (especially as the class has become it's own archetype somewhat divorced from it's roots, and D&D has become a genre unto itself)...but I don't think any of that entitles anyone to be rude to them. Third, I doubt anyone but SLOTHmaster is qualified to say what he does or doesn't "get".<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />    As I said above, I don't believe that the D&D Paladin must remain the way it always has been. If there is any one constant to D&D, it's that it continuously evolves and redefines itself. So in large part, I agree here with hafrogman. Also, having a system that allows people to play a Paladin like hafrogman wants, in no way means that B.T. can't also play a Paladin the way he wants. It can be different at each and every table, and still be D&D. Just as the next editions rules can allow for both approaches, and also still be D&D. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses    B-)" data-shortname="B-)" />    I drown them to determine if they are Witches. If they float, they are. If they drown, they weren't. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />   That may not be entirely true... <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/did-hasbro-send-real-life-goons-harass-toy-182434806.html" target="_blank">Did Hasbro send real-life goons to harass a toy gun blogger? | Technology News Blog - Yahoo! News</a> (just joking...)<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification