Paladin poll: How do you see paladins?

[Gothic_Demon]

Knight Protector

To those of you have have read David Gemmell, think Knights of Dark Renown, and the original Knights of the Gabala.

Paladins should be protectors of the weak and slayers of evil. They should champion the causes of those who are oppressed and those under unfair duress. They should seek out evil-doers and bring their crimes to a stop.

The Paladin is the strong Good who protects the weak.

A Paladin must be lawful because he must be consistent and true to his word, and he must be good to look after the innocents who need protection.

 

[Goobermunch]

This was the attitude in 1E and 2E but I think they've tried to steer away from the "knight in shining armor" in 3E.

I haven't read the Paladin description in the core rules for a while, do they even mention the words chivalry or knight?

Not explicitly, but the sub-text is still there. Paladins view every mission as a test, they gain power from their purity and devotion, they learn the class as squires, they get the horse, and the code is basically a chivalric code. I'd say it's close enough.

--G

 

[Khaalis]

Personally I disagree. The Paladin code has NOTHING to do with the code of Chivalry, nor is the code of the Bushido.

The code is very simple and straightforward.

People who quote such things as this to describe things that are unbecoming behavior for a Paladin, and they have no true place being related to the Paladin. This was quoted to explain how a Paladin's Code and their expected behavior are different.

Wearing clothes with the arse out of the trousers would be unquestionably unbecoming to a paladin.

My reply to this was:

Wearing pants such as this has NOTHING what-so-ever to do with being a Paladin! Hell it doesnt even have anything to do with being LG. This is a modern day view of morality and propriety speaking here. Being LG and being a Paladin does NOT mean being a Prude, nor Chaste, nor even Polite nor do their battles always fall on a field of honor! These are Chivalrous tenants and are NOT a part of the Paladin.

In fact there is a Novel set in the FR about a Paladin (of Tyr if I remember correctly) who is not only impolite, but rude, crass, dark, brooding, and a drunk to boot - but he slaughters evil and fights for the rights of the innocent - and thus is still a Paladin.

Comments like this mix personal views of Chivalry and Morality into the definition of being a Paladin. Following the tenants mandated to the Paladin in the PHB (as have been quoted dozens of times in these threads now) - what defines the Expected Conduct of a Paladin is defined by their code, their religion if they have one, and nothing else. It says nowhere that the Paladin must follow the Code of Chivalry.

 

[diaglo]

in the last 25 years i've only seen 1 paladin played correctly.

my respect for Mike Brock, the player, and Glenn Dean, the DM, can not be measured.

 

[Patlin]

Neither. Paladins can be more complicated than that. Paladins must always act for the common good, and should generally act in a lawfull manner. Within those guidelines they have a very wide range of acceptable behavior. A lawfull manner doesn't even necesarilly mean following the law of the land. A Paladin can be on very solid ground challenging the authority of secular forces in a matter he feels is more within the purvue of his church. For example:

A fugative, being chased by a mob, runs into a monastery's chapel and stands at the altar begging for asylum. He's accused of murder, and the lawfull authorities demand he be turned over. (I've stolen all of this from a Cadfael story, btw.) There could easilly be paladins on both sides of the dispute, one dedicated to upholding the church's authority to grant asylum and another dedicated to aprehending the fugitive. Meanwhile, a third Paladin might be withholding judgment and investigating the murder, to be sure they have the right guy. A fourth might see the whole thing as an unworthy distraction from whatever quest he is on, and might ride onward having faith that the monks and the guard could work this out themself. A fourth, convinced of the fugitives guilt or certain that the gods would aid the just, might challenge him to trial by combat and make his stand based on the outcome (becoming the fugitive's staunchest supporter if he is somehow bested.)

Paladins need not be monolithic.

 

[Faraer]

Well, the modern jurisprudence thing is obviously wrong. But the 'holy warrior' thing has always been a crock: clerics are the holy warriors, and I hold to the original conception by which paladins uphold law and good, and then their specific god. So neither.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

This poll is a joke. The key to asking polling questions is that you ask the questions in a neutral manner. The same goes for the previous poll. Hardly anyone will choose the Fantasy warrior bent on jurisprudence, but if you were to ask: "A fantasy warrior who holds himself to a high standard and reacts in an appropriate manner when he sees a chaotic or evil act" and "An indiscriminate slayer of chaos and evil. Kill first, ask questions later." I'd be surprised to see your results THEN.

Peace,

 

[Oscar carramiñana]

I vote for holy Champion of good what kick evil asses the justice are secondary evil must die
If an evil PC needs helps for a noble quest even good quest the paladin must kill the PC because are evil then goes to help for a noble good quest the Pal are good stupid

 

[Eddie Baron]

Holy Warrior

I finished playing one last year and I played him a follower of Torm (Forgotten Realms). That diety had no patience for evil and I played my Paladin accordingly. If he found out someone was evil, heaven help them. Though a few times he was able to convert some people that were borderline evil.

 

[CrusaderX]

I think paladins are like every other class - interpretable. Folks who try to bind all paladins to only one single mode are missing the point - if you wouldn't do that to the fighter or rogue class, you shouldn't do it to the paladin either. The class as written has flexibility to fit a reasonably wide number of roles and styles. Exactly how I work with them depends upon the campaign style I want, what my religions are like, and so on.

Agree 100%. The class is much more flexible than many people seem to realize.