Paladins and alignment

[gribble]

Just wanted to point out that there's no mention of a code on either of the Paladin pre-gens that we've seen. Given 4e tendancy to ignore/hand-wave "fluffy" rules (i.e.: anything that doesn't directly impact a dice roll or something else mechanical) and the necessity of this information to correctly play a Paladin without the PHB (one of the main points of having the pre-gens in KotS), I think it's a fairly safe assumption that it's gone the way of the dodo.
There may be some "fluff" text in the paladin class description, but I really doubt it's been called out as a "rule" in the class description (as it was in 3.x).

 

[Oni]

If there was still a paladin code, would it be the same for each deity, or would each deity have a different code of conduct for their paladins?

Thematically, the latter makes more sense to me, but that would be a lot of page space used on one aspect of a single class, and furthermore it requires every new deity to have a code of conduct for their paladins, and thus more work for a DM who uses deities not covered by published material.

I suppose that would depend on how detailed the code was. For me upholding the ideals of the god in question I would think would be code enough. Everything you need to know would be written up in the Deity's entry. If the diety is a god of knowledge and truth than lying is probably out, god of mercy and healing passing by a suffering man without the offer of aid is probably out. A paladin should exemplify whomever is their chosen god. They should never work counter to that gods ideology. I'm not sure what use there would be for a code of conduct above and beyond the description of what the diety is about, seems like that would be all the info you'd need.

 

[hong]

A 4E paladin is a divine champion, not necessarily a knight-in-shining-armour.

 

[Mostlyjoe]

In my Keep on the Shadowfell game our Paladin of Bahamut called himself a Paladin of Badass. He loved being a holy warrior with no moral code. Not to say he didn't have his own honor and fairness in play, but it was purely a thematic RP thing.

 

[MindWanderer]

That's almost exactly what my tiefling paladin/wizard is going to be like. His object of faith is himself, and his negotiation strategy is Diplomacy, Intimidate, Flame Burst.

 

[VannATLC]

My group's Paladin's have an allegiance, and a duty, to their god.
Divine Champions, and Divine Servants, as Hong mentioned.

There is no class-wide code. My current group has a Paladin of Gruumsh.
His core philosophy is Might=Right. He seeks to be a pure respresentation of all that is Gruumsh.

No Compassion, No Remorse. If somebody wasn't strong enough to stop him, they didn't have the right to.

 

[Green Knight]

Intimidate appears to be a Class Skill for Paladins, now. Say hello to Paladin Jack Bauer.

 

[Torchlyte]

I always hated the Paladin Code. It caused player vs. GM arguments and penalized characters with no bonus in return. Also it made them often unplayable in groups. So I'm glad it is gone. Lets just make it a religious warrior cleric/fighter hybrid thing and move on.

This.

Nothing like having others tell you how to play your character.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I guess my issue with paladins being the champion of gods is: we already have that. They're called clerics.

As it stands, the 4e paladins look like, thematically, "Warriors...who are slightly more religious then normal!"

 

[Intense_Interest]

I guess my issue with paladins being the champion of gods is: we already have that. They're called clerics.

As it stands, the 4e paladins look like, thematically, "Warriors...who are slightly more religious then normal!"

Why in the world would you want to be straight-jacketed into playing your character's concept as one and only one class? Especially when you want to play a more "Smite and Fight" Holyman rather than a "Heal and Feel" Holyman.

I'm surprised that you are decrying an increase in options here.