Paladins and the Mentally Instable People that Play Them

[Celebrim]

I suppose there is always one.

My first encounter with a dysfunctional gamer was with a Satanist that insisted on playing devil worshipping assassins.

I latter went on to meet a Vampire LARPer that had obvious difficulties separating his character's identity from his own identity. Actually, I met a couple of those that seemed to suffer the delusion to one degree or the other.

I can't say I've ever had any problems with anyone playing a paladin though. In fact, the most obnoxious groups I've suffered through sessions with in thought Paladins were for dweebs.

 

[Nifft]

I've got one player who's playing a Paladin (a Paladin/Monk actually... and from the nation to the south... but not a girl). He's excellent, and he's done a good job of keeping himself true while not holding the party back.

There were also two other players who wanted to play Paladins, one of whom lasted for 1 session and the other of whom didn't last quite that long. Less excellent, and in at least one case, less stable.

In any case, I suspect the bad Paladin players are first and foremost bad players, who would be bad at any class, but who see the Paladin as a way to excuse their badness... same thing with someone who wants to play a CN Kender, I bet.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Wik]

Hunh. The Paladins in my game are never played by the crazies. In fact, most of my favourite characters I've had in my games were paladins. IN fact, the paladin in my game is my favourite character - he's cool.

That being said, I have had a crazy in my game. He was a good friend of mine who took way too many drugs in high school, and it rolled over into every aspect of his life. Because he really loved D&D, the D&D was what affected his insanity. What I mean is, he would wander the streets and "Cast spells" at people. Last I saw him, he was telling me how he ordered a phaser over the internet and how he figured out the secret to actual spellcasting - had something to do with "self-actualization".

He never played a paladin, to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Chimera]

One reason that I house rule the idea that someone playing a Paladin has to be approved by the group as a whole is the very idea that Paladins tend to warp groups into their service. The game starts to focus on that character, it's ideals and it's service; to the exclusion or reduction in the service of the other characters at the table.

The "this one guy always plays the same character" bit is something completely different. Sucks for you that they occupy the same player as the paladin problem. My solution has been to tell the person that they have to play something else (after about the third time they play the same character), or that I won't be playing with them anymore.

[i[Harumph! Harumph! How dare you tell me what to play![/i]

Yeah, good for you.
Play that one character the entire rest of your life.
In another group.
Did ya ever think that someone else might want to be the (insert class here) this time?
Did ya ever consider playing something else JUST ONCE???

 

[jdrakeh]

That said, I can see how certain types of problem players might be more inclined to play paladins. . .

That's the key, I think. . . I've seen both perfectly fine players and perfectly problematic players roll up paladina. That said, without fail, the problem paladin players were always of the same sort. . . self-righteous sorts with some serious control issues (which describes the OP's guy perfectly). Let's call them "hostage takers".

Such players, IME, always want the spotlight to be on them and will go to absurd lengths to assure that it is, including engaging in deliberately odd (or otherwise attention-grabbing) behavior away from the game table -- such as the olive oil crosses thing. When they fail to obtain this attention, they usually do one of two things -- they either leave the game or actively try to ruin it for everybody else.

I've seen the situation end in both of these ways and vastly prefer the first, as it saves me the trouble of having to tell somebody that the group is tired of their crazy, manipulative, BS and wants them gone (which is never a fun thing to tell anybody, no matter how much part of you may want to say it).

 

[Wraith-Hunter]

As others have said, it is the person who has a problem. I would find out what the other players think about having him play. If everyone else is having a problem with him I would listen to them. If they haven't spoken up about his antics they may just be trying to be nice and not make waves. But I bet dimes to dollars they are tired of him playing. It might be best for the group to not have him play. You can still hang out if you want to but he may be putting a damper on most of the other players.

I doubt you can reason with him. His thought processes will be different than yours. He may even see playing a paladin as a way to witness to the players. If that is the case what he is doing would in his mind be gods will. Maybe I'm wrong but I have quite a bit of experience with people like him. Though never playing D&D just real life stuff. They would be the typical D&D is satanic people. Just as hard to reason with him as the guy who thinks/acts like his vampire character (known some of those). Dosn't matter what the particular delusion is, relating to people in this state is difficult to say the least.

In regards to the Paladin class. Last group I was a player in (2e time frame) The DM, a Christian, loved the paladin class. It was common (at least the 2 Paladins I saw played) got some magic armor and sword at first level others didn't have such equipment. It was supposed to be 'secret' but wasnt. Anyway he also happened to enforce the Lawfull Stupid/err I mean Good alignment. If you didn't play Lawful Stupid you lost your abilities. His view of LG was such that to this day the phrase 'Lawful Good' makes me throw up in my mouth alittle bit. It was very fustrating playing when there was a Paladin in the group. To every one but the DM. He was normally a very good DM but with this one class and alignment it was a real pain. After awhile everybody refused to play a paladin 1. because they did not want to get railroaded and his version of LG was really LS 2. The rest of the party was sick of playing a back seat to the paladin. So if we invited new players we would all tell them NOT to play a paladin just trust us. (It was funny when one of the other players and myself when hanging out got to talking about it and admited to telling people we invited to the group not to play one, we both did this seperately).

It brought the fun level down to the point where the rest of the party was just about ready to kill the paladin ourselves. (Hense my suggestion about asking the player to leave, that kind of thing makes you wish you went to the movies instead) At times you almost didn't want to bother playing. Again this problem is totally a player/DM problem not a rules problem. Though I am of the mind that the Paladin should be a PrC.

The people who played them were not religious, or anti-religious just average people. But the DM's religion was THE factor that made the class painful at the game table. It was wierd because clerics were fine and we was a good DM in all the other aspects it was just that one class.

 

[jdrakeh]

The people who played them were not religious, or anti-religious just average people. But the DM's religion was THE factor that made the class painful at the game table.

Umm. . .

And, from this point forward, just to be be 100% clear - we don't want to see anyone in this thread try to lay the problem on religion. That will not be tolerated.

 

[Nightfall]

I guess no one is going to disagree I'm mentally unstable huh?

 

[jdrakeh]

I guess no one is going to disagree I'm mentally unstable huh?

Well, you do have a fetishist obsession with Scarred Lands. . .

[

Spoiler

. . . but since I shared that obsession once, I can't criticize you for it with a clean conscience.

]

 

[Nightfall]

Well no one said you had to have a clean conscience to criticize my obsessions.