Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7746132" data-attributes="member: 6683613">Why &quot;regardless of any ideals or purposes&quot;? The paladin is all about grand ideals and greater purposes. Quoting 5E because the book is at hand: &quot;...their loyalty is first to the cause of righteousness, not to crown and country.&quot;Why not? A character who is committed to upholding good laws sure sounds &quot;lawful good&quot; to me. The commitment you are describing -- to all law while remaining neutral on whether it's good or evil -- sounds like it might be something else.No, I am saying that in the mind of the paladin, they are synthesized into a single ideal. It does not follow from this that one part or the other is meaningless. You cannot easily reseparate the components of of a mixed drink, but that doesn't mean a screwdriver is the same as a glass of orange juice.But if they did enforce even the bad laws, well, it'd be the &quot;good&quot; portion of their alignment that was vestigial, wouldn't it? As I hinted above, I think the basic problem is that you're conflating &quot;lawful&quot; with &quot;lawful neutral&quot;. There is no &quot;neutral&quot; in &quot;lawful good&quot;. They are allowed to notice whether or not a law is good. I cite as evidence of this the fact that it makes lawful goodness possible, whereas your definitions seem simply to render it impossible.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 7746132, member: 6683613"] Why [I]"regardless of any ideals or purposes"[/I]? The paladin is all about grand ideals and greater purposes. Quoting 5E because the book is at hand: [I]"...their loyalty is first to the cause of righteousness, not to crown and country."[/I] Why not? A character who is committed to upholding [I]good laws[/I] sure sounds "lawful good" to me. The commitment you are describing -- to all [I]law[/I] while remaining [I]neutral[/I] on whether it's good or evil -- sounds like it might be something else. No, I am saying that in the mind of the paladin, they are synthesized into a single ideal. It does not follow from this that one part or the other is meaningless. You cannot easily reseparate the components of of a mixed drink, but that doesn't mean a screwdriver is the same as a glass of orange juice. But if they [I]did[/I] enforce even the bad laws, well, it'd be the "good" portion of their alignment that was vestigial, wouldn't it? As I hinted above, I think the basic problem is that you're conflating "lawful" with "lawful neutral". There is no "neutral" in "lawful good". They are allowed to notice whether or not a law is good. I cite as evidence of this the fact that it makes lawful goodness possible, whereas your definitions seem simply to render it impossible. [/QUOTE]

Verification