Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 1473311" data-attributes="member: 2067">Well, it just has to justify it, really. Dark Sun has never really justified forbiding bards or paladins in my mind. Having a &quot;dark&quot; setting in no way hinges on not having a warrior of honor. In fact, it makes such a character *more* interesting to play, because they're more an exception than ever. Why should the setting needlessly nix something that could add interesting angles to it out of some misguided perceptions that paladins in your campaign means that it can't be dark? Or that it's harder to be dark? If the world hinged more on &quot;it's overrun with demons and devils with no villages that are safe havens, so any paladins would be pretty much instantly destroyed the moment they are attempted,&quot; that's a pretty okay justification. But &quot;becuase people in this setting are morally ambiguous&quot; is not, because you can still have moral ambiguity with a paladin.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 1473311, member: 2067"] Well, it just has to justify it, really. Dark Sun has never really justified forbiding bards or paladins in my mind. Having a "dark" setting in no way hinges on not having a warrior of honor. In fact, it makes such a character *more* interesting to play, because they're more an exception than ever. Why should the setting needlessly nix something that could add interesting angles to it out of some misguided perceptions that paladins in your campaign means that it can't be dark? Or that it's harder to be dark? If the world hinged more on "it's overrun with demons and devils with no villages that are safe havens, so any paladins would be pretty much instantly destroyed the moment they are attempted," that's a pretty okay justification. But "becuase people in this setting are morally ambiguous" is not, because you can still have moral ambiguity with a paladin. [/QUOTE]

Verification