Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Brother MacLaren" data-source="post: 1342956" data-attributes="member: 15999">Interesting points.&nbsp; Here's where I disagree with you: I do think that the paladin's goals of defending the innocent, punishing the guilty, preserving Order, and defeating Evil are more important than the paladin's personal honor.&nbsp; A paladin who would say &quot;Better to fight fair against steep odds, lose the battle, and have the village slaughtered than to deceive the enemy with false information&quot; is not Good.&nbsp; Such a character is too selfish, too concerned with his own image.&nbsp; And if he is acting in accordance with a god's dictates, then that god isn't a Good deity.&nbsp; And, if this is the best Good has to offer, then &quot;Evil will always triumph because Good is Dumb.&quot;Perhaps part of our difference of opinion could be on what makes a deity &quot;good&quot; (and I know paladins don't need to have patrons, but assume this one does).&nbsp; The god asks the paladin to do something evil, such as sacrifice his innocent son on an altar.&nbsp; It's a test.&nbsp; What should the paladin do?&nbsp; Could a god capable of having paladins value obedience more than doing Good?&nbsp; Part of the issue is that the legendary paladin-type code you refer to comes from a mindset that is rather LN and worships a view of a god that is basically LN - obedience is paramount. I don't see the European medieval heroic knight archetype as necessarily LG, and therefore I don't see it as the definition of a D&amp;D paladin.&nbsp; And, because there are literal physical manifestations of Evil in the D&amp;D worlds that present a very real threat to the existence of all else, the Paladin *has* to succeed.&nbsp; Especially at high levels, where the party is fighting to save the world on a regular basis.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Brother MacLaren, post: 1342956, member: 15999"] Interesting points. Here's where I disagree with you: I do think that the paladin's goals of defending the innocent, punishing the guilty, preserving Order, and defeating Evil are more important than the paladin's personal honor. A paladin who would say "Better to fight fair against steep odds, lose the battle, and have the village slaughtered than to deceive the enemy with false information" is not Good. Such a character is too selfish, too concerned with his own image. And if he is acting in accordance with a god's dictates, then that god isn't a Good deity. And, if this is the best Good has to offer, then "Evil will always triumph because Good is Dumb." Perhaps part of our difference of opinion could be on what makes a deity "good" (and I know paladins don't need to have patrons, but assume this one does). The god asks the paladin to do something evil, such as sacrifice his innocent son on an altar. It's a test. What should the paladin do? Could a god capable of having paladins value obedience more than doing Good? Part of the issue is that the legendary paladin-type code you refer to comes from a mindset that is rather LN and worships a view of a god that is basically LN - obedience is paramount. I don't see the European medieval heroic knight archetype as necessarily LG, and therefore I don't see it as the definition of a D&D paladin. And, because there are literal physical manifestations of Evil in the D&D worlds that present a very real threat to the existence of all else, the Paladin *has* to succeed. Especially at high levels, where the party is fighting to save the world on a regular basis. [/QUOTE]

Verification