What *is* it about paladins that makes people nutty, anyway?

[Endur]

Essentially, playing a Paladin requires difficult role-playing decisions for ANYONE who isn't the RW equivalent of one already.

I knew there was a reason I liked playing Paladins.

 

[rounser]

I knew there was a reason I liked playing Paladins.

I think I've found one.

"Tithe more gold, girlie-man."

 

[davidschwartznz]

As far as I'm concerned, atheism is a system of belief, and is thus covered under the definition I posted. (the definition comes from a Unitarian website, a religion that includes atheism in its belief structure. I sought an all-encompassing definition.)

Then I don't see your point. If that's your definition of spirituality, then everyone has spirituality. Hell, I've argued that humans, as race, are "often Lawful Good". So, perhaps you could expalin from a different angle: Who, in your opinion, can't play a paladin properly?

 

[ForceUser]

Then I don't see your point. If that's your definition of spirituality, then everyone has spirituality. Hell, I've argued that humans, as race, are "often Lawful Good". So, perhaps you could expalin from a different angle: Who, in your opinion, can't play a paladin properly?

I disagree. Everyone can't have spirituality, because everyone is not concerned with spirituality. Those who are unconcerned with issues of self-fulfillment, or expurgating sin, or living a moral life, or finding enlightenment, or what have you; in short, those who live the unexamined life; are incapable of expressing what they do not understand, and certainly not through role-play. Some people get it; most don't. I don't know how better to explain it than that. Even an atheist is concerned with such issues--after all, atheism is a reaction against theism. If he is not, then I'd hazard that he's not an athiest, he's just lazy.

 

[Vigilance]

Paladins, frankly make some DMs batsh*t crazy.

I think the feeling is, at least subconsciously, that the Paladin gets more power than the other classes and in return should "pay" through a draconian code of behavior.

This was ok in earlier editions when the Paladin really DID get a ton of abilities, but in 3e the Paladin isnt even the most powerful class (that would be you Mr Druid) or even the most powerful of the FIGHTERS (that would be the... uh fighter).

In any event... there always seems to be brand of DMs who want to make the Paladin "pay" in some way.

 

[Aikuchi]

New to this forum, forgiveness if I crossed any lines.

Isnt the Paladin thing rather subjective?
If we're talking about faith and spirituality in regards to the actions a paladin takes as a representative of that concept, are they the champions of that virtue (concept)?

How does that differ them from clerics much?

The 'Lawful Good" alignment restriction simply narrows what the generci mechanic ofr a paladin should be played for according to the PHB. I'm pretty sure when it comes to trying to roleplay a paladin who is a champion for a cause (or deific portfolio) that there are many expressions to it.
The LG alignment is simply one listed (not imposed) in the book.

So what is the discussion here?

The 'roleplay' of the difficulty in handling the paladin class or the people who had trouble grasping the concept of a paladin (which may or may not confine themselves to the book definition and may argue otherwise with their DMs).

I'm Asian, and I consider myself rather spiritual but when I practice Shintoism or Taoism there isnt a deity I'm particularly campaigning for or a cause but simply a set of life rules. Hopefully I'm spiritual but does that make it difficult for me to roleplay a paladin? Or are the values of Lawful Good' too different for a Oriental leaning?


Sincerely speaking.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

"Those who are unconcerned with issues of self-fulfillment, or expurgating sin, or living a moral life, or finding enlightenment..."

The thing is, ForceUser, I don't think there are many people who are unconcerned with these things. I think a lot of them just come up with different answers to these questions than the ones you come up with.

Ken

 

[ForceUser]

"Those who are unconcerned with issues of self-fulfillment, or expurgating sin, or living a moral life, or finding enlightenment..."

The thing is, ForceUser, I don't think there are many people who are unconcerned with these things. I think a lot of them just come up with different answers to these questions than the ones you come up with.

Ken

In my mind, it's not an issue of having different answers; it's an issue of not asking the questions in the first place.

 

[rounser]

after all, atheism is a reaction against theism

There's a problem there. Just because I believe in Y, not X, doesn't mean that my belief should be defined as being a believer in not-X, except according to X believers who are putting themselves into a position of importance which they don't necessarily deserve. By doing so, you give X respect that it's not due in my eyes, because X isn't even on my radar, and doesn't even warrant consideration based on the evidence I'm choosing to pay attention to.

If your definition stands, I'm not atheist (1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. 2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.), nor am I agnostic (1. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. 2. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism. 2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.) because my opinion on god is a non sequitur to my belief system, and it's neither a reaction nor any more doubtful than anyone else's beliefs. The question which defines these terms doesn't apply, and is not put....except by theists!

 

[Crothian]

Who, in your opinion, can't play a paladin properly?

the people who post in this threads saying they can't

I don't think there is any link to spirtuality and being able to play a paladin. I think Paladins are a tougher class to role play and some people are just not up to the challenge but don't realize they have limitations.