D&D 4E What will the paladin represent in 4e?

[fuindordm]

Apparently 4e is going to have non-LG paladins (of Asmodeus?). This might imply that all gods can have paladins, or just that the blackguard has become a core class variant of the paladin. This is not an evolution that I like much, and this post explains my views on the variants of paladin that we've seen so far.

DEVOTION TO AN ALIGNMENT

In my mind, the paladin's power comes from their devotion to a spiritual ideal, not to a god. In that sense, they are not unlike the monk. LG is arguably the most difficult ideal to reconcile with society, self-interest, and martial training. The paladin's code of behavior and training is a living sacrifice to the LG ideal, and the source of their spiritual strength.

A person with similar devotion to CE, on the other hand, makes no sacrifices and need practice no self-discipline. Where is the power in that choice? CG and LE codes of behavior require a little more effort, but not that much: the former permits a great deal of flexibility and rationalization, while the latter is still self-serving. Only LG behavior imposes a true and constant sacrifice on the paladin.

Another reason I like LG-only paladins is that it hints at another source of divine power beyond the gods. If the gods could make paladins, surely they would all do it--but *something else* bestows a measure of grace on exceptional individuals who follow the most difficult moral code. No one in the campaign world knows what, but the paladin starts feeling like a kind of miracle in this situation, rather than a variant of priest. For all the other gods, there are always clerics and fighter/clerics--paladins aren't really needed.

DEVOTION TO A CAUSE

Arcana Unearthed's Champion class is an excellent alternative. There you have a class which says "I will devote myself utterly to promoting and protecting one aspect of the world." All these classes make a sacrifice in that they put their lives in the service of a reasonably concrete and difficult goal--freeing everyone from bondage, protecting and spreading magical knowlege, the destruction of all life, etc... Note that most of the ideals Monte Cook suggested are likely to come up often in any campaign!

DEVOTION TO A GOD

The "chosen of a god" model for paladins works too, I'll freely admit. There has always been a lot of slippage between the "paladin as spiritual exemplar" and "paladin as divine servant" concepts--2nd edition clearly favors the latter (see especially the excellent FR sourcebook Faiths & Avatars), but I think 1st and 3rd edition somewhat favor the former. The problem with making paladins choose a god is twofold: first, you would expect each god to bestow different powers; and second, unless the god plays a quite active role in the campaign the paladin's goals are not greatly restricted.

The player may write down a code of behavior for the DM (which will probably be easier to follow than the LG paladin's code), but their character will have little in the way of practical goals or lifelong sacrifice. To exaggerate a bit, imagine a Barbarian who declares himself a champion of Thor, then keeps spending his gold on the proverbial ale and whores "because that's what Thor would do". Perhaps he has a practical goal as well: "slay all giants", which he ignores most of the time because the campaign doesn't have any giants nearby.

IN CONCLUSION...

None of this, of course, has anything to do with the paladin as a balanced, playable class. It all relates to the paladin's role in the campaign and to the 'implied setting' of the rules. All three variants are perfectly viable, but I think we can all admit that this choice will have a significant impact on the feel of a campaign. As you may be able to tell, I prefer the former.

Cheers!

 

[Rechan]

I dislike Paladins who are god-focused. I thought the Paladins were basically based off of Knights, who were first and foremost the upholders of a code. Ergo why they get a Mount and are generally full plated: they are the chivalrous knight.

So there's very little affiliation with a Deity there.

And I'd like to point out that one can have Bad Morals; moral codes aren't limited to LG. We just associate Morality with "Good" but morals are not limited to "Goodness".

I also think it's been expressed that the Paladins in 4e will still have a "Code" of behavior they have to act within, just like 3e paladins.

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

Whether they follow man's credo or a god's credo the one thing that is certain, they must be lawful.

 

[jimpaladin]

As you can see from my nickname my preferences are pretty obvious. Reading too many Gord the rogue novels always had me believe that the good powers along with Lawful Neutral provided the powers that made up a Paladin. It made it easier to decide whom the paladin had upset to lose some of his powers.

It then made it easier to redeem one's self by going to a cleric of the appropriate deity and atone. To me this made sense since why else wouldn't a priest of a LG become a paladin? hopefully this made sense if not I can post how and why if there is interest.

Don't want to threadcrap!

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Someone posted on here somewhere that a designer mentioned potential paladins of Asmodeus.

(whew, talk about "heard it through the grapevine!")

If that's the case, I think we'll get different kinds of paladins devoted to various gods along the G-N-E axis, though I agree that they really should maintain the lawful part of their alignment.

 

[pawsplay]

I'm thinking dedicated to a cause.... any alignment, any god, some abilities related to being a crusader. They will probably inherit the "cavalier" type abilities as well.

 

[Kerrick]

Considering "paladin" is defined as:

1. A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion.
2. A strong supporter or defender of a cause
3. Any of the 12 peers of Charlemagne's court.

I don't see any problem with having them be champions of a god. I even wrote up a Divine Champion PrC that does just that.

Whether they follow man's credo or a god's credo the one thing that is certain, they must be lawful.

They had variant alignment paladins in 2E, in Dragon Magazine, for ALL alignments. I don't see why they must be lawful - if dedication to a cause or a being required being lawful, then we wouldn't have clerics of any other alignment. And since the cleric's alignment must be within one step of his god's, either all chaotic gods would die, or we wouldn't have any of them either.

 

[fuindordm]

Someone posted on here somewhere that a designer mentioned potential paladins of Asmodeus.

If that's the case, I think we'll get different kinds of paladins devoted to various gods along the G-N-E axis, though I agree that they really should maintain the lawful part of their alignment.

That would be more palatable than allowing paladins of any alignment, to be sure.

I can see a sort of LN "paladin", dispensing justice to all without mercy. That would be even less fun for the party, I think, than the LG paladin. Who wants to play with an inevitable?

What would the code of behavior of a LE paladin be, though? "Bring the world under my rule?"

 

[Klaus]

I dislike Paladins who are god-focused. I thought the Paladins were basically based off of Knights, who were first and foremost the upholders of a code. Ergo why they get a Mount and are generally full plated: they are the chivalrous knight.

So there's very little affiliation with a Deity there.

And I'd like to point out that one can have Bad Morals; moral codes aren't limited to LG. We just associate Morality with "Good" but morals are not limited to "Goodness".

I also think it's been expressed that the Paladins in 4e will still have a "Code" of behavior they have to act within, just like 3e paladins.

I voted for devotion to a code. I don't mind the paladin following a deity, but one have to bear in mind that the paladin doesn't follow the code because of the deity. Rather, he follows the deity because of the code. If a paladin worships Heironeous, it's because he sees Heironeous as being as devoted to the Code as he wishes to be.

 

[Jared Rascher]

That would be more palatable than allowing paladins of any alignment, to be sure.

I can see a sort of LN "paladin", dispensing justice to all without mercy. That would be even less fun for the party, I think, than the LG paladin. Who wants to play with an inevitable?

What would the code of behavior of a LE paladin be, though? "Bring the world under my rule?"

Its been said in a few places that they are trying to remove the "mechanical" aspects of alignment, meaning it most likely won't be any kind of requirement for a class. That would be a mechanical aspect. I'm betting the class entries don't mention alignment one bit.