Why aren't paladins liked?

[NeoDarke]

Well, a good paladin, and by good I mean one who plays one to the letter and intent of the code not LG, we already know he is that, would ask where information came from. This would be an example of a paladin who fell into the 75% catagory of not being played properly.

Sorry man, if you are a paladin and you know for sure that the player is a rogue, you have an obligation to not steal and to take information from someone who might steal, you have an obligation to stear them towards another end, to bring them to the light as it were.

Now, if the rogue never did anything underhanded in front of the paladin and he didn't know he was a rogue, he could easily take the information and not worry about his oath, but to say, 'Great! Now we can get out of here," is just taking the easy way out and that is not what a paladin is all about.

Sucks having a paladin and a rogue in the party cause it really limits the rogue. Of course your DM can turn a blind eye to this kinda thing cause in real life if someone told you this you, 90% of us would be like, 'Great! Now we can get out of here," and that is why paladins are not played properly, cause DMs and PCs use them for smite evil abilities and put the oath to the back burner. This is even more true when the game has very little role-playing and a lot of 'munchkining'

As a paladin you have a obligation to guide others and not do wrong, whether it is wrong you have done or others have done. By taking information gotten through less than honest means, you might as well have beat the man yourself to get the information.

I don't really see how having a Paladin and a Rogue in the same party harmful. To be hostest with you, as a Paladin i'd rather sneak through "who knows where" with the underhanded information (that the Rogue got BTW), then have to go through who knows how many guards who very well maybe good guys (But just happen to work for some evil SOB who your sneaking to or whatnot), because that's the only job they could get.

For that matter, the Paladin's I come up with are very down to earth. They understand that the world isn't how it should be (I.E. how there faith says), and that there is alot of evil out there in the world, destroying all that matters the most to everyone. And most of them follow there own codes of honor more then the law of where ever there at. Because when you look at something and you know deep down that what it is, is worng. But the law of the land says otherwise. What are you going to do?

I mean lets say your Paladin used to be a slave, and now here he is. A free man, and a Paladin of his order. And he goes into some land which just happens to has slaves, and that the law says it is not worng to own somebody. What would you do? I know what I would do. I'd do everything I could to free them. If that ment I'd nolonger be a LG Paladin, Then so be it.

And here's a book I think some of you should look at. The book is called Paladins by Joel Rosenberg. I thought it was a great book, and you see the pain some of these men go through, for Church and King.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Okay, again, reread the post above where I detail the pages.


Also, the original post was concerning why are paladin disliked or given a bad rap, not what a paladin can and can't do. But since it is turning into that, here goes, I am correct. The Paladin is supposed to be played as the moral back bone of society. Just cause you as an out of character player may take a rogues dishonest information and run with it doesn't mean it is the correct thing for a paladin to do. That would be an extremely liberal interpation of what a paladin can and can't do.

The bottom line is that if your DM is cool with you side tracking the paladin code, and yes I do know there is more than one code you can play by, and you are having fun and the party is having a good time, no worries. However, if you are running around knowingly taking dishonest information just for the sake of convenience or taveling with evil or known law breakers or whatever, then according to the books, you are not playing him right.

Just be happy you didn't play a paladin in first edition AD&D, pay close attention to rule number 4:

Page 22 PHB

The following strictures apply to paladins:

1. They may never retain more than ten magic items; these may never exceed:
armor, 1(suit)
shield, 1
weapons, 4
any other magic items, 4

2. They will never retain wealth, keeping only sufficient treausres to support themselves in a modest manner, pay henchmen, men-at-arms, and servitors, and to construct or maintain a small castle. Excess is given away, as is the tithe.

3. An immediate tithe (10%) of all income - be it treasure, wages, or whatever - must be given to whatever charitable religous institution (not a cleric player character) of lawful good alignment the paladin selects.

4. Paladins will have henchmen of lawful good alignment and none other; they will associate only with characters and creatures of good alignment; paladins can join a company of adventurerers which contains non-evil neutrals only on a single expedition basis and only if some end which will further the cause of lawful good is purposed.

5. If possible, paladins will take service or form from an alliance with lawful good characters, whether players or not, who are clerics or fighters or noble status.

In addition the paladin could not atone for his sins if he commited an evil act, period. You had to become a fighter.


This is surely where the paladin got a bad rap in the history of D&D.

 

[Ed Cha]

I like the paladin class. I just don't think it's played right most of the time. Being lawful good doesn't mean you have to be a goody two shoes. You could be self-righteous pompous ass who thinks you're doing "good".

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I always thought the 1st edition paladin was something with a bit flavour to it, but we never saw them because the stat generation method was 3d6 in order.

 

[Hussar]

Without more specifics as to how the rogue got his information, it's pretty impossible to make a determination as to whether or not the paly can use it or not. I mean, if the rogue hung out in a whorehouse all night using the gather info skill, can the paly use that info? I don't see why not. Hanging out in a house of ill repute is hardly an evil act.

Now, if the rogue beat the crap out of some little old woman for the info, then there is a problem. Then again, if the rogue beats up old women, he's evil and the paly shouldn't be adventuring with him anyway since even 3e paly's can't have evils in the party.

As I said, without more info, we can't really say one way or the other. Now, granted with a paly in the party, you can't have that evil rogue. Oh, boo hoo. The majority of parties out there are neutral or good aligned anyway. No evils is a pretty common thread for many campaigns out there.

If people ACTUALLY played alignment once in a while instead of just putting lip service and then acting in whatever way they feel like, then you would see paladins get a lot more popular.

((BTW, 1e paly's got a lot easier to play after the original Unearthed Arcana came out. Being able to roll 9d6 for Cha, made making paladins much easier.)

 

[Darmanicus]

I'd have to agreee with Hussar on the Rogue and his information thing. Just because a Rogue got information from somewhere doesn't mean he got it in an underhanded way or it's tainted. Also just because you are a Rogue, it doesn't mean you are dodgy: some examples..

1. Trap/Lock-Smith.
2. Tout.
3. Scout.
4. Infiltrator.
5. Spy.
6. Diplomat.
7. Acrobat.

The above and IMO, virtually any other Rogue other than evil or CN ones can quite happily party with a Paladin without clashing. Seems like the people arguing against any sort of harmony between the two play Rogues in the worst pssible way, (remember they changed the name to Rogue from Thief people.......and so too can you now change!).

 

[DM-Rocco]

Without more specifics as to how the rogue got his information, it's pretty impossible to make a determination as to whether or not the paly can use it or not. I mean, if the rogue hung out in a whorehouse all night using the gather info skill, can the paly use that info? I don't see why not. Hanging out in a house of ill repute is hardly an evil act.

Now, if the rogue beat the crap out of some little old woman for the info, then there is a problem. Then again, if the rogue beats up old women, he's evil and the paly shouldn't be adventuring with him anyway since even 3e paly's can't have evils in the party.

As I said, without more info, we can't really say one way or the other. Now, granted with a paly in the party, you can't have that evil rogue. Oh, boo hoo. The majority of parties out there are neutral or good aligned anyway. No evils is a pretty common thread for many campaigns out there.

If people ACTUALLY played alignment once in a while instead of just putting lip service and then acting in whatever way they feel like, then you would see paladins get a lot more popular.

((BTW, 1e paly's got a lot easier to play after the original Unearthed Arcana came out. Being able to roll 9d6 for Cha, made making paladins much easier.)

Well, I agree with you on this. But I guess when I said gathered information in an underhanded way it would be assumed that it was by beating the crap out of others, not just casing a joint.

 

[DM-Rocco]

I always thought the 1st edition paladin was something with a bit flavour to it, but we never saw them because the stat generation method was 3d6 in order.

It was hard to get the 17 CHR that you needed to be a paladin

On the plus side, in 1st edition, they did have other methods of rolling up your character, if not in the DMG, then they were in Unearthed Arcane, Again I am at work and can't confirm page numbers.

 

[DM-Rocco]

I like the paladin class. I just don't think it's played right most of the time. Being lawful good doesn't mean you have to be a goody two shoes. You could be self-righteous pompous ass who thinks you're doing "good".

That is true, you could, but you still ahve to follow the code in any event. Just because you think it is right doesn't mean it is. If you have a truely dedicated role-playing group, as opposed to a hack-in-slash game, it may be acceptable to play a paladin like this. However, if he over looked to much, even a self-righteous pompous ass who thinks he is doing good would have to admit that he was wrong if he pushed things to far.

King Priest of Istar from Dragonlance would be a good example of this mentality, look what happened to him in the end.

 

[DM-Rocco]

What the hell, I am agreeing with people. Quick, someone tell me that a paladin can kill a child molester with out losing his powers so I can argue somemore.