Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 1955400" data-attributes="member: 2013">I have one very simple "acid test" for whether or not a given character concept can be a paladin that has saved me much grief..."Do you (the player) feel the need to justify the character's actions?"Everything about this character - from the write-up to the fact that it was submitted for a vote to the fact that you're challenging the paladin class by saying "there's nothing in the PHB that says I can't do it this way (a classic rules-lawyer technique to follow the letter but not the spirit of the rules) - says, "yes, I need to justify the character's actions."And of course the answer to the acid test is: "if you feel the need to justify the way the character is acting, he is absolutely not paladin material."A fascinating character?  Yes.  A beautiful example of smart role-playing?  Absolutely.  A great thought-provoking look at the life of a paladin?  Darn straight.A fallen paladin, disillusioned with his lot?  Sure.A faithful paladin with all the perks that accompany that?  As Sir Cedric would say, "**** no."However, it should also be noted that I find Sir Cedric "morally wanting" as a paladin on more fronts than just the "acid test."  Does a paladin IMC have to be a perfect paragon of holiness?  No.  Drinking and swearing as Sir Cedric does could probably get by - provided the paladin recognizes and acknowledges these as weaknesses/faults in his character.  Part of being a paladin is not "being" a paragon of lawful-good-ness so much as "attempting to be a paragon of lawful-good-ness" - one of the principle themes throughout literature is the "flawed hero" and that's okay... but as someone trying to be a paragon of virtue, a paladin can have flaws (he's human), but he shouldn't revel in them (he's supposed to represent virtue, not vice).  Sir Cedric revels in his moral flaws.  Sir Cedric does not acknowlege his vices as faults that ought to be corrected (heck, he could go to the grave swearing and that's cool, provided he's not proud of it and keeps getting upset with himself for slipping), and that's a problem for me.  It's not that he isn't a paragon of lawful-good; such a standard is impossible to bear.  My problem is that he's no longer even "trying to be a paragon of lawful-good-ness" - and as such he falls short of meeting the paladin's code* (see end of my post).  I don't see a paladin, as a dedicated foe of evil, as someone who will not only accept, but revel in evil in his own nature; rather, I see him as someone who is disappointed by his own imperfection and while he knows he's not perfect, and may not revile himself because he knows he is flawed, he certainly doesn't embrace his own evil nature.  In fact, in classic fantasy literature, it is usually the moment when the paladin ceases to struggle overcome his flaws and embraces them instead that he falls from paladinhood. For instance, Sir Lancelot was one example of an archetypal paladin, even to the point of the "lay on hands" ability - and in the Arthurian legneds, so long as he struggled with his weakness (his appetite for Guinevere), he kept his paladinhood and honor; but when he finally gave in to his weakness, he fell from grace.  Note that it's not the "affair" per se with Guinevere that caused the fall - he, along with many of the other knights, was somewhat promiscuous if I recall the legends correctly; in fact, if memory serves, Galahad was his son by an illicit relationship - but in Lancelot's "giving up the struggle with self," he lost his honor.Sir Cedric, by the fiction piece, appears to have given up the struggle with self to overcome inner weakness and appetites he acknowledges are wrong.  Over and above the "acid test" that tells me he's not paladin material.(I know, I know, "prostitution, etc. is/isn't evil because of moral absolutism/relativism" but the original piece had the tone that prostitution was not seen as "good" and while Cedric acknowledges this, he doesn't care... that's another rant entirely - my point is, in the fiction piece, Cedric seems to acknowledge he has moral flaws from his own point of view but embraces them instead of rejecting them, and that doesn't "jive" with my thoughts on paladinhood.)Would I allow the character in my game?  Yes (perhaps minus the sexual elements depending on the other players, as others have suggested).Is the character a paladin in my game?  No.  Slightly OT - The thread title is misleading... it suggests the character IS a paladin without room for debate - when it should be asking "is the character a paladin."  You've "led" your audience to the conclusion you obviously want - to vote that he is a paladin - by your framing of the question, so the Yes/No data is flawed. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />*WITH REGARD TO "DOES THIS VIOLATE RULES-AS-WRITTEN PALADIN'S CODE?"Remember the little bit about "acting honorably" in the paladin's code?  Yes, it's honorable to "fight the good fight" - but that consists of fighting it on all fronts.  You can't choose only to "fight the good fight" without (i.e., physical combat with undead, demons, devils, etc.) and surrender the "good fight" within (embrace your vices) as Cedric has and claim you're fighting the good fight... he's not honoring his beliefs by not trying to live them.  He's not honoring his "calling" as a paladin (in fact, he seems to despise it a bit).  He's not honoring himself by trying to rise above his weaknesses.I know, "in his campaign brothels MIGHT be..." - but re-read the fiction piece.  It's implied that brothels are not an honorable place and Cedric knows it.  It's implied that swearing and drinking are not honorable pastimes and Cedric knows it.  If he's not acting honorably, ESPECIALLY if he knows it and tacitly acknowledges, and even MORE ESPECIALLY if he embraces the practices and shows no desire to change, then by definition he's not living up to one of the points of the paladin code!--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification