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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6041703" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I'm glad some of what I say makes sense <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I agree, which is why I think it's fine for a Paladin to leave sometimes, if there's no hope of winning. Try to evacuate as many people as possible, or go help a fortress that has a chance of winning instead of one that will assuredly be lost. There's Moral Math (like the sound of that) to be done!I've seen the show, and discussed the books. I'm not necessarily discussing realistic effectiveness, I'm discussing the Paladin's Code. Do Good or die trying, really. Inspire those around you to do Good by your honor, your purity, your strength. And if your strength fails you, your bravery to stand up for what is right, even in the face of impossible odds.Sometimes, it might be Fall or Die. It's just the unfortunate reality of the Paladin code as it stands by the Rules as Written, since you may need to lie, cheat, or use poison to win a fight at some point. And, when you tack on more restrictions (based on the "and so forth" wording), of course they might get more caught up in rules than in effectiveness.Your argument makes sense, and I can see a very Lawful Good person making it. It's just not good enough for a Paladin, from my view.Resign from service, in my opinion.Take the money back, and give it back to the mugged family. See if you can arrange for the mugger to get an honest job, or arrange for him to accompany you to the next town and get work there, if possible.Of course, a lot of this will change based on circumstances, and I do get your point, which I'll reply to in a moment.This is a social contract issue. I'd rather my GM decide for me; I can focus on my character, and react to the setting. But that's because it's not as open in my view, and I'll talk about right now.This is where it's more set to me, as I've always seen Paladins as drawing their power from Good as reward for following their calling and the Code, and not as given by any god. Paladins, in my view, are set to such a strict view because of the restrictions Good has set, not because of what individual gods have set.I don't. But I see "justified dirty fighting" as completely different from "fighting honorably." I don't think people would condemn her for hitting someone in the groin, but I don't think most of my friends would say it's "honorable" either. They'd probably stop to think longer about it since they'd obviously sympathize with the victim, but I think they'd frame it as I have.I brought up "most people" because honor in combat is basically defined by society, which means that, in my mind, "most people" is very important in deciding that.Well, yes, in the Core 3e book, lying seems Evil, but poison doesn't seem to be. And I bring up the Core book for a couple or reasons. One, the Paladin was written in that context, and that's important to me. And two, that's how I played the game; I didn't include the Book of Exalted Deeds, Vile Darkness, and the like. I just used the Core 3.So, while I agree that I don't want to go into the real world moral philosophy on such issues, I'd like to go into the D&D concept of why the Paladin can't. It's listed as a matter of honor: "act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth)". In the context of a Paladin seeing it as a manner of honor, and the core 3 not saying that poison is Evil, I feel perfectly fine making my judgment on the matter as "honor" and not "Good or Evil."Well, nothing bars a Lawful Good Cleric from occasionally lying, cheating, or using poison, and he gets the Detect spells. I don't think that the Paladin getting the Detect Evil spell-like is because he can't lie, cheat, and use poison; he gets it because he needs to find Evil and do Good. But, that's my view, and I accept yours.I think that the Paladin would be fine, mechanically, without such restrictions. He probably won't pass up a Lawful Good Fighter in combat, even if he was allowed to lie, cheat, and use poison like the Fighter can. I personally don't see the abilities as making up for it, but as a mechanical limitation placed to make the Paladin act as the designers thought a Paladin ought to act. Which leans towards the Glory Paladin, from my point of view.I think the actual inherent mechanical limitations of the class definitely implies that they're held to a higher standard than others. For instance, they lose all Paladin powers if they willingly commit any Evil act. That's a lot harsher standard than other Lawful Good characters, in my book.My 3.5 books (and all other books) are in storage at the moment (while I'm homeless), but I think the Paladin class description implies a higher standard, doesn't it?This is an interesting point, and a good catch. I'd probably think of "gross" as something along the lines of "conscious and voluntary disregard" of the code. But I can easily see looser interpretations of it, and might even use those depending on the setting.Well, as I said in my original comment, I wouldn't even peg him as Lawful. I'm place him at Neutral. He acts Lawfully some of the time, but I also see a lot of Chaotic tendencies or actions in him. Have you read most of the thread (including all of the arguments, and not just fiction)? A lot of good arguments get made on why I think this is the case.The grating part I definitely get. It got old, right around the time that the Cleric was recounting tells to the younger Paladin, though even the "Bob" incident before that grated on me in a different way.The concept, though, is an interesting character, in my view. It's just not an interesting Paladin. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />They're hidden, but here you go: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/faq.php?faq=faq_rules#faq_new_faq_irule1" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/faq.php?faq=faq_rules#faq_new_faq_irule1</a></blockquote>

Verification