[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.23507557 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Tell me, /tg/, what makes a Paladin a Paladin?

Upholding the law? Honor? Justice? Is a Paladin beholden to the laws of the land, or the divine principles of Good? Why do DMs love shitting on Paladins at every turn?

Do you detect and smite, or smite and detect?

>> No.23507586

Being a paladin is in the heart, and GMs don't have those.

>> No.23507619

Paladin as a class is just D&D's morally idealized version of a heavily armed warrior of some church.

>Why do DMs love shitting on Paladins at every turn?
I think you might be assuming the wacky stories on /tg/ are the norm, when they really aren't.

>> No.23507638

Because paladin is a shitty, poorly defined "class", and most things that are added to a game that relates to paladins breaks the image they had before, so add inconsistent to the list...

So what is it? are they good or are they worshipers of their gods? God how i love classes and alignments...

>> No.23507645

upholding the laws of your god and the laws of the land when they dont defy the laws of your god

being a good person and all. DMs hate them because they tend to think shitting on the good guy gives them depth. it doesnt really but DMs are silly that way

>> No.23507686

I would argue the specifics are purposefully vague. It's an arch-type. It's the underpinnings that are important, not the specifics.

-They are a religious warrior. Their focus should by martial/priestly.
-They follow a (very) strict code. If it doesn't interfere with their decisions and make their life hard, they aren't paladins.
-And personally, I require good. I get why other alignments are allowed in newer editions, but to me it stops making sense at that point. You don't need to gain power from being selfish, or sneaking, or hurting others. Those provide power on their own.

So those are my big 3. The specifics can vary from there.

>> No.23507733

Being a Paladin is about Doing the Right Thing.

You don't bring harm to the righteous or innocent. You bind yourself to a code so that you're never tempted. And you never make the easy choice when you can make the right choice.

Because the thing is, it's not hard for a Paladin to fall. Everybody has those moments where they think, 'I know how this SHOULD be', where they want to exercise the power they have to do things THEIR way, and fuck the consequences. A good Paladin will often fail in the pursuit of righteousness, when he lets his earnest-hearted pursuit of the greater good blind him, when he decides that the Ends justify the Means.

The great Paladin understands that there are no 'ends'. Nothing ever ends, no decision can be made in a vacuum, no matter how large. What matters IS the means, the rules by which you pursue justice. Your faith in your code, your willingness to serve the people, the humility to understand that while you are an arbiter of justice, you are not its representative - these are what makes a Paladin.

>> No.23507747

Anon, why does that Warforged have tits?

>> No.23507757

>> No.23507771

Why do paladins have to have gods?

>> No.23507782

>Why do DMs love shitting on Paladins at every turn?

THAT GUY DMs love screwing over their players in general. It just happens to be easier with Paladins because they have built-in rules for "how to be screwed over by the DM.

The only thing I don't understand is why Clerics never suffer the same fate. Clerics share a similar code, except instead of "must always uphold the principles of Law and Good" it's "must always follow the teachings and whims of his god". You'd think DMs would be all over that shit with "oh, you burned down the farm the bad guy was hiding in? You fall because you worship the god of agriculture".

I guess I don't know after all.

>> No.23507796

So edgy.

>> No.23507807

I at least said religious, not gods.

>> No.23507813

To explain the magic powers, probably. It's perfectly acceptable to follow a code and not be a Paladin.

>> No.23507819

Not screaming "VAE VICTUS" and decapitating everyone after a fight.

>> No.23507823

Agito doesn't count.

He IS a god.

Or at the very least, Jesus.

>> No.23507847


>> No.23507851

they get there power from them as a Representative of the gods will.

>> No.23507856

Gray Guards are lame. Another stupid idea in an edition full of stupid ideas.

>> No.23507858


Its about living for a higher cause. Trying to make the world a better place. To protect the weak and helpless. To right wrongs where you might find them, be it with a gentle hand or an unbreakable will. Ever willing to deliver justice but tempered with mercy. Its not always an easy task, but its one I believe in. That's what being a paladin is for me.

>> No.23507873


Um, they don't?

Seriously I want to know how this "paladins are clerics with higher BAB" (fluff-wise) myth got started on /tg/. So many people seem to think a paladin HAS to have a god and that one of the conditions for falling is disobeying that god. *Nowhere* does it say either of these things. Nowhere. The 3E PHB even goes out of its way to tell you a Paladin doesn't need to be religious--he is devoted to Law and Good as concepts.

>> No.23507913

Yeah, see, the thing about that post is, regardless of its of any logical/moral debates about it, THAT IS NOT THE MINDSET OF A PALADIN!

Paladins get their powers from an almost impossibly strong faith that a certain ideal and code is right, that it will always lead-in the end-to the best outcome. That actions contrary to those ideals, while they may appear to help in the short run, cannot in the end lead to anything but more evil.

In short, they have faith in an idea/god. Faith so strong they get super powers from it.

What that post describes is not faith. Which is fine.

But you don't get to be a paladin without faith. You don't get to have your cake (super powers) and eat it too (not have to deal with the consequences of faith in a code).

Not everyone who is good is eligible to be a paladin, no matter how good they are.

>> No.23507921

The fuck you say bout my pragmatic paladin

>> No.23507950

your pragmatic paladin is a bitch, might as well be a fighter

>> No.23507969

>Implying "gray" isn't just concession to evil

>> No.23507970

You heard me. Waaah, I want super powers, too, but I don't want to have to do anything haaaaard.


>> No.23507972

That if you are pragmatic in the sense you mean i.e. willing to act in ways contrary to the ideal you are supposedly personify, you don't get super powers from personifying that ideal.

It's a stupid idea. Just like Chaotic, Neutral, and Evil paladins are a stupid idea.

>> No.23507993

I love Paladins but I hate how morons try to shoehorn them all into white knights or they fall. There's more to Lawful Good than that. It's more than possible to play Batman as a Paladin if you go about it the right way.

Regrettably most people think it means you have to be Lawful Stupid

>> No.23508010

It's a photoshop of Pathfinders Iconic Paladin. Who happens to have tits.

>> No.23508011


That's not how paladins fucking work. Just play an uppity fighter.

>> No.23508020

They don't. Being a paladin is a calling felt deep in the heart, it's being able to smell every evil deed on every sinner you ever walk across and despite that holding people to higher laws than those of men, for the afterlife holds their rewards.

It's knowing that virtue, honor, faith, altruism and compassion are strengths despite them being able to be used against you - for no man can be called fearless until he bears the scars of his convictions.

It's to stoke a bonfire of righteousness and conviction in your heart where others hold merely a guttering candle, so quick to be snuffed out by fear of inadequacy or lack of conviction - the belief deeds are judged according to station not universally "I am not a great man, only for heroes do ends not justify means".

>> No.23508030

>Implying everything isn't better with tits.

>> No.23508034

What in the name of the Gods didst thou recently speak of me, thou little wench? I’ll have thee know I was the most valued student of the sword in the King's crusaders, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Heretics, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in the warfare of apes and I’m the most vaunted bowman in the entire contingent of fighting men of the kingdom. You are nothing to me but just another brigand. I will slay you with righteousness the likes of which has never been seen before on this Plane, take heed of my declaration. Thou thinkest thou can escape my wrath at your utterances to me over the messenger-dove flights? Think again, dolt. As we correspond I am contacting my secret network of inquisitors across the kingdom and your dove-flock is being traced right now so you better prepare for the wrath of the Gods, swineherd. The wrath that wipes out the mewling little thing you call your life. Thou art deceased, knave. I canst be anywhere, anytime, and I shall end thy life in none less than seven hundred ways, and that number is soley with the force of my gauntlets. Not only am I extensively trained in fisticuffs, but I have access to the entire armory of the King's crusaders and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your mewling scutt from the known world, you little swineherd. If only thou couldst have known what unholy retribution thou scrabbling “clever” comment was about to bring down upon thy head, maybe thou wouldst have held thine slavicious tongue. But thou couldn’t, thou didn’t, and now thou art paying thine due, you god-damned idiot. I will excrete my fury all over you and thou will drown in it. Thou art surely dead, knave.

>> No.23508042


Sharks are not better with tits.

>> No.23508062

As far as im aware they don't unless you're playing 4.0.

You just have to have something to believe in and fight with all your heart for that cause.

>> No.23508065

Anon, please don't turn this into a Sharktits thread.

>> No.23508072

Doesn't a cleric do that already? I think it would work better to have paladins work off "internal faith" like a sorcerer works on internal magic.

Or just scrap the concept and use it as options for other character types.


>> No.23508078

Sharks aren't even mammals. Sharks having tits is just silly and excessive.

>> No.23508081

any reason in particular why someone shooped her into a warforged?

>> No.23508084


>> No.23508095

Warforged are cool.

>> No.23508106

>Doesn't a cleric do that already?

The cleric is so ill-defined it does fucking everything. Just pretend it doesn't exist and the game gets much better.

>> No.23508111

What the fuck are Sharktits? Sharks don't even have mammary glands.

>> No.23508113

A few days ago I watched the movie Appaloosa starring Ed Harris and Viggo Mortensen. The way they both played "Lawful Good" bad-asses reminded me of how a Paladin should be played.

>> No.23508125

This fact does not stop furry fandom.

>> No.23508128

Those posts don't actually contradict each other.

One simply defines it as Faith - which, you may note, he states can be in an ideal - and another says that a Paladin must be Devoted. Faith and devotion are not contradictory concepts.

Nice try, but I graduated top of my class in Semantics.

>> No.23508129

Roll for Sanity Loss

>> No.23508143


because, at least in pathfinder, they're really insane at combat and their codes are huge limiters.

>> No.23508147

>You'd think DMs would be all over that shit with "oh, you burned down the farm the bad guy was hiding in? You fall because you worship the god of agriculture".

If That DM runs DSA, he's guaranteed to do that. Of course, "paladins" (read : members of warrior orders of the various churches) are just a subtype of cleric there.

>> No.23508152

Rolled 4

Better make another roll for Fetishes...

Annnd now I need to make one too...

>> No.23508153

Don't you mean Anal Circumference

>> No.23508162


>> No.23508163

probably just someone who wanted to make easy character art.

>> No.23508167

What's FATALs take on Paladins?

>> No.23508188

the head looks so weird though
maybe if it had a neck it'd be okay

>> No.23508196

Thank you for explaining that. I'm the first poster listed.

And yeah, neither I nor my post disagree with the second post.

>> No.23508197

>You feel the walls of your mind begin wash away, as of sand forgotten along the evening tide of a beach sinking beneath the setting sun.
>roll for anal circumference

>> No.23508201


This gives me the idea of playing a paladin of nature or god of nature.

>> No.23508219

>Sanity Loss

Jesus Christ, the Horror

>> No.23508226


Welp.. there goes the logic ship...

>> No.23508232

>In short, they have faith in an idea/god.
The idea here being ensured survival of the human race.

>> No.23508267

That's not really an ideal, though.

It's a biological imperative. Continuation of the gene pool is the lowest possible urge. It's literally the most base, animal instinct in the human mind. It's in no way Lawful Good. As a goal or ideal, it's Neutral at best. He's not considering the future created by his actions. How will an immortal humanity live into the future? How will they effect the world around them? Will they be happy, or has he consigned his species to an eternity of misery?


>> No.23508269


Hitler says hi.

>> No.23508274

The greatest value for a paladin is good. His faith and reverence of god is because the god he worships is the exemplary of how they should act.

>> No.23508278

First, I demand better prose. Secondly, I inform you that one does not simply roll for Sanity Loss. It is experienced in the narrative during the game, and left to the individual to filter through their PLAYER.

>> No.23508308


Those live for different causes and ideas. Champions of very different missions.

>> No.23508313

Not YOUR paladin.

>> No.23508317

Level 21 Paladin of Christ, Level 15 Paladin of Christ, Level 12 Paladin of Christ.

>> No.23508340

Not a paladin. He doesn't meet the criteria established by any edition.

I suppose he COULD be a Neutral 4e Paladin, though I'm not sure of what god. In any other edition he's just a really pretentious fighter. Or a Grey Guard, but as established, stupid.

>> No.23508381

>though I'm not sure of what god

>> No.23508410

Being a Paladin is about trying to uphold the cause of justice.

While justice is represented by lawful good, the paladin protects everyone from chaotic to neutral, and even must attempt to show mercy on evil when he can.

For evil is a force in the world of D&D. Casting an evil necromancy spell "for good" is like preforming above ground nuclear testing "for good." At the end of the day you still are deliberately empowering the forces of evil.

A paladin debases no one, not themselves nor others. A chaotic good ranger is just as stalwart and worthy ally as another paladin, for it is not lawful good's place to say "I will protect you and fight along side you to make the world a better place oh but only if you bow to how I think the world should work" for that is how a tyrant operates. Instead he acts as a force of unification. A true lawful good society would have a place for chaotic good people. Hell, a chaotic neutral person should be able to find a place to grow and thrive.

A paladin is always a paladin. Most people misinterpret this to mean they are always questing and sacrifice their own happiness, but just as many paladins house themselves out of a bakery instead of a church, count on their husbands or wives to take care of them when they come home rather than a cleric, and have children instead of a flock.

And a paladin genuinely believes the world could be better. Sure, paladins destroy evil, but they do more than that. They are not just defenders, they are also destroyers. Paladins destroy the concept of always evil races, everything from orc to even succubi paladins exist. Just as he protects a young sorcerer from being abused and exploited he destroys the ability for the abuser to ever harm anyone again.

Also this video is P-good too! It may be cheesy but damn it has feels: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fJK841IWTE

>> No.23508422

Yeah, which is why my first post was about how I don't really accept the concept. The opposite of a paladin is not an evil-paladin. I still can't wrap my head around a selfless adherent to an ideal and code that follows it even when it contradicts what seems to be the best course of action at the time, that sacrifices who and what they are to said idea/code...who is evil. Why would you do all that?

Just be a selfish warrior that makes pacts with dark powers.

>> No.23508443

Yeah, you don't get super powers for that. You also don't get super powers for "I really want to be rich" or sleeping with a lot of women.

>> No.23508465

4e Paladins work by a different definition.

They are exemplars of a divine power - that's why they can be non-Lawful Good alignments, because they can be exemplars of a non-Lawful Good god.

Therefore, while Paladins in GENERAL don't have to have a god, Paladins IN THE CASE OF 4e do.

Therefore, if he has an ideal which is not Lawful Good, he does not fit the general case, and if he has an ideal which does not exemplify a particular god, he's not a Paladin in the specific case of 4e. And if he doesn't fit either of those cases, he's not a Paladin.

Semantics, motherfucker.

>> No.23508520

Fine, redefine the word. But you are no longer discussing the same thing as the rest of us.

I'm going to discuss wizard, which I will now define as non-magical defenders of the peace. Suddenly no meaningful discussion can occur.

>> No.23508652

Maybe you could build off the idea of a Paladin as the exemplarly Lawful Good character, who lives for justice and peace, and have other classes as the exemplars of other alignments, or at least the 4 non-neutral alignments

>> No.23508655

>but just as many paladins house themselves out of a bakery instead of a church,
Paladin bake sale campaign? Paladin bake sale campaign.

>> No.23508688

I Agree with a lot of what you said, but strongly disagree with other parts of it.
> Being a Paladin is about trying to uphold the cause of justice.
If you don't follow a code, if you aren't "religious" in some sense of the word, and if you aren't a holy warrior, you are not a paladin. You remove those parts, you aren't a paladin. There are plenty of beings that uphold justice and aren't paladins.

> A paladin is always a paladin. Most people misinterpret this to mean they are always questing and sacrifice their own happiness, but just as many paladins house themselves out of a bakery instead of a church, count on their husbands or wives to take care of them when they come home rather than a cleric, and have children instead of a flock.
No, you don't get super powers for being the living archtypal embodiment of an ideal while running a bakery. If you are not actively representing your code and ideals, you lose your super powers. You can still be a good person. But your super powers came from your faith, and your sacrifices, and your active stance in destroying evil. Take away the sacrifices and the active destruction of evil and you are just a good man. Possibly a very good man, but still just a good man.

>> No.23508704

This isn't faith like "I believe in <concept>" or "I believe in <thing>" this is something you build your entire life around, you live and breathe it for decades, and become infused with its power to make it a reality. You could justify it how you like

>> No.23508746

A paladin wouldn't create a tainted world of utilitarian good. That's hubris on the level of self-deification, and it's also creating a world that was, essentially, created through death magic. Is it worth damning humanity's soul, and damning it forever? Hell no. That would be a true betrayal of what it means to be human, and what is good.

A true paladin, if he were being forced to make that decision by a threatening dark god, would channel his deity's might and go out with a bang.

Pic related, this is how you paladin.

>> No.23508813

why not run like a bitch and come back with a bigger force?

>> No.23508843

Running from the enemy is as good as letting him win, even if you intend to come back
Besides, running messages for reinforcement while the Paladin dies fighting is what the other party members are for

>> No.23508848

Because as soon as you turn your back on something that looks like that you get squished?

>> No.23508907

Are you trying to say paladins don't uphold justice? And are you trying to imply that justice is not a divine force similar to how evil is? Because you need to look into 3.5's metaphysics a bit more. A paladin is a servant of justice. While many gods have paladins, a god can't make a paladin who does not borderline worship justice. Paladins can be chosen from entirely random ass people as well. Churches do not create paladins, and while paladins commonly hail from templaric orders in the same way a cleric does (Oh, and for the record, clerics are not just priests, they are also knights) they could just as easily be a blacksmith, commoner, or even the son of a high priest of Grumish. As long as you hold justice in your heart and fight and die for it you CAN be a paladin. Not ALL people who fight for justice ARE paladins, but to be a paladin that is the bare minimum. All Blueberries are blue berries, but not all blue berries are Blueberries brah.

And did I say the paladin is a simple baker?

No. I was trying to state the paladin is allowed to have a life. There is a reason elvish paladins are viewed as tragic figures as opposed to other races. It is because their code of conduct makes it extremely hard for them to continue living in the society they defend. Most paladins can have a wife and kids, and can have a home. They are always paladins in that they must always hold themselves to the code, but nothing in the code is designed to hold themselves away from happiness, except again in the case of elves.

>> No.23508943

Because, anon, most people think you have to play knights and paladins lawful stupid

>> No.23508967

Not running and staying back Gandalf-style to stop the Balrog from wiping out the fellowship doesn't make you lawful stupid.

It makes you lawful heroic sacrifice champion knight.

>> No.23509006

That is entirely not true.

In fact, if you look into the book of exalted deeds it points out that sacrifice for no reason is neither a good nor evil act. It is a waste. It is not like "falling for a cause" which is a short sighted and selfish use of the very ideal of good like it is a currency that can be traded and bartered, but it serves and helps no one.

Now if that paladin was alone? If he was the last warrior there? If all was on the line and if he ran he would simply be saving himself? He would try. He may know he can't win, but he has to try.

Nothing at all in that picture implied that something bad would happen if the paladin was WISE. You know, with WISDOM. One of his primary stats. The braver act may be to run away if good can better be served by actually killing the beast with allies able to help you, rather than dying a pointless tragic death that causes another noble soul to leave the earth.

>> No.23509014

Kamina was a bard

>> No.23509103

My friend, do you not know that there are paladin bards, extolling others towards great acts and acting as a nurturer and guide? For what is the greater act? What champions the co-operative nature of good more? Slaying a demon alone, or bringing four people with you, of different alignments, walks of life, and skills, and helping them find the power to slay the beast with you, and becoming a living symbol of strength through the unity of infinite diversity?

Seriously, there is even a feat for it in complete adventurer. Most classes have a "style" when they fuse with paladin now.

>> No.23509130

But Anon, I play Pathfinder.

>> No.23509153


What's your point?

>> No.23509173

>Why do DMs love shitting on Paladins at every turn?
They don't, only bad DMs do. Also made up stories on /tg/ do.

>> No.23509191

> Are you trying to say paladins don't uphold justice?
Nope, never said that. Just that upholding justice isn't enough, or a requirement. A Paladin CAN be dedicated to justice, or virtue, or selflessness, or the destruction of evil. And they must do MORE than just uphold an ideal.

Really not sure what all that discussion about were a paladin comes from has to do with my post.

As for the baker thing, I think I understand what you meant better now. Thank you for explaining that.

>> No.23509193

My point is that if a paladin where to make a last stand against a creature and die when he very well could retreat and actually have the creature killed when he rallies he has utterly failed in his duty, and given into a somewhat selfish view on his role in the world by putting his personal desire to never retreat over his real divine duty to actually help destroy evil.

>> No.23509215

This is probably my favorite Paladin story. This for me is what a Paladin is supposed to be.

>> No.23509224

Despicable, isn't it, the way evil and weakness attempts to disguise itself as virtue?

I suppose you think yourself a "realist", do you? Seeing through the haze of naive idealism to see what truly needs done, or some such claptrap?

Do you not realize that you cling to a far greater falsehood than even the most starry-eyed idealists? You claim for yourself clarity of foresight, soundness of reason, and steadfastness of conscience. These are the claims of a fool! It is naught but blind hubris.

Do you know why I bind myself to this code that you deem so "unpragmatic"? It is because I realize that I am but a man, fallible and prone to rash judgment. My code is no shackle that binds my hands from the work of righteousness; it is a lifeline that binds me to the rock of truth to save me from falling into the pit of evil when my own efforts falter.

For I know the temptations that beckon, when all seems lost in the darkest hour. If you would only do this, or sacrifice that, you could accomplish so much! But can you truly trust yourself to see the cost clearly, when the prize seems to glitter so near your grasp?

No. You cannot. You are only a man. As am I.

So I bind myself with a code of honor, swearing to uphold these tenets that I know, through much study and contemplation, to be good and true, even when my resolve might waver. Thus shall I be sure to never lose my way. For the hearts of men, even paladins, can be deceived; but true righteousness does not waver.

>> No.23509234

Fucking captcha ate my image

>> No.23509235

No, I mean, what? Where do you get all these strange strawman arguments from and why do you care to inform us of them?

>> No.23509263



Both of you are being to situational and ignoring each other points.

In one case paladin sacrifices himself to save others from certain doom.

In the other the paladin escapes with everyone else because their escapes doesn't call for a heroic sacrifice but quick thinking and legs.

Both are quite different situations and are both correct.

>> No.23509268


Where's that MR. RAGE pic on paladins?

>> No.23509294

If we're posting favourite paladins, heres a great one I found

>> No.23509312

My group had a very self righteous paladin, who while suspicious and judgmental never actually enforced his code on others.

He also had low dex, and our party was a lot of agile types. We all (including the paladin) had a laugh figuring out how many ways the paladin could "fall."

It isn't a strawman argument. That was what was posed to us, a paladin should never retreat. Then other people starting to bring in "Oh well if he retreats his party will die" despite the scenario depicting the paladin utterly alone.

The idea of the paladin defending another in the scenario posed was fiction. So it isn't a strawman argument, the argument I was taking out was really just that dumb. If it was actually a different context the paladin would stay, which I very well pointed out.

I am a more metaphysical type myself and would just like to add Ser Paladin that choosing pragmatism treats the universal forces of evil and good as a cheap currency that could be spent like copper, and that attitude inevitably leads to a rise in evil, for it is evil's want to grow and consume. No act that permanently deprives the world of something good and pure and empowers evil for a short term gain can ever truly make the world a better place. Pragmatic choices must be made, but should never be sought out.

>> No.23509353

Whoa, bro, he never said a paladin should never retreat.

He said it was fine and glorious for paladins to go out in flaming glory fighting insurmountable evil rather than capitulating on good.

>> No.23509378

But it isn't. A paladin who "Dies for good" when in reality he is just letting his selfish view of a heroic last stand blind him to his actual duty to the people who will still be around when he is gone has committed a (Minor and not fall-worthy) breach of his code. Duty before any sort of misguided sense of glory.

>> No.23509408


You're not paladining right. Go Grey Guard and leave us the fuck alone.

>> No.23509435

A Paladin collects no glory. A Paladin has no reputation. A Paladin has no face. A Paladin's true name is known but to his friends and brothers.

>> No.23509456

It's more about not accepting that you can't do something and turning tail. If you feel here and now is the time to make a stand, that here and now you have the strength, that here and now you will see your enemies destroyed, then by god you make a stand and you fight to your last.

>> No.23509464

Since when does retreating from an unwinnable battle make you a Grey Guard?

>> No.23509504

Retreating from an unwinnable battle is a situational issue
If the Paladin knows reinforcements are near, but needs to hold the line just a while longer? Than he must fight, perhaps die to hold it
If, however, the battle is some emergent evil that the Paladin cannot hope to challenge alone? He must ride to warn his brothers. Remeber always, no Paladin has ever walked alone

>> No.23509521


>> No.23509547

I feel like everyone's arguing about different things.

>> No.23509592

The bugger is there is no argument, its just two similar but different scenarios with different answers

>> No.23509601

To die for a purpose, to die for the greater good? All fine and dandy. But to die pointlessly for something that you can't change is just foolishness.

Personally, I think there's a place for paladins and a place for those who aren't necessarily so bound to a specific set of actions. That said, however, gray guards do suck.

>> No.23509608

Recognizing you have duties above the want of the self is what a paladin is. A paladin could be called glorious, but it should never be his primary calling. A paladin should never make a choice because it is pragmatic, he should make it because it is right. There is a reason why "never retreat" is not in the paladins code. "Never show weakness" isn't there either. A paladin, as a good person, should recognize the CAN'T do everything alone, and believing such he cheapens what it means to be lawful good.

A paladin must understand he is fallible or he heavily risks becoming a blackguard. There is a difference between being a grey guard and realizing neither he nor the world is perfect. If it already was perfect, a paladin could lay down his arms and armor and retire for good. If the paladin thinks he can do anything alone he heavily risks falling.

It doesn't. It just makes you foolish, which is also not against the paladins code.

This right here.

The paladin must be long sighted. He can't fall for the traps of glory or perfection or isolation. Every act anyone preforms has ramifications for the people around them. And every paladin understands more than anyone that the world is not made up of individuals.

They are not. The problem was this argument is hinged on people making assumptions about a scenario that were patently untrue. The question was "Why doesn't a paladin retreat in a hopeless situation" and some derps shouted "Because then he isn't holding the line for others." Which misses the point. If a paladin can actually serve anyone by standing and fighting they should. A hopeless situation, when there is no chance for anything to be gained by standing and drawing a line in the sand requires the paladin to do one of the hardest things he can do. Realizing that being lawful good is not about personal glory, but holding yourself to an honorable code that places other's well being above your own glory.

>> No.23509666

Sometimes the bravest and most difficult thing you can do is admit you are not able to do something and run away so you can try again.

It is especially hard for paladins, because their code is designed to make sure others do not suffer their burdens.

>> No.23509685


I say so myself >>23509263

Charging into the Balor to get yourself kill went no one else is at risk and you have a way to escape is stupid.

But standing in his way knowing that he will kill you so that others have a chance to escape is heroic.

>> No.23509724

This sums it up rather well.

I was just trying to point holding any last stand to a high ideal was dumb, especially because there were conclusions drawn about how the scenario for "why doesn't he run and get help" was "Well surely there are people juuuust outside the painting he is holding ground for"

>> No.23509748

Is there really a difference between "pragmatic" and "right?" I don't know if there is. To me, what right is is the action that brings about the best possible outcome for the greatest number of people, whatever that may happen to be, though causing undue suffering in pursuit of that isn't really acceptable.

Also, I don't really like lawful good, and prefer neutral good.

>> No.23509793

Well, see, that's the thing.

You're Neutral Good. So yeah, you define Good differently from a Lawful Good character.

>> No.23509818


But you also have to recognize that there are inescapable situations were a last stand for anything but pure defiance and bravery are the way to go.

>> No.23509832

I don't really get the point of lawful good, honestly; neutral good and chaotic good get combined into just "good" in 4e, but I don't see what makes lawful good seem somehow better to its practitioners. All it seems to do is handicap you with more strictures, when just being good saddles you with a lot already.

>> No.23509850

Oh, it's going to be one of THOSE threads.

Protip: that's not how the alignments work.

>> No.23509890

>> No.23509905

Phillosophers have been debating that for years.

It helps that in D&D evil and good are quantifiable forces. It isn't up for debate that radium emits radiation in all scenarios. Likewise in D&D it is never up for debate if certain actions create more evil. Torture is never acceptable, nor is cruelty. It gets dicey in gray actions, ones that even paladins have a hard time with and that prove to them that the world isn't perfect and they alone can't be the judges of what is right and wrong.

Killing one innocent to save a thousand? A paladin should look for other options but if there are none to be found it is the kind of choice that leaves the code. It is the kind of choice that when a paladin is forced to make others look on him not with judgement for his actions but for pity that he ended up in that situation.

Chaotic good people encourage people to stand on their own and help them reach that.
Neutral good people help people to their feet themselves.
Lawful good people try to make everyone stand together.

All three kinds of people NEED to exist. You need people teaching people to get jobs, soup kitchens run by individuals, and people trying to get people to care about each other. Any friction between lawful good and chaotic good isn't if the other should be acting the way he wants too, but how much he should be.

4e kinda dropped the ball with keeping lawful good and regular good separate, and then doing things like having the paladin of sacrifice imply lawful good was "Super good." Suffice to say simplifying something explainable because it is too complex and forgetting the reason you did it is bad.

Chill out. Alignments are an insanely confusing concept because they work off of energies and philosophical concepts that could not possibly work in real life.

>> No.23509912

I think the reason why GM's like to shit on paladins is because of the concept of Good Lawful. First of all, nobody can be inheritly be pure Good Lawful. There are times when you need to realize that there is a potential when you need to be evil in order for true justice to be withheld even if it means killing someone to end a life long torment, or achieving the greater good. Or being chaotic where you need to break the law in order to achieve fairness. Just like those Private Eyes who have to go against the court and law in order to give fairness to a person wrongly accused. This automatically breaks the Lawful Good concept. And as a lawful person, there are times when you need to realize that the law is the law even if the ending outcome is to sentence someone to a life of imprisonment, stripping someone of their rights, which is evil in definition. Are you going to break the law and define what is right because you are good? Then you are no longer lawful but you Chaotic. In theory, a Paladin has to be strict in terms of Good Lawful, or else he isn't a Paladin, and that does not work.

Another reason is for the shits and giggles. Its funny to break a person's character as a GM and see their Pally become a fallen. Its just too easy to fuck with them. And there isn't much to roleplaying as a Paladin, because your character is defined from the start. You are expected to act this way for the rest of the game if you are a Pally.

>> No.23509917


>> No.23509944

That makes my lawful good dick rock hard.

>> No.23509953

>this whole post

>> No.23509966


Maybe it is foolishness.
It is irrational for any man to decide that he'd rather bear the anguish of the whole world than watch even one person suffer in his stead.

Paladin is a symbol of hope to those he protects. No matter how short-lived that hope might be.


>> No.23509983


God I love Kamen Rider.


>> No.23509990

The first part, I'll agree with you on. In your other thing... I never really saw the alignments divided like that; I don't see why neutral or even chaotic good can't help people stand together. I personally will use laws if they're good, but I see no particular reason to obey the bad ones if I can do better by disobeying them.

Incorrect; it's part of the paladin's code that they have to prioritize good over law if the two clash.

I wouldn't call it foolish; I think the whole idea is to work toward a world where no one has to suffer anymore.

>> No.23510001

You say "handicap", I say "guide". Lawful good looks at the world and the human condition and sees that people have a tendency to go astray, even when their intentions are pure. People are constantly swayed from righteousness by incomplete information, personal desires, or just plain old shortsightedness. Furthermore, even in the best of circumstances, our perspective is only so broad. Can we really be sure that this pragmatic compromise won't plant the seeds of something even worse down the road?

That's why we have rules -- to keep people on track, and to discourage rash speculation. It also prevents bizarre double-mindedness, like your earlier point:
>what right is is the action that brings about the best possible outcome for the greatest number of people, whatever that may happen to be, though causing undue suffering in pursuit of that isn't really acceptable.

Just how do you define "undue suffering" if you don't know what brings about the greatest good? If the right thing to do is whatever produces the greates good for the most people, then wouldn't the proper moral approach be to rigorously investigate every possible approach as thoroughly as possible, even if doing so will likely cause a good deal of suffering along the way? After all, in treating disease, you don't just throw any old treatment that seems like it might work at the patient -- every treatment is carefully evaluated with extensive studies to see if it works, and how well.

>> No.23510051

Laws are a means, not an end. If they're effective, fine, they can be held to as long as they serve their purpose. If they become corrupt or are used too often to allow corruption to flourish, there's no particular need to respect them for being the law.

And yes, I prefer as much investigation as can be practically done, until quicker action is necessary.

>> No.23510059

He is... slightly right.

A lot of people confusing being a paladin with being perfectly lawful good.

There is a reason paladins are not exalted by default. They are human, make mistakes, and have their own wants.

A paladin strives to serve as an example and to unify, and would never make a critical error towards evil, but at the end of the day even D&D isn't a black and white world.

A good GM would give a pass to anyone who tries as hard as they can without forgetting what they are trying to accomplish. It is one of the one things I like about 4e alignments. They are not straight jackets that you can fall out of instantly for mistakes. They represent what you are trying your hardest to do, be it to be good, or thinking you are doing good but actually encouraging evil. In 4e the fact you are trying to do right is more important than if you actually manage to do it. After all, a paladin doesn't fall because he missed a demon with his bow and it got away did it?

Only when a paladin fallss to a jaded sense of pragmatism should he well and truly fall.

>> No.23510111

Your brain runs quite fast for something with important wheels missing.

>> No.23510122

Actually, I think paladins are exalted by default; the Book of Exalted Deeds basically says that "exalted paladin" is a redundancy. By default, I think that paladins can take exalted feats as long as they keep to their code.

>> No.23510321

>If they become corrupt or are used too often to allow corruption to flourish, there's no particular need to respect them for being the law.
I was speaking more in terms of more fundamental moral codes, though societal law structures are also part of the lawful good package. The former are meant to be immutable signposts you can look to in order to make sure your own moral compass isn't getting out of whack. The latter are not so absolute; a lawful good individual can and should stand in opposition to a corrupt or unjust law. The difference between a lawful good and neutral or chaotic good alignment in that situation is that where a nonlawful person might simply ignore or pitch the law and have done with it, the lawful person recognizes the necessity of laws and obedience thereto for good to truly flourish, and thus would seek to reform the bad parts while maintaining the value of law as a general principle as much as possible.

>And yes, I prefer as much investigation as can be practically done
I think you underestimate just what sort of investigation we're talking about here. I'm talking full-blown social engineering experiments, setting up artificial societies for the express purpose of testing ideas. Such experiments would, by necessity, break many conventional ethical standards (such as informed consent). It would likely also entail trying methods that many might consider quite unsavory.

>> No.23510425

>> No.23510505

man that vids pretty cool

>> No.23510534

Fundamental moral codes, you can use in ordinary good along with lawful good; the latter certainly has no monopoly on them. And trying to reform laws frequently lets too many people suffer while trying to do so; reform them if possible, but break them if need be to protect people.

As for the investigation... it's an intriguing question, one that'll require more thought.

>> No.23510859

Where is the lawful part coming from?

>> No.23510971

A lot of people confuse "Law" with "Lawfull good"

Like they correlate it with mundane laws.

Here is a scenario: You are the only man of power in a city, your budget is extremely tight at this point and the city has an extreme unemployment problem.

You have enough money to only try to do one thing about it.
A chaotic good person may try to increase education, and try to give those unemployed people a means to take care of themselves.
A neutral good person would see the suffering as an immediate problem. They would try to start something like a halfway house or soup kitchen.
A lawful good person would try to bring people together to solve the problem. They may start a think tank to figure out the source, or may start a charity foundation.

All of these things are valid solutions to that problem. Ultimately all three alignments want to d oall of these things, but they prioritize certain ideals over others.

Now imagine that you had two friends, each of a different alignment than you. One of you starts the education center, one of you starts the soup kitchen, and one of you starts the charity foundation.

Things will become better a lot faster. The teacher is making sure not only are people not utterly dependant on anyone, but now they can start doing things like earn money to donate to the kitchen and foundation.

The kitchen makes sure that the problem is stopgapped, they are giving the other two time to work.

And the foundation is trying to ensure that society will never allow the problem to happen again.

Good is different than evil. A lawful good person and chaotic good person empower each other. They go out of their way to empower each other.

Conflict is always minor, because the energies of law and chaos are more stable than good and evil. Unless something goes way out of whack they will keep doing as they do. The :G character may say "You are not stopping the real problem" but they don't say "No soup kitchens or schools!"

>> No.23511020

It may not feel too classy
Begging just to eat
But you know who does that? Lassie
And she always gets a treat

So you wonder what your part is
Because you're homeless and depressed
But home is where the heart is
So your real home's in your chest

Everyone's a hero in their own way
Everyone's got villains they must face
They're not as cool as mine
But folks you know it's fine to know your place

Everyone's a hero in their own way
In their own not-that-heroic way

So I thank my girlfriend Penny
Yeah, we totally had sex
She showed me there's so many
Different muscles I can flex

There's the deltoids of compassion
There's the abs of being kind
It's not enough to bash in heads
You've got to bash in minds

Everyone's a hero in their own way
Everyone's got something they can do
Get up go out and fly
Especially that guy he smells like poo

Everyone's a hero in their own way
you and you and mostly me and you

I'm poverty's new sherrif
And I'm bashing in the slums
A hero doesn't care if you're a bunch of scary
alcoholic bums


Everyone's a hero in their own way
Everyone can blaze a hero's trail
Don't worry if it's hard,
if you're not a friggin 'tard you will prevail

Everyone's a hero in their own way
Everyone a hero in their -

>> No.23511065

Lawful Asshole.

>> No.23511148


That is how you Paladin.

You are the party's fun police.
Just be sure to remind them that you have to be a dick, or lose your powers.

>> No.23511277

I'm not saying that a LG won't flat out defy an unjust law if it's causing significant present evil, but rather they won't be content with just defiance, and they'll make sure as much as possible that the problem is not laws or authority per se, but rather the specific ways in which the particular law in question is prone to causing evil. LG always strives to emphasize that the problem is not law itself, but rather shortsighted drafting of laws and abuse of law for evil ends. LG may defy a law or set of laws, but they strive as much as possible to maintain the rule of law, if that makes sense.

Essentially, they would approach the situation with an attitude of gravitas and careful deliberation, remaining cognizant of the fact that their defiance of the unjust law may set an example that could be misinterpreted by the people as a precedent for lawlessness and general disregard for authority. They strive to avoid sending a message that any law you disagree with can be ignored out of hand. Instead, they defy the law in such a way as to emphasize that laws are fundamentally good and necessary for a thriving society, and in fact exist precisely because people often disagree with them. It may be that laws sometimes lead to evil and thus should be defied and overturned, but this is not something to be done rashly.

>> No.23511345

>make sure as much as possible that the problem is not laws or authority per se
*make sure to emphasize as much as possible

>> No.23511878

Paladins are played from within, they take an ideal and go for it. As long as they are doing what is right according to their beliefs they're doing well. I had a buddy that would play paladins as bastards and our DM was to chicken-shit to call him on it. So, I rolled a new Barbarian and out Paladined him. 6'6" Human Barbarian raging for truth and honor, saving orphans, refusing to kill unarmed opponents, helping former foes get back on their feet, giving his share of the loot to the various charities he came across, and, finally, he called out the Paladin and eventually drove his greatsword straight through him and left him impaled in the road, a marker for all that in this world there was still a place for honor and justice.

>> No.23514085

What did your buddy do?

>> No.23516598

throgbor the paladin

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.