[ 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.38941213 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

/tg/... Why must the paladin fall?

>> No.38941226

So that others will rise.

>> No.38941245

Because there is beauty in tragedy.

>> No.38941255

Because fall mechanics exist.

>> No.38941258

Because, the memes.

>> No.38941264

You know damn well why.

>> No.38941270

>> No.38941272

Because paladin fags must suffer.

>> No.38941286

Because otherwise they are not a paladin.
Active, garnered virtue, not inherent perfection, must be gained through overcoming temptation, not accepting it.
This is why there must be a challenge- to force the paladin to grow towards the ideals of Good and Law.

>> No.38941289

Because multiverse theory states that for every possible outcome, a universe must exist. Therefore, a universe must exist where the paladin falls.

>> No.38941295

Untrue statement.

>> No.38941320

Because paladins are shit and only played by shitty players.
You play a paladin in my game? You're going to fall. No ifs or buts, it is going to happen, I'm going to make sure of it.
Don't like it? Then play something else already.

>> No.38941345

Yes, the fire rises.

>> No.38941348

Stop being a shitty DM

>> No.38941363

Because world is too cruel for goodness, Shirou. I thought Archer beat that into you.

>> No.38941366

Wow, I bet you believe that wizards should massively outclass fighters, too.

>> No.38941370


You sound fun.

>> No.38941371


>> No.38941383

If you're no friend of justice, you're an enemy of humanity!

>> No.38941388


>> No.38941391


>> No.38941420


Kouga pls

>> No.38941451

Because there's Beauty in the Struggle and Ugliness in the Success

>> No.38941469

Why shouldn't they? It's fucking MAGIC.

>> No.38941496


Because why else would someone play a Paladin? All Paladin players are full blown tsundere. They pretend they're not into falling and that they want to stay pure, but deep down each of them lusts after the drama of a tragic plotline, along with its unique mechanics and chance of a redemption arc.

If Paladin players really just wanted to be incorruptible holy warriors, they'd play LG Clerics with a few Fighter or Divine Champion levels. But that's not what they want. They want to be the angel that flies just above the lake of fire, basking in the thrill that at any time a moral dilemma could hit them like a blast of flame and send them spiralling down into darkness.

If you have a Paladin player in your group, don't be That DM: you have to give the player what they really crave and make that Paladin fall any way you can. They'll make a show of protesting, but underneath they'll be loving every second of it. No doesn't always mean no.

>> No.38941505

Beowulf wasn't magic, and he outclassed dragons.

>> No.38941519

What if I just want to smite all the evils?

>> No.38941520

Because they didn't smite the growing evil within them.
And because these idjits find joy in making paladins fall but the second one is That Guy. Why?

>> No.38941536

No he didn't he died
if he was a wizard he probably could of won

>> No.38941540


You're a liar and a slut.

>> No.38941557

Please stop shitposting.

>> No.38941574

Someone was jealous of all the jocks. I bet your characters have deep tragic backstories all because you had daddy issues because he wanted to play catch while you wanted to play video games about little girls.

>> No.38941578

Don't listen to >>38941540
Clearly he has never encounted a Doomguy style paladin before. That and I suspect he's ND.

>> No.38941579

It's not that the paladin must fall. To say that is to say that every player character should be killed.

It's that the paladin must face the risk of falling. To a paladin, falling can be seen as even worse than death. It is their struggle that makes them interesting characters, balancing their ethical stance, moral code, and personal desires. They aren't perfect heroes, and they shouldn't be. If there isn't a risk of falling, then their virtue is meaningless.

And you can go eat a dick.

>> No.38941601

b8, and ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

>> No.38941613

He died at old age, after killing the dragon and holding himself together long enough to get some fucking bling.

King Kong ain't got shit on him.

>> No.38941621

How do you feel about lawful good clerics

>> No.38941627


That's a Palatard, not a Paladin. It's some fuck saying "hurr i be edgy but it not teh bad kind of edge cuz i fight evil XD". There is nothing about that Palatards that is interesting or worthwhile.

>> No.38941647

Joke's on you, I took Grey Guard levels!

>> No.38941650


I'm not shitposting. Don't like what I'm saying? Take it to boo-hoo town, kid.

>> No.38941657

>Someone was jealous of all the jocks

And that someone is you. Why else would you pretend to be a strong guy in a magical fantasy world, other than being too much of a lazy sack of shit to lift in real life.

>> No.38941674

Whatever you say. Whatever you say.

>> No.38941679

So how's your love life going with all those women who secretly want you and they don't know it yet, because they date dumb jocks who only do better than you because you don't test well?

>> No.38941684

You just don't get it son.

>> No.38941689

You've got to become The Devil to fight The Devil anon

>> No.38941704

I'll be honest here anon. That level of projection in that post is actually worrying and sad.
Are you alright?

>> No.38941713

No, that would be envious. And secondly, I play wizards-I just feel fighters should be buffed, as they're not even close to their fantasy counterparts.

>> No.38941735

"Those who play with the devil's toys will be brought by degrees to wield his sword."

>> No.38941738

You still gotta answer the question nigga I've acknowledged my love life will be shitty because I'm a fatass who can't work out, but at least I don't take it out on others in fantasy games.

>> No.38941751

"And then stab him in the crotch with it"

>> No.38941757

Jealous and Envious are synonyms.

>> No.38941763

So that he may rise stronger

>> No.38941785

What if I just want to give The Devil a hug?
Friendship fixes everything.

>> No.38941790

I wasn't even the person you were responding to though anon. Your post just seemed like a sad and bitter cry for help.

>> No.38941801

I didn't know SKR visited /tg/

>> No.38941816

How about we do a comparison here. We see what the ups and downs of paladins and clerics see who has the fewer disadvantages.
This isn't MLP or anime. That won't work.

>> No.38941823

Because we become the beasts why fight
There is Darkness within light
Balance of all things
More one liners.
Honestly, I dont like it when Paladins fall, bcuz eval, I prefer it when Paladins start to take their code too seriously after having to kill piles of monsters and demons. Like when a Pali thinks Lawful Good is no longer an alignment, but a code to live by and all who disobey it deserve to die. And then a Paladin falls because he does what is right in his eyes, but maybe not his god's. But the normal ways are sometimes interesting too.

>> No.38941837

They do not mean the same thing.

Jealous = Taking something others have so that you alone have it.

Envy = Destroying what others have so they cannot have it.

>> No.38941867

Even Mortal Kombat has friendship.

>> No.38941869


or won't?

>> No.38941876

Shut the fuck up that's not what those words mean you goddamn retard

>> No.38941884

>not anime

Then they're doing it wrong.
Evil will be redeemed though the BURNING RIGHTEOUSNESS in your heart!

>> No.38941897

Anon you're committing the cardinal sin of mistaking your personal Connotations with Denotative definitions of words.

>> No.38941901

I personally think lamia daughter quest actually had one of the best near paladin falls out of most quests. The MC nearly fell, not because she angered her patron god (which, granted there was no way to prove actually granted her power or not), or because of extreme hardships, but because of her wishing to be recognized by a dragon as an equal, something that, from a creature that is literally 90% ego and 10% fire, is quite impressive. This nearly derailed the mc from the whole lawful good mindset to do so.

It also reinforces that the only way a paladin can fall is if they stop acting like a paladin. It also means only they can choose to fall and stay fallen.

>> No.38941905

Well, this got real shitty real quick.

I agree that part of the appeal of the paladin is the challange of keeping to your code, and carefully deliberating when (or if) to break it. You constantly have to search for the high road, which meshes poorly with your average murderhobos.

That, and soloing dragons is badass.

>> No.38941922


>> No.38941927

Okay, maybe once in a while friendship can work.
I now see the errors of my ways. But it won't stop me when I go Not!Kekfa the Bard.

>> No.38941946


>> No.38941950

Ignoring that those are your personal definitions, how the fuck could you be dumb enough to redefine an adjective and a noun as verbs?

>> No.38941990

So I guess not all evil must be smited violently. I guess it takes friendship too.

>> No.38942030

>How Amazing Is The Ass In Life!

>> No.38942085

>Sassy fat black woman paladin

>> No.38942123

wtf are you taking about?
he definitely died

>> No.38942131

favorite quotes to ham-hand onto your Paladins?

>So what if I'd spare him? In my mind, it's the certainty in myself that I possess which allows me to have that kind of mercy or compassion. There's no wavering on that point. It's fixed like the stars. The fact is, I'm never gonna be killed! So remember this: Mercy and compassion are virtues that only the strong are privileged to possess. And I am strong.

>> No.38942163

He died after killing the dragon, and if he wasn't already old as shit he would've survived it.

>> No.38942228

Because there's no heroes left in men.

>> No.38942232

Some friends of mine planned on doing stereotypical sassy black women paladins based on this: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a-C9q-Na6_w

>> No.38942249

He died after he killed the dragon and monologuing about what to do with it's bling. If the dude wasn't an old ass king at that time he'd have solo'd it like Grendel and his mom.

>> No.38942303

Law of large numbers on a large timeline.

>> No.38942366

The same reason the cleric must loose the favor of their god, the wizard must loose their arcane knowledge, the sorcerer their raw power, and the barbarian their illiteracy: characters grow the most when you take away their comfort.

The problem is that in shit systems a character is defined mostly by their class and not their actual character. Not to mention a character in said systems without the full ability of their class is effectively dead weight and no fun to play.

>> No.38942542

Got any more of these?

>> No.38942633 [SPOILER] 


I mean... yeah. Duh.

>> No.38942665

Because they give up.

>> No.38942761

Enjoy your all wizard, chaotic-"neutral" campaign, excellent GM!

>> No.38942926

You fight the devil by righting what wrongs he commits and help those he hurts. Fighting the devil does not involve the sword but words and good deeds.
Will you take up arms against servants of evil in your crusade? Yes, but don't let that be all you do.
For every evil lord you throw down, build a city up and help its people rise. You only become the devil you fight if you let yourself take the easy path.

>> No.38942972



>> No.38942992

As a warning

>> No.38943031

Falling paladins are becoming a cliche.
How about dark knights who rise for a change?

>> No.38943049


I think I understand what the guy you're replying to is trying to say. He's saying that even if a wizard was old he wouldn't have died fighting the dragon. Some kind of wizard superiority thing, thinking that wizards are immortal or something.

>> No.38943093

Honestly the whole fight about wizards and fighters has lasted way too long and screams insecurity and fanboyism that people would cling to something so abstract and pointless.

Play whatever the fuck you want. DnD isn't about winning you spergs.

>> No.38943120

Well the wizard wouldn't have walked straight into the fuckers fire/poison breath to stab it so he's got a point. But honestly something that badass makes a wizards power meaningless in comparison.

>> No.38943128


>> No.38943156

Big enough for you and what not.

>> No.38943356


>> No.38943381


>> No.38943425


"If I take the mask off" and "excruciating" and stuff of that sort.

Glad we got that sorted out.

>> No.38943443

I never understood why that became such a big meme. What was so funny about that exchange?

>> No.38943476


The dialogue is just so awkward, and the delivery is so bizarre. If it had the right tone, it'd be more coherent, but as it is it comes off as vaguely disturbing and possibly somewhat sexual innuendo-filled.

>> No.38943537


A Paladin's ideals must be challenged at every opportunity. Even if the whole world turns against them, or the odds are impossible they should follow through. It's what makes them heroes.

>> No.38943606

>Cap is a paladin and his god is America
How have I never realized this before?

>> No.38943717


Anyone have the page of all the different heroes commenting on Captain America's mood according to the state of the nation?

>> No.38943782

The entire opening of TDKR is stuffed to the gills with unintentionally hilarious dialogue. Combine that with awkward line delivery and Bane's voice being silly as hell and you have high grade meme fuel.

>> No.38943855


You are mostly correct, although depending on what dictionary you're looking at (online dictionary vs. printed dictionary, publisher, etc.), they may have very subtle differences.

For example, I've always understood Envy and Jealousy to be feelings that revolve resentment of another person's things, success, or what-have-you.

However, I always thought Jealousy had more to do with a fear of losing something due to someone else's success, whereas Envy revolved more around hating someone because of their success and yet wanting it for themselves.

>> No.38944007

So we can pick ourselves back up again.

>> No.38944044

Oh gos the feels

>> No.38944048

They really are synonyms. The difference in meaning between the two, if any, varies from person to person as it is only connotative.

>> No.38944069

It's all thanks to the concept of Chekov's Gun. When you establish that Paladins can fall, you're introducing a chekov's gun. And most stories will always strive to fire the chekov's gun, for if it's not fired, then why does it even exist?

>> No.38944097

So what is the word that is the fear of losing something to someone else?

>> No.38944098

Because we are defined by how we deal with failure.
Also because the DM wants to feel insufferably smug.

>> No.38944112

>Establishing that Paladins can fall
>introducing a chekov's gun
That's like saying establishing that people can die is introducing a chekov's gun. And also you're applying a purely narrative rule to roleplaying. Besides, a gun doesn't need to be fired to justify it's existence, it being used to threaten someone is enough to justify it being there.

>> No.38944126

fishy fishy
pasta pasta
fishy fishy
pasta pasta

>> No.38944128

For me? I wouldn't consider Jealousy or Envy accurate for that.

>> No.38944164

I know, I just remember I read somewhere that envy was wanting what others have and something else was having what others want but I can't remember what the word they used was. Maybe greed?

>> No.38944195

pretty sure jealousy describes exactly that.
the clingy girlfriend jealous that her man's been talking to other women is a classic example.

>> No.38944198

Was it Simpsons?
>I'm not jealous, I'm envious. Jealousy is when you worry someone will take what you have. Envy is wanting what someone else has. What I feel is envy.

>> No.38944208

That's it! Thank you so much, that was bothering me.

>> No.38944227

I just pulled out my Unabridged Webster's new international dictionary, second edition. It still lists Envy as a synonym for jealousy, using "Jealousy of rank" as an example.

>> No.38944232

the others are substantially less /tg/ related

>> No.38944256

Good feelings are always related

>> No.38944289


>> No.38944378

did i kill the thread?

>> No.38944437

No, just crying good tears

>> No.38944449


He needn't, but the risk is there.

This is because the paladin exists as a archetype of a commonly held belief: That right makes Might. That those who act in a manner that is fair, who are merciful and courageous, and defend those unable to defend themselves, are better than those who do not. Because it is easy to be selfish, cruel, and wicked. Good is a trying path, where one can see the ease of evil, and its potential rewards, and forego them for the higher path.

We inherently believe that effort should be rewarded. And we know that being good takes effort. So we believe that being good should have a reward. The Paladin exists as a idea of a warrior empowered and rewarded for his devotion to good.

But we fear that such power would corrupt a man from his stance of grace and strength, and so we feel that, should he abandon the path of the righteous, the gods should revoke their gifts, to show others that strength of spirit can empower one, and falling to temptation will weaken you.

So the paladin does not NEED to fall, but it must be true that he CAN.

This is why I think of three ideals when discussing or formulating a paladin:


>> No.38944500

That's a rule for plays, which are different than the stories of roleplaying games and fantasy novels. If I include my character writing letters to family, nothing has to happen to that family. It's just an interesting background trait that I strive to have realistically represented as part of the character.

>> No.38944510

The Impossible Dream from Man of La Mancha, which acknowledges that the goals of a paladin are likely impossible, but it is the effort that counts. That one must strive to make the world better.

Stars, from Les Miserables, which reminds the paladin that it is dedication to his ideals, his unwavering belief, that powers him. That disorder breeds fear, weakness, and unfairness. So there must be order.

And the Melian Dialogues.

Which, if you are unaware, are a famed series of arguments between Athens and a "neutral" city-state (Melos) during the Peloponnesian War. Athens told them to surrender, Melos argued it was was wrong for Athens to attack, and Athens rebutted with "Right is only a question between equals. The strong do as they can, and the weak suffer what they must."
They further argued that "Strength is the first virtue" because only those in power can afford to be virtuous. Mercy is choosing not to harm someone you could. Charity requires you have more than you need that you may give it away.

Another summation of the argument was "Justice is the shadow the strong cast over the weak."

I think of this when making a paladin, because it reminds one of the NEED for paladins, and good people. IF there is no mighty power of good, then Evil will inflict what it desires. That it is in having the power to enact one's base desires, and ignoring that power, that makes one virtuous. Paladins must be stronger than other warriors, or their codes would cripple them They must have wisdom, strength, and health, that they can shelter the weak that their shadow falls over from tyrants, beasts, and criminals.

>> No.38944590

Slight point of contention:

It is a rule for effective writing of stories, rather than depictions of realistic beings.

This is because a Chekov's gun is an example of Conservation of Detail: In a story, you shouldn't add many details that aren't relevant, because they just clutter the audience's attention.

In using such details to reinforce character, however, they are meant to show us some facet of who the character is.

To use your example:

IF I noted, at a random point of a story, that a character took the time to write to his family, I would assume it somehow tied to current events. Perhaps he sought support, or feared he would die and wished to tell them, etc.

On the other hand, If I establish, "This is Lieutenant Lettuce, a good young dwarf. He writes to his parents every week." Then it become illustrative of his attention to those he cares about, his dependable nature, etc.

So if you include a detail that's out of the ordinary, that's a chekov's gun. But establishing a random trait is not.

Further, you can adapt details INTO guns, and so on. I once had a character who wrote his girlfriend every week while on the adventure, and who had a pet that was a gift from her. When the pet died, suddenly his letter home became an emotional plot point, and a moment to measure his character: would he tell her, or try and hide it until he returned home?

Just a little point of order.

>> No.38944600

>Fallen Paladin who failed to protect his people now rises as a Black Knight in the search of Redemption only to stand on the side of the law and fix the law itself from all its cracks on the contract
Sounds like a good plan

>> No.38944603

No. You just got something in its eyes.

>> No.38944639

i guess this is paladin-y

>> No.38944649


>> No.38944661

A Good hero isn't the one who protects the people, smites evil, upholds the law and defens justice. A good hero is the one with the will to stand on his ground and never give up on his ideals and even if his ideals could be wrong or if the law he upholds is broken or corrupt, he would fix it, a good hero is the one who will say "Go ahead and talk shit about my god buf if you are messing with my brotherhood, i will make your face a mess"

>> No.38944668

I actually like that you mentioned Javert in here because I always think of him as the perfect archetype of a Paladin, who when he finds himself fallen, decides he'd rather die than live a life he considers sinful or unworthy.

The rest of your theory is pretty good too, just wanted to note on that.

Valjean is clearly some sort of Paladin too.

>> No.38944674

A roleplaying game is different from a play. You can have things that don't have extreme importance to the main storyline, as the storyline is about the characters. Helping to flesh out the kind of person your character is, even through little things like writing a letter to their family, is still relevant. A Story with multiple people writing it, and can surprise them all.

>> No.38944795

Because you're playing a shit edition

>> No.38944819


>> No.38944831


>> No.38944839


>> No.38944842

If a story bothers to have "This character might die" as a narrative element, it'll probably happen. This is why someone saying that this is their last battle, or they're fighting off a mysterious illness, or that they're weak to some specific element practically guarantees that, at some point in time, this character is going to die or be brought to the brink of death - Otherwise, why even have this particular detail as part of the story?

>> No.38944867

Honest, when I first went over the paladin as a class, and noticed they were supposed to be high strength and high charisma, my first instinct was to make a paladin character who was a typical shonen action anime HOT BLOODED ALLY OF JUSTICE.

>> No.38944924

But in that case the only person who controls the story is the writer. The characters don't get to chose their own backgrounds and write their own dialogues.

The DM is supposed to create a world that is carefully balanced between fun and realistic, and sometimes just throwing stuff in is good, whether the party picks up the plot hook to go get the loot in the crypt of that creepy castle, or not to and you have to make up a tale about raiding slavers instead.

>> No.38944955

The problem with Chekov's gun is that it assumes firing the gun is the only way to make it relevant.

>> No.38944980

Sorry, I should have been more clear with my opening line:

I agree that it's not needed for roleplaying games, but it's not solely a play thing. It's for anything that has a set cohesive story arc, plays, movies, books, etc.

In fact, it's perfectly fine and recommendable to include Chekov's guns in roleplaying games.

Not every detail is a Chekov's gun. Some are purely worldbuilding, character building, etc. Though their reason/function should be explained. You shouldn't just say, "My character writes a letter to their family." You should say "My character writes home. He thinks his family will enjoy the excitement of our recent quests, and wants his family to know he's alright." That establishes that this isn't something you think should be important to the plot, it's just for your characterization to grow a little.

Also, in proper play contruction, the arc of the story is an outward manifestation of the arc of the characters. Almost all good media is about the characters.

My complaint isn't your argument that details don't need to come back, only that you characterized Chekov's Guns as a "play thing". They're a "story thing".

I mentally cast them as Paladins in a more 4e/5e/etc system, where Javert is a LG paladin of a LN belief system, and Valjean is a NG Paladin of a NG system. It's clear he believes in helping people regardless of laws.

>> No.38944983

Because demons are unknowingly performing a manner of divine selection. Someday a paladin with fly.

>> No.38945010

>My complaint isn't your argument

You have no complaint with my argument because I wasn't the person you were conversing with previously, I was just commenting on your post. Wasn't my argument in the first place.

>> No.38945037

"Father, what does it mean for a paladin to fall?"

It means he has succumbed to the world's evil. He has been defeated by the unending tide that we all face. It is only way a paladin's duty ends, besides death.

"But WHY do they fall?"

So that others might fly.

I know it's corny as shit, but I had to get it out there.

>> No.38945065

I agree with your second paragraph. There's no need for EVERY detail to come back. However, it can be fun to pick a few to have them come back. If the players don't raid the castle, maybe an orc tribe infests it, and now there's a stronghold of orc activity in the area. Or not. It's just more of a real world if some choices lead to ramifications later on, because people like tracing cause and effect. It helps invest them.

Your first point you may find to not always be 100% correct. Plenty of writers find out things about their characters while writing the play, because it slots into their head as the logical reason they believe X, or do Y. Or they find the character says something they didn't imagine.

It's like getting into character with your group, except you're every member of the group, and all the NPCs.

"The" argument then, my mistake.

>> No.38945083


Bane comes off as is they hired Homer Simpson to play a Dark Vader rip-off

>> No.38945096


>> No.38945126

You've fallen as a DM already you fool. Repent and introspect lest you become the weakling you so despise.

>> No.38945130

Why is it so difficult for people to accept that Paladins are good guys?

>> No.38945143

No one is that good.

>> No.38945147


>> No.38945182

Anyone can be that good.

>> No.38945205

Both are true, such is the tragedy of man.

>> No.38945248

That's probably WHY paladins and the kind of heroes they're based on exist in fiction to begin with. They're an ideal of what men could be but so often aren't.

>> No.38945292


It's a stilted conversation where one of the guys has a speech impediment that makes his tone hard to read.

Partly it's because the set-up is really stupid. Like, consider. This is a CIA operative. The CIA monitors a lot of shit. They have intel on a shit ton of people, or they'll hack emails and phone calls to get it. So this guy starts interrogating these terrorists that he let on his plane without checking them out, about why a guy wears a mask, a stupidly easy question. Just looking at him tells you that A, it hides his identity. B, it creates a distinctive look, no doubt to match with his nom de guerre, and C, depending on the quality of the picture, you could see that it's clearly also a delivery system for someone.

So it's setting up a kind of stupid situation, that gets even stupider when one of his captives IS the guy he's asking about.

And then he lets Bane set him up with the "It would be extremely painful" line. Like, there is no way that's not ending in a threat. But he takes the bait, and boom.

Except even the "oh so badass threat" comes off a little weird, because Bane's tone isn't threatening. It sounds almost lilting. Which leads to the joke/inference that maybe it's not a continuation of the last line, but Bane noting that he's only a big guy in comparison to the CIA agent.

Shrug. It's mostly a huge thing because Dark Knight Rises was a huge movie, and Bane was a really hyped villain, and this is his establishing moment, and it starts off just...weird.

>> No.38945349


But so are all the other ideals. When someone tell a story about an awesome, skilled warrior, people don't assume they are in fact a shitty combatant. Sure, there is subvertion, like the "Miles Gloriosus" archetype, but the fact is that it's not the default assumption. Same with magic users powerful enough to challenge the gods: sure, they could be hacks or con men pretending, but generaly they're genuine.

But when you talk about a Paladin, people will want to know how much of an hypocritical shit they are and how they will fall.

>> No.38945409

Because of modern views of the crusades and shit like that.

>> No.38945451

Skill, ability, and achievement are things that can be shown and proven.
Accomplishments are self-evident.
Virtue... is not.
It's something we're all told is good, but that experience teaches against. It's something that is perceived less the less of it one has. The presumption -and hypocrisy- of virtue is inherent to society.
Seeing a paladin fall vindicates those who are already grounded.

>> No.38945456

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

That is how I paladin.

>> No.38945464

Because that's the one unique thing they bring to the table. That's what they do.

>> No.38945468

Scratch that, that's how I live. Or at least I try.

>> No.38945499

The paladin has to fall so that I know he's still human and that he's something that I could be, even with my faults.

And goddamn do I wish I could by my own paladin. Sometimes I really need something greater than myself to believe in and strive for.

>> No.38945544


I was going to argue, but then I remembered that "virtue" and "virtual" comes from the same root.



>> No.38945575


If a Paladin falls, it means that they weren't that great.

Paladins have flaws. They're still flesh and blood, and have feelings, emotions, even moments of pettiness.

Falling is, when asked to choose between what is right and what is wrong, to look at what is right and say "fuck it".

>> No.38945610

This may be a little tangential, but i feel like its close. Currently playing a neutral good cleric who is the captain and owner of an airship business. Obviously, the whole falling thing isn't a big factor but I need to/try to remain good and while being good while you're a murderhobo is easier than people make it out to be, being good while running a company that is steadily getting larger is pretty hard. Balancing profit with morals is difficult and is making this the first good character I've played where I actually feel like the struggle to be good is readily apparent. Down to the most minute actions, any "good act" I have my character do risks the lives of an entire ship full of people who I lead into danger because of my own morals. If I sink another ship, I'm killing dozens upon dozens of men who may very well not be bad people.

>> No.38945614

The hell was that music?

>> No.38945708


Sinking ships which attack you is self-defense. The people inside the ships are probably not good persons, since they attacked you. Still, you should probably try to rescue them if you can.

Unless you mean that you are attacking other ships, in which case it is not a good act, unless you're doing so in order to help people and rescue them from harm.

> Down to the most minute actions, any "good act" I have my character do risks the lives of an entire ship full of people who I lead into danger because of my own morals.

There is plenty of good acts that don't require you to risk their lives, you know.

Dwarf Fortress's "Danger Room"

>> No.38945775

>There is plenty of good acts that don't require you to risk their lives, you know.

Not really. If it requires an airship to do it requires a crew and most of the things we do require an airship.

>> No.38945845

If I may ask a paladin-related question:

I want to make a paladin of Oaths. Basically considers oaths and promises to be morally-binding to the point of being a legal contract in of themself, and doesn't like oath-breakers and those that abuse promises. It'd help emphasize their noble background, and be a good way for them to stick with a less moralistic party (I promised I'd fight alongside them until the evil wizard is defeated.)

The problem is, how can I make this Lawful Good? It feels more Lawful Neutral.

>> No.38945925


Would your Paladin prefer someone to keep an oath of doing something horrible, or to break it?

>> No.38945936

Quick paladin question

My paladin pushed over a burning watchtower onto a group of tents with sleeping goblins in them. He felt kinda remorseful after the fact, buT he rationalized his actions because they were evil beasts. Did I fuck up?

>> No.38945948

He'd probably be against them either way because they agreed to do something horrible in the first place. Unless they were tricked, in which case the question is whether he believes in following through with an oath they didn't understand when they made.

>> No.38945950

Depends on the setting as well as the god. You might want to detect evil, before doing something like that though. I recommend a confession to clear your guilt.

>> No.38945960

That is pretty LN. But, you can fuck with it a bit and say that while oath breaking is deplorable, the oath itself has to be good. I.e. you swear an oath to protect the realm: just dandy with you. Swear an oath to murder children: not ok. More than not ok, they just explicitly stated they were evil, and you surely can't let them back out of that oath now, just because you kicked in his door...

>> No.38945994

Sorry buddy, but you fucked up. That's not honorable combat. They were sleeping and completely unaware of you. It's not a "lol fall" but if you did a few more things like that, I'd consider it.

>> No.38946022

Honestly, no. They're fucking goblins. They're slightly more worthy of an honorable duel than rats. Also, unlike orcs, gobins would not fight you fair in the traditional sense of fair combat. Goblins are pretty much 100% evil. you did no wrong.

>> No.38946026

D&D, the god is Pelor. The goblins were clearly evil, stealing and killing and whatnot but the actions we took struck me as less than lawful and good

Obviously there will be much repenting

>> No.38946028


Then your Paladin is Lawful Good.


Well, I'd say that your PC's action was logical, and that it's normal for them to feel remorseful. The justification is a bit bothersome for me, though: good guys don't kill bad guys under the rational "they're evil beasts, anyway, not people". They kill the bad guys when not doing it would lead to the bad guys harming others.

Like, you don't kill the Joker because you don't like him, you kill the Joker because if you do not, he'll come back and destroy other people's lives

>> No.38946035


You're a good roleplayer

>> No.38946042

The paladin I'm playing is the "SMITE ALL THE EVIL" type, just so we're clear.

>> No.38946085


this is my first game too

>> No.38946103


The point is that you don't smite evil because you arbitrarily decided that you didn't like some people, you smite evil because allowing it to roam free would let it harm others and ruin people's existence

>> No.38946137

We were hired to clear them out because they were robbing and killing travelers and other nasty not good things

The pushing over the burning tower was my idea

>> No.38946158

After level 5 everyone is FUCKING magic like it or not.

>> No.38946173


Most people on /tg/ that play roleplaying games like this are probably born in the mid-to-late 80's and early 90's. We are a generation of subversion and cynicism. We NEED to find the flaws in things. We NEED to find the flaws in people. We NEED to think that, since it's been ingrained in our minds by pop culture that cynicism and disenfranchisement is just how reality should be.

We've had this discussion before, OP. We know, deep down, that the Paladin who falls is better for it when they regain their powers.

They have learned from their hubris. They are no longer blinded by zealous pride. They have known what it is like to know human emotion again. A Paladin is immune to fear, disease, sickness; when that is taken away, those all come rushing back.

The regret of what they have done comes crashing down on them, and for the first time in potentially years, they feel very human things.

When That GM makes a Paladin fall, it is out of spite. When a GM presents a Paladin with a situation that makes them fall and it is utilized properly, however, it becomes a part of the Heroes Journey.

Their fall is their spiritual death, their wandering through Purgatory in search of something, anything, to regain what they have lost. Their Rebirth comes from when they have learned the lesson of why they fell in the first place.

Sometimes, redemption never comes. Some never learn their lessons, and they are forever lost to the low road.

But if a Paladin should regain what they were, they are wiser for it. Better for it. They have learned and grown as a human being.

Paladins are immune to fear; that is why they must fall, for confronting fear is what allows us to push forward and reach new heights of greatness.

That, OP, is why the Paladin must fall. Not to see him fail, but to see them become better for it.

Not all those who wander are lost.

>> No.38946195

>Paladins are immune to fear
What? Most are willing to die I guess, I never think of them as immune to fear though.

>> No.38946200


Any crew you have can be assumed to have signed on knowing the risks. If they don't, then you should have made them more clear. So the idea of putting your crew at risk isn't a worry of becoming evil.

Secondarily, any airship combat can be assumed to be a matter of self-defense, assuming your ships don't just drop out of cloud cover and open fire. As long as you bear your flags and similar insignia, and don't initiate fights, you're not in the wrong.

Thirdly, many companies have actually found that acting morally increases profits when done correctly. Treating your workers fairly, paying them generously, and insuring their care makes them incredibly loyal, and willing to work for your company above and beyond the call of duty, as well as makes them more likely to purchase your own services. (Costco for instance makes $10,000 a year off of each of its own employees. So of course they're willing to pay them $30,000-40,000 a year, they know they're getting a third to a quarter back.)

Lastly, is this a world with Airships but no widely available means of protecting the crew upon it? That's a HUGE market ripe for exploitation, and it's practically guaranteed to make money.

In 3.5, a single use item of Feather Fall at caster level 10 is 500 gp, and will save anyone from a fall of 600 ft. (You could argue with a GM that it saves anyone from any fall, if the sailor times it right (wisdom check))

Alternatively, you could create a device that stick out from the bottom of an airship and casts it on any being entering its range (75 foot radius) for 20,000 gp. That will last forever, but has the downside of only being able to target 10 men per round.

All values are assuming a 10th level caster.

And you can reduce those costs if you're willing to profit less per item, which is undoubtedly Good! (or find an artificer)

>> No.38946207

"Aura of Courage (Su):Beginning at 3rd level, a paladin is immune to fear (magical or otherwise). Each ally within 10 feet of
her gains a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against fear effects."

read your Player's Handbook

>> No.38946213

Level 3, bro.

>> No.38946219

I never interpret that as literally not feeling fear. Being immune to intimidation effects and being immune to fear in general are two different things. Besides, courage means overcoming fear, not having none.

>> No.38946231

>immune to fear

what is there to interpret.

>> No.38946239



>> No.38946256

I feel like an anime protagonist.

>> No.38946268

Immune to fear effects. You can still get scared though, you just have enough balls to always push past your fear.

>> No.38946270


what is this from?

>> No.38946271

That being immune to intimidation wouldn't stop you from fearing for others, or your own failure, or shit like that.

>> No.38946277

(magical or otherwise)

This means a paladin cannot become Shaken, Frightened, or Panicked. Which is what Intimidate does, it makes an opponent shaken.

It is perhaps better to say "a paladin's decisions are never mechanically influenced by fear."

But in multiple editions, the wording is IMMUNE to it. Fear may surround them, it may touch them, but they are not affected by it. Fear can find no grip in the heart of a paladin, it cannot shake his hand. It can howl and screech, but it cannot make him blink. He may choose to do these things, for note that he is not immune to doubt. But paladins have nothing to fear from fear itself.

>> No.38946287

Yeah, it doesn't even seem like a mystical effect, it's just the mindset of "I'm not afraid to die because life's not worth living if I don't do what's right".

>> No.38946303

That and the fucking guy is empowered by his god to not feel fear.

Honestly, is it that fucking hard for people to accept that Paladins ain't afraid of shit?


Fucking amateur hour tonight.

>> No.38946310

Actually, interestingly enough, it is EXPLICITLY a Supernatural event, meaning, among other things, that it vanishes in Anti-Magic fields.

>> No.38946328

I guess my point wasn't that he was scared by shit, just that it shouldn't be by inhuman means. The entire purpose of his life is risking it to do what's right, so why should he fear something physically dangerous. It should be a mindset thing, not a magic spell that mindcontrols them into being fearless.

>> No.38946339

I'm going to be playing a Paladin (or at least aiming towards it; they're an Expert class) for the first time in an upcoming game.
I hadn't even THOUGHT about the possibility of falling.

Then again, I'm not sure there are mechanics for it in FantasyCraft. I'll have to look that up.

>> No.38946358

Just remember any oath made under false pretences is non binding. And that you are released from an oath if the person you gave it to betrays you in some fashion.

>> No.38946370

That's terrible.

>> No.38946373

There is no actual need for them to fall though, not even slightly. They can only fall if THEY lose faith or choose the easy, non good path anyway.

>> No.38946376


I don't think a Paladin must fall or risk to fall to have interesting character development or an Hero's Journey.

Sure, their philosophy should be challenged, because not everyone wishes to be as good and at the service of others as the Paladin. But that doesn't mean that the Paladins risk to fall. Have the selfish ones mock them as they're helping the poor, the angry ones assault them as they're trying to save people, and the ruthless ones kill in front of them without any trace of guilt.

To me, the Paladin who sees Evil and decides "this is not for me" is just as interesting than the one who do Evil, and then redeem themselves

>> No.38946391


Paladins aren't empowered by gods

>> No.38946447


>> No.38946507

>the ruthless ones kill in front of them without any trace of guilt.

You would think after enough of them get cleaved in half immediately they would learn.

>> No.38946532


>> No.38946538


Paladins aren't empowered by gods. It's not bait, it's written in the rules.


As long as someone can think of the benefit of doing so, they won't stop

>> No.38946540


To be fair, they aren't necessarily powered by gods.

They could have no special powers and just be fighters with exceptional moral standings and still be considered paladins to most people.

In D&D though, a god has their back for being such a based representation of their ideals in the flesh.

>> No.38946635

>In D&D though, a god has their back for being such a based representation of their ideals in the flesh.

Wrong. The rules explicitly says that it's not a god who give power to the Paladin. In 3.X and 5e, at least, I'm not sure about the others.

>> No.38946665


>Divine power defends the paladin and grants her special powers.
You think they find that shit in a fucking tree? You don't have to directly serve the gods, but they'll still give you power for being hardcore.

>embody the teachings of the virtuous deities they serve
>As a reward for their righteousness, they are blessed with boons
>Upon reaching level 5, a paladin forms a divine bond with her god.

>Paladins aren't powered DIRECTLY by the gods, but by the mystic rites they undergo when swearing to serve a god.

>a paladin's power comes as much from a commitment to justice AS IT DOES from a god.
>Every description of the Oaths in "Creating a Paladin" mentions how you serve your gods.

>Paladins are the most skilled bearers of Terminator armor amongst the Grey Knights
>A chapter who all love their God Emperor so much they have Daemon-killing psychic powers.

I think the only game in which you're right is Mechwarrior, where Paladins are a Heavy Mech with XXL Fusion reactor and jumpjets.

>> No.38946804


>> No.38946840


In 3.X, the power come from the dedication to their alignment (typically Law and Good)

5e precises that Paladins don't get power from gods, but that they see them as role models

I can't talk about 4e or PF, so I'll admit you're right there.

40k is based on a different cosmology. The Paladins are effectively empowered by technology, psychic powers and their faith in the Emperor

>> No.38946850

is this what happens when newfags get in /tg/

are these people from tumblr

i can't tell if they're trolling or just ignorant

>> No.38946855

>I think the only game in which you're right is Mechwarrior, where Paladins are a Heavy Mech with XXL Fusion reactor and jumpjets.
Not the only game.

>> No.38946925

Because despite costant evidence of the contrary postmodern tought decided there's no such thing as virtue or goodness. This is "proved" (despite postmoderns by definition not believing in proofs) by conflating hard fringe cases to normal life. The simple Truth is that they're wrong, and that while we humans allmost never live up our potential for goodness and prefear to feel smugly elf satisfied through undeserved moral superiority, there are still people that go on and in helping and trying to be better Persons through Grace and Actions.
We might, ever so often, disappoint ourselves. But sometimes we're exactly what we were meant to be. Despite nihilists, cinics and postmoderns denying it and trying to destroy our whole ethical frame of reference, despite people judging every human relationship as a strenght and dominante issue,There are paladins amongst us even now.
It is sad that the only thing Evil has to di to convince si many people in this thread of their inexistance is "deconstructing" them. Pic related.

>> No.38946955

I'e rather go play with someone else. Goodbye.

>> No.38946986

>implying Alan Moore is evil
>implying Rorschach, despite his mental illness, didn't have a point

>> No.38947049


The problem with Rorschach was that he is a neurotic loon. It doesn't make him wrong, it just makes the way he lives not enviable.

Also, despite claiming a balck or white morality, he apparently excuses the Comedian's attempted rape.

I prefer the ethical nihilism of Beta Ray Bill, personally.

>> No.38947071

>he apparently excuses the Comedian's attempted rape
How would he have even known about that?

>> No.38947087

>ethical nihilism
So Nietzschean?

>> No.38947109

Because he's done nothing but smitebot and lawful stupid for two months.

It's lolibus time, faggot.

>> No.38947132



>> No.38947149

Well Rorschach also hated sluts didn't he?

>> No.38947170


What i'm trying to say is exactly that rorscharch is a deconstruction of The Question and Mister A. He has a point, obviously, because he's the only One that doesn't compromise with the genocidal maniac. In rpg terms he's Also the One character not moping around and actually following the plot untill the very end. But Moore tries to show him as a loon and an asshole the whole time and he makes him cry like when he was bullied when DR Manhattan kills him due to his Newfound love for all life, just to deprive him of the good death he deserved. Alan Moore is Evil. He draw a pedopornography about beloved innocent fable characters just to try and destroy the idea of purity. I won't accept any description of that man that doesn't start with the words "Evil warlock".
Rorscharch is a beloved character despite Alan moore's attempts to make you hate him, because he's still so much better than the impotent hubristic cowards and sluts he has to share the scene with and with wich Alan wants you to identify.

>> No.38947175


So you're saying that someone with a "black or white" morality system is willing to excuse a criminal who tried to rape another person, simply because he thought that this person was a slut (which he hates) ?

That's hypocrisy. Especially when Rorschach killed rapists for their crimes.

>> No.38947195

It might have something to di with the fact the comedian is allready dead by when rorscharch discovered what he did.

>> No.38947199

Someone with a black and white morality system will not register injustices against whores.

>> No.38947212

>>That's hypocrisy. Especially when Rorschach killed rapists for their crimes.
It might have something to do with Alan wanting you to hate the character and willingly putting him in indefensible self contraddictory positions.

>> No.38947215

>He draw a pedopornography about beloved innocent fable characters just to try and destroy the idea of purity.
>Rorscharch is a beloved character despite Alan moore's attempts to make you hate him
You missed the point here so fucking hard.

>> No.38947226

Yes i'm sure the point is real precious and valid despite being mean spirited bullshit at heart.

>> No.38947248

Moore's works are cynical in tone but often optimistic in message. Rorschach is supposed to be one of the most sympathetic and likable characters because of his unwavering morality, and despite his insanity and flaws.
This guy has it right- you missed the point of the character sooooo goddamn hard. You interpreted the whole story wrong, for no real reason other than "the good(est) guy doesn't get his way".

>> No.38947251


I don't think that Moore attempted to make the readers identify with the other shitheads. Watchmen is a dark work, and Rorschach is a deconstruction, but the point is that he *has* a point. The madman being right is a common motif in fiction. Here, Moore uses it to show how much of a shithole the setting is: the only one who is not fooled by it is a crazy, assholish pariah who no one in their right mind would want to be.


Doesn't change the hypocrisy.


Or it is to show us that he's still a flawed man who will arbitrarily forgive some people, just like anyone else.

>> No.38947261


The point is that some people will do the right things, no matter how much life shits on them and society goes against them, and this despite being a flawed, failing human being.

>> No.38947276

>despite being mean spirited bullshit at heart
Except it wasn't mean spirited, it was just cynical. He didn't have bad stuff happen to Rorschach because he didn't like him and wanted to shit all over him, he had bad stuff happen to him because the whole fucking setting was horrible. You weren't supposed to hate Rorschach and only sympathize with Night Owl and the other assholes. But shit like
>But Moore tries to show him as a loon and an asshole the whole time and he makes him cry like when he was bullied when DR Manhattan kills him due to his Newfound love for all life, just to deprive him of the good death he deserved.
Makes me think you're too pissed off about Roarschach not being 100% right and just stopping Ozymandias to be convinced of anything.

>> No.38947304

Lost Girls wasn't about destroying the concept of purity you mook, Moore's main goal was to prove that porn doesn't have to be shitty and can have a good story. And if it's anything about purity, it was that sex isn't impure, not that purity is stupid and nonexistent.

>> No.38947313 [DELETED] 

Funny thing about Rorschach is that he choose his nanme after the Rorschach's ink bolt test, thinking it fitted his black/white mask and view on life, when in fact it contains ink bolts of several different colors... just like the man behind the mask.

>> No.38947328

Funny thing about Rorschach is that he choose his name after the Rorschach's ink bolt test, thinking it fitted his black/white mask and view on life, when in fact it contains ink bolts of several different colors... just like the man behind the mask.

>> No.38947333

Just like how Ozymandias chose his name after the king of kings, thinking it represented someone larger than life, when really it represented the insignificance of all things in to the passage of time.

>> No.38947399


And just like "Watchmen" can seem to be a good name for a superhero team, but it's a reference to the question "who watch the watchmen ?".

Another funny thing is that I didn't even read or watch Watchmen and I still got it better than "mean spirited bullshit" anon.

>> No.38947419

How could someone be this wrong and continue to live...

>> No.38947429


Give it a read

>> No.38947498

Rorscharch its time for you to stop posting and accept that you will never enter the holy order of paladins.

>> No.38947529

He didn't excuse the rape. People misrepresent that.

In the comic, Rorschach was at Manhattan's place and was telling them that Blake died when Laurie states:
>"Anyway, it couldn't have happened to a nicer person. Blake was a bastard. He was a monster. Y'know he tried to rape my mother back when they were both Minutemen?"
Rorschach says:
>"Uhm. So you support the allegations made in Hollis Mason's book concerning Blake?"
Laurie replies:
>"What Mason said in 'Under the Hood' is what happened. God knows I'm not my mother's biggest admirer, but some things shouldn't happen to anybody. Why do you think Blake never sued Mason?"
Which is when we get to the point where everyone says he brushed it off. Rorschach's reply:
>"I'm not here to speculate on the moral lapses of men who died in their country's service. I came to warn..."
And then Laurie cuts him off with her outrage.

So what does Rorschach know about Sally's rape?
>It was revealed via Hollis Mason's book "Under the Mask"
>The Comedian never sued Mason

That's it. As a reader, we're allowed to see the attempted rape. We know that Hollis Mason is telling the truth. But when it comes to the characters the attempted rape isn't so concrete - its word of mouth in a sense. Its an allegation. No lawsuit was been pursued by Sally vs. Blake, so from the perception of Rorschach - it remains unconfirmed. Laurie, believing it, attempts to use Blake's lack of legal action to justify its truth - though this lack of legal action might not necessarily be out of guilt (as this is merely Laurie's interpretation) but that is another thing which is not confirmed. Laurie gets incensed and we ignore the separation within Rorschach's response - he is refusing to comment on the actions of Blake who just "died in their country's service" as the Comedian was still active for the US government during the 80s. Aka, he isn't there to bring up the past of the dead - he's here to warn them about what he suspects is a hero killer.

>> No.38947532

And Dr. Manhattan, well, actually what good connotations did he think that name had to begin with?

>> No.38947614


Thank you for clearing that up

Still, he did brush it off. He called a serious crime that may have happened a "moral lapse". When that's the kind of things he kills people for. But you're right that it was probably just Rorschach being insensitive and putting his foot in his mouth, rather than him being deliberately unpleasant. He isn't there for this, so he doesn't care and want to move on the real subject.

>> No.38947647

It was chosen to intimidate the commies

>> No.38947674

Superman and Batman are both paladins, with a different approach.

>> No.38947706

>mfw playing Lawful Good characters that are not paladins and acting all goody two shoes without the risk of triggering That DM instinct in the guy running the game

>> No.38947743

Fuck anon... fuck

>> No.38947749

What if I play paladin because I simply like the concept of a valiant knight bringing light to a dark world, and being as good a person as they can so much as to manifest their pure goodness as a magical force to aid them in casting out the fear and doubt in men's minds before the golden flames of courage?
I don't play paladin to be a holy warrior, I play it to be Lawful Good.

>> No.38947766

>In 3.5, a single use item of Feather Fall at caster level 10 is 500 gp, and will save anyone from a fall of 600 ft.

>Alternatively, you could create a device that stick out from the bottom of an airship and casts it on any being entering its range (75 foot radius) for 20,000 gp. That will last forever, but has the downside of only being able to target 10 men per round.

Alternatively alternatively, somebody could just invent parachutes.

I mean, ultimately not as reliable or convenient, but they would certainly be a metric fuck-ton cheaper, and wouldn't require truck with no mages, or stop functioning in anti-magic fields and the like

>> No.38947829



I'm crying.

>> No.38948005 [SPOILER] 

Tell us,in your opinion, why would someone play a Paladin?
Then, see image.
Also consider handing in your screen and monster manual.
I'd also suggest handing in your DM guide, but I'm pretty sure you can sell that in mint condition, so do that instead maybe?

>> No.38948187

I don't exactly view it as him brushing it off - as much as I view it him trying to avoid an argument he clearly has opposing views to Laurie on. Rorschach probably doesn't think the Comedian tried to rape Sally, though he may be suspicious that its not as clear cut as the Comedian is innocent - regardless though, Rorschach can't exactly punish a dead guy so the point is largely irrelevant to him.

He's picking his fights in a sense, but ain't exactly tactful in his diplomacy.

>> No.38948287


>> No.38948392

I wish I knew where to read this kind of stuff online without running into copyright hell

>> No.38948407

Go fuck yourself.

>> No.38948430

>dat post
>half of it in caps
>don't call me mad, though

That guy is mad as hell.

>> No.38948440

Go to the /co/ Win-O-Thread and ask for some links to download it. Recs and piracy are the two things they're still good for. If that fails somehow you can probably find a torrent of it. It's relatively popular stuff.

>> No.38948455

He's saying don't act like him being mad refutes his point. He's obviously mad as fuck.

>> No.38948526

He died because he gave in to greed.

Beowulf was an exemplar of male Saxon virtues. Honesty, courage, loyalty, duty, perseverance and modesty.

By going in to that lair after treasure rather than to protect his people he lost the blessings of his God /Gods. Beowulf was a paladin that fell at the last trial.

Or maybe it's because he was old as fuck.

>> No.38948561

Wait how were going into that lair and protecting his people mutually exclusive? The dragon was dead by that point. He died because he was old as fuck and he basically walked through the dragons breath to stab it straight up, something which 100 years prior he probably could've brushed off, but age caught up to him. A wizard of equal power might not have won, but if they did they probably would've survived because wizards don't have to get that close to hit a dragon.

>> No.38948814

>Ctrl+F gravity
>0 result

Gravity is the answer.

>> No.38949038


>> No.38949054

Meant for >>38941320

>> No.38949165

The absolute saturation of stupid in this post is unbelievable. As in my first impulse was to just write up a simple correction, because it's clearly wrong. But then looking at it to find a logical starting point I realize it's just wrong conclusions based on wrong logic applied to wrong evidence with wrong definitions and wrong citations. Literally everything but the syntax is wrong.

>> No.38949353


What? No, not at all.

Beowulf wasn't interested by the treasure at all. He fought the dragon to protect his people. He wanted to fight the dragon alone, because he didn't want to endanger his followers more than necessary. But word/fate/God didn't favor him, as he was an old and tired warrior against a formidable beast, and so he was losing. Also, he literally couldn't find helpful followers if his life depended on it, and only Wiglaf helped him. But Beowulf still had his god-given strength, as he hit the dragon so hard his sword broke

>> No.38949382

You didn't find gravity because these people were slightly more clever than that.


>> No.38949399

Honestly Wiglaf was ballsy and loyal but he was fucked with the ending. Having to fill Beowulf's shoes is insane, and I don't think he even had above average strength.

>> No.38949483

Damn it.

>> No.38950297


I know this is hours late (sorry, I made my post and then went to bed, it was already 3 AM here.) but first, not a newfag. I've been here since 2007. (I know this part is also unverifiable, but I can tell you I've written shit for projects as early as 2008 that are still on 1d4chan.)

Second, those are all quotes from the actual rulebooks involved.

Paladins do not have to serve a god, but it is ridiculous to claim in most settings that they are not EMPOWERED by them. In the same way you may not work for a bank, but you can receive a loan from them.

Here's 5e's first paragraph in CREATING A PALADIN:, pg 83.
>The most important aspect of a paladin character is the nature of his holy quest. Although the class features related to your oath don't appear until you reach 3rd level, plan ahead for that choice by reading the oath descriptions at the end of the class.
(gonna break the next three sentences up for illustration, with some emphasis added)
>Are you a devoted servant of good, LOYAL TO THE GODS OF JUSTICE AND HONOR, a holy knight in shining armor venturing forth to smite evil?
>Are you a glorious CHAMPION OF THE LIGHT, cherishing everything beautiful that stands against the shadow, a knight who oath descends from traditions older than many of the gods?
Or are you an embittered longer sworn to take vengeance on those who have done great evilg, SENT AS AN ANGEL OF DEATH BY THE GODS, or driven by your need for revenge?
>Appendix B lists many deities worshiped by paladins throughout the multiverse such as (IRRELEVANT)

So, of the three oaths, all of them discuss your relationship with the gods, and two of them note your role as their servant/ally. The only one that isn't is the Oath of the Ancients, which is basically the Druid-Paladin, instead being empowered by nature.

Paladins are not perpetual motion machines of faith. They don't generate their own faith to power the divine strength they then grant themselves as reward for their faith.

>> No.38950551


>. Manywho swear this oath are devoted to gods of law and good and use their gods' tenets as the measure oftheir devotion. They hold angels-the perfect servants of good-as their ideaIs, and incorporate images ofangelic wings into their helmets or coats ofarms.

> Sometimes called fey knights, green knights, or horned knights, paladins who swear this oath cast their lot with the side of the light in the cosmic struggle against darkness because they lovethe beautiful and life-giving things of the world, nat necessarily because they believe in principIes of hanor, caurage, and justice.

>The Oath ofVengeance is a solemn commitment to punish those who have commitled a grievous sinoWhen evil forces slaughter helpless villagers, when an entire people turns against the will of the gods. when a thieves' guild grows toa violent and powerful, when a dragon rampages through the countryside-at times like these, paladins arise and swear an Oath of Vengeance to set right that which has gone wrong. To these paladinssometimes called avengers or dark knights-their own purity is not as important as delivering justice.

The Paladins are devoted to their gods or their principle, but not empowered by them.

>> No.38950967

Kouga is damn near the definition of a delusional fallen paladin

>> No.38951009

Because I love paladins, but so many of the people who play them do so very poorly. They play them in a way that is unlike how LG is played by other people using other class's. Honestly most of the paladins I have seen at the table were not LG, and would throw goddamn bitch fits when called on it. Getting paladin players to write a 12 point CoC ( so player and DM will know they broke it) is pulling fucking teeth. If that do break th CoC or run the line hard and a player calls them on it they say only a the DM can call them on that, however that runs counter to the point of writing it out.. and If do agree with the player who called the paladin out I am "siding with him". I can tell you why most paladin players are so shitty too.

They are draw to the class because of authority and are dunk on its power. It is the only class that in informal player D&D social contract tradition get to tell the party what to. Because if they going along with they should not of they lose class abilities and it costs a fuck ton to get it back. Also they expect most of the lands they are in to give them some kind of authority or to be evil they can aurge out of " respect legitimate authority". For example when I ran a PF game set in the river kingdoms my paladin player of the time had a fit over the subject. A place of mostly CN kingdom, but not wholly. They mostly do not give a fuck about paladin one or the others, thus do not give them special rights or a KoS order ( the enemy kingdom of the story did though). In order to know details of the kingdoms you would need to pass a knowledge check or ask the locals. When my paladin figured out he could not be the law or ignore the law he was pissed.

>> No.38951909

But doesn't every story have that implicit element, by virtue of being about mortal races that, by definition, might die at some point?

>> No.38952091


I'm going to go with this.

>> No.38952224

It's true. No matter how much I love my characters, I always like to imagine the sad moment where they say some brave last words to the party, or where they realize they can't be with the woman they love...

Maybe I am crazy, but I don't want nothing but good things to happen to my character, but at the same time just getting a bad roll or losing an item feels cheap and without substance. Like it was the game that made me fail and there was nothing special behind it.

>> No.38952345

Naw, the mere fact that you're dealing with a story tends to space that away from reality to that extent.

Besides, we're not so much talking about common sense and logic as narrative technique. If a story, of any sort, starts to put weight on the mortality of a character, then that mortality is going to be put into play because it was given narrative weight.

It's like how in a story, if you mention a legendary sword of some sort, that legendary sword is going to pop up eventually. No matter how it's introduced, the author has, for some reason, put narrative weight on this sword more than the infinite number of theoretical swords that could exist.

It's conservation of space in work - If a movie is an hour and a half and we spend 15 minutes hearing the story of Excalibur, Excalibur has to show up because 1/6 of the fucking movie was devoted to talking about it, therefore it's going to be important as fuck... Even if those 15 minutes was listening to the town drunk tell the most twisted version of the King Arthur story where everyone was futa and excalibur was what she called his dick.

>> No.38952735

You need people like me. You need people like me so you can point your fuckin' fingers and say, "That's the bad guy." So... what that make you? Good? You're not good. You just know how to hide, how to lie. Me, I don't have that problem. Me, I always tell the truth. Even when I lie. So say good night to the bad guy! Come on. The last time you gonna see a bad guy like this again, let me tell you. Come on. Make way for the bad guy. There's a bad guy comin' through! Better get outta his way!

>> No.38952770

>It's like how in a story, if you mention a legendary sword of some sort, that legendary sword is going to pop up eventually. No matter how it's introduced, the author has, for some reason, put narrative weight on this sword more than the infinite number of theoretical swords that could exist.

Unless the sword is a metaphore for something else.

>> No.38952875

Everyone is a paladin, some just don't realize it, all it takes is the right moment...

>> No.38953098

>paladin that worships the god of executions

>murder my way out of any situation

>following my ethos still

Good luck with that, DM

>> No.38953405

Please show me the Good god of executions. If you can't, you're probably an antipalidan

>> No.38953833

Adhan is lawful neutral and you can worship any god within 1 step of their alignment.

>> No.38954005

Well, right, I can understand that. On the other hand I don't feel like the fact a paladin has a code necessarily means he's going to break it at some point. Not to say that stories about people who find out they can't pass muster when the chips are down aren't compelling. But then stories about people who absolutely refuse to compromise their beliefs, even at great cost to themselves, can be equally compelling. I suppose I would stay in the middle ground, where the paladin's code is brought up fairly regularly. Force him to make the tough decisions, that's what paladins are all about. But him falling shouldn't necessarily be a foregone conclusion.

>> No.38954052

*sniff sniff*
That smells like a prompt if I've read one.

>> No.38954665

No, immune to fear. Full stop.
"Effects" are only mentioned for the ally bonus.

>> No.38954690


It doesn't have to be the tough decisions, though, only the right decisions.

>> No.38956211


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