Universal Paladinhood vs. God-sworn Paladinhood

[bentusi16]

So, I've seen on other servers and I don't know if it's here, and I'm not sure it's really touched on in the DnD books, but the idea of a universal paladinhood vs. the more god-centric paladin system.

Universal paladin hood refers to the idea of some sort of universal code that all paladins must follow.

Up to a point I think this is correct, such as not lying, not stealing, not striking down an unarmed opponent, things of that nature.

However, paladins are given their powers by the gods. Specific gods. No paladin exist outside the influence of the Gods.

Because the paladins are inevitably part of a church, and by their nature are holy warriors of said church vs. the clerics of said church, it seems to me that, paladin to paladin, different oaths to their gods would apply.

And since their powers are granted by their god, that their oaths to their god, and their gods dogma, would come first, then the universal oaths second, then the laws of the land third.

As lawful good characters they are supposed to respect lawful authority that is of good intent (hence the clause about ignoring unjust laws), but lawful is also about sticking to a particular moral code. With paladins that moral code is supposed to be Good in nature.

Anyway my question/point is, what comes first, a paladins gods dogma, his own personal code, or the law of the land he is in?

This is not a way to try and come up with an excuse to 'police the playerbase'. I know that everyone is super scared paladins will start smiting evil all the time if they had the chance to. Mind you if they did their arms would fall off from over use.

However, it is absolutely one hundred percent stated that a paladin is going to lose his powers under two specific conditions.

1. If he commits an act of moderate evil of his own free will. (Lieing once isn't going to make him lose his powers, committing murder out of jealousy/rage/hate/fear is)

2. If by his action or inaction he allows an evil act to occur that he could prevent, of his own free will. (Sitting by while a person is robbed or attacked)

This is where the personal oaths and god dogma come into play against and with the lawful alignment: On one hand, it is lawful to stick to a personal code strictly, while respecting the greater society. On the other hand, the paladin has taken oaths to prevent evil from occurring if they can stop it in any manner. And yes, that includes bashing the head of the robber/murderer open before they can finish the job.

So to me, the order is.

1. Gods dogma (Changes from god to god)
2. Paladin Oaths (Don't lie, don't steal, don't cheat, be honest, be merciful, respect the local law)
3. Personal oaths (Changes from person to person)

The main raeson I bring this up is because of the undead invasion.

On one hand, they are undead, and necromancers are usually evil. A simple detect evil would settle the morality of destroying them.

On the other hand, legitimate authority is supposed to be respected. Since this is not modern earth, legitimate authority are 'whoever is in charge and isn't bleeding the kingdom dry' type deal. If the necromancers came in, and set up a fairly reasonable and just system, then the paladin would be hard pressed to come up with an excuse to attack it, depending on the god of the paladin.

Further, since this is an age of might makes right, a war between Cormyr and the undead horde, if the undead horde is not making unjust laws and oppressing people, is a political squabble between what are essentially two legitimate authorities.

A torm paladin and a Tyr paladin and a Ilmater paladin would all have different logic behind everything they do.

[Munroe]

I would say it would go:

1.) Paladin oaths.
2.) Personal oaths.
3.) Deity's dogma.

A person can follow a diety's dogma, even a lawful good deity's dogma, without being a paladin, but a person cannot be a paladin without following the paladin oaths.

A paladin can fall from paladinhood without breaking their deity's dogma, and without changing faiths, if they break the paladin's Code of Conduct.

I placed personal oaths above deity's dogma as well, because to a paladin any oaths undertaken should be as binding as his paladin oath, since his paladin oath includes restrictions against deception. A paladin shouldn't be taking any personal oaths that are in conflict with his paladin oaths, and should honor those oaths he undertakes.

In Forgotten Realms, a paladin's deity must be LG, LN, or NG, or Sune, who is the CG exception to the alignment restriction rule. Regardless of whether the paladin's deity is LG, LN, or NG, or Sune, the paladin always must be LG. That means that at times the paladinhood itself may clash with the deity's dogma or alignment. In such cases, the paladin's LG alignment and paladin code of conduct must be given preference over the deity's dogma or alignment.

If a deity is sponsoring paladins, such a deity must accept that the paladin's Code of Conduct is going to take precedence over the individual deity's dogma or outlook.

Neither of the examples Mercenary gave conflicts with this view, however, because neither the Golden Lion nor the Golden Cup orders require the paladin to violate his oaths to fulfill the goals of the order (as Merc listed them).

[bentusi16]

For the sake of discussion, it might help to define what the general paladin oaths are. The code of conduct seems to be the standard DnD stuff.

Don't lie
Don't steal
Don't cheat
Do not strike down unarmed opponents
Give selflessly
Don't break your promises (or oaths)
Uphold the law
Do not associate with evil people

The last two are kind of impossible to actually do on FRC

For uphold I guess we have the 'legal dictionary' definition ( legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/uphold ) which has a lot of active words. Upholding the law is what cops do IRL, after all, but FRC has a very strict anti-character law enforcement OOC policy.

And the last one is obvious; it's 90% of the reason 'detect evil' exist as a spell like ablity for paladins, so they can make sure they aren't going to fall by associating with someone of evil nature. It's not meant for 'detect evil = smite', which is a really crappy way to play a paladin and should be treated as such, from my perspective.

[StabbingNirvana]

I don't think there's a stict order of what oaths are more important. Every oath a paladin takes is to further the cause of good and his deity so they all should hold a decent amount of weight. He wouldn't make different oaths that a counter to one another, so it shouldn't matter really.

It should look something like this for a brief example using A Tormish template:

Oaths:
Don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal, keep to the penance of duty, vow of personal stuff

It shouldn't be:

Paladin oaths:
Don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal
Personal oaths:
Vow of personal stuff
Religious oaths:
Keep to penance of duty


About upholding the law, if a paladin sees an unlawful act occurring and there's 100% guilt of said culprit, I'm sure he can deliver them to the guards and let the guards do the rest. He is a paladin afterall. Law enforcement should be a bit more accepting of a paladin doing that than any random adventurer, I would think.

On detect evil, you don't really need it. People tend to play their characters pretty openly about what they are. Through associations, faiths, opinions of goodly gods, law, stuff like that, you could figure out who is who. My paladin doesn't associate with a group of people of a particular goodly faith because he believes their associations with evil faithed clergy and other questionable evils to be against the common good and worse, supporting evil to a degree. It would be a nice ability to have and should be given to paladins who wouldn't abuse it I'd say.

[828stingstingneo]

May 11, 2013 8:37:16 GMT -5 bentusi16 said:

Don't lie
Don't steal
Don't cheat
Do not strike down unarmed opponents
Give selflessly
Don't break your promises (or oaths)
Uphold the law
Do not associate with evil people

The last two are kind of impossible to actually do on FRC

My paladin does follow the last one but changes it to "Do not KNOWINGLY associate with evil people."

As for "Do not strike down unarmed opponents," that one's more of a toughie. Plenty of monsters don't have arms.

[Razgriz]

Detect evil makes it to easy in my opinion. The more you do it the more it becomes a habit. If anything, Holance just uses it for NPCs and I try to find out ic who could be evil or who is.

[Rane]

How about arson holance. HUH!?!?!?

[docofmadness]

as the player of honorbound i can say that personal codes often overrule god codes. because how each paladin is raised and the order he was raised in make each of us different even if we all serve the same god. even paladinns are not printed out on a press with lawful good arse tatoo on are heads. it is the different personal views that make us all fun to be around. and no i am not ranting here

[mandene]

Here is my lengthy debate on the subject. I'm going to address OP's question in two different sections. Secion 1 will address the Uiversal Paladinhood vs God-Based Paladinhood. Section 2 will address the question of what thing is more imortant. So here it goes.

---

Section 1: Universal Paladinhood vs God-Based Paladinhood

The answer to the question if paladinhood is universal or god-based would be: Are you playing paladins on FRC based on the "standard/cannon" D&D description of a Paladin, or are you playing the Paladin according to the Forgotten Realms Setting?

You see, there is a big difference between these 2. In cannon D&D people (most importantly clerics and in extension Paladins) can ignore gods alltogether and decide to dedicate their lives to an ideal - that ideal being representation of a certain alignment. For a Paladin that would be the representation of the Lawful Good alignment, of course. Then the books go on describing that Paladin is more than just his alignment, he also follows a code of condact. And thus there is a Universal Paladin Code of Conduct. So, Paladin is first and foremost a Paladin, and religion becomes pretty unimportant, since a Paldin would choose a religion that would support his Paladinhood, or no religion at all.

Now to the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. Differently from cannon D&D, religion is central in everything here. Gods are not just representation of some ideals you can choose to follow, or choose not to follow. Gods are real, people have seen most of them not that many years ago. According to the books, you would be considered wierd, stupid, or even crazy if you say you don't believe in gods. And we also know that it has practical ramifications - if you don't follow a religion, you end up dissolved on the wall in Limbo. So where does it leave the Paladin in FR? In a very different situation than in D&D. Suddenly, Paladinhood is no longer universal - it is based to the Paladin's religion. The 3rd Ed books skim through this, but the 2nd ed Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting  (FRCS) actually has something to say about this:

There is no specific paladin's code, no set of do's and don'ts by which paladins are graded on pass/fail basis. The closest thing to such a code is "Quentin's Monograph," a short treatise on the nature of alignment and paladinhood by a retired paladin. In addition to flowery descriptions of early endeavors and practical advise on the care of weapons and animals, the monograph summarizes what it calls the Paladin's Virtues.

The listing is not all-inclusive, and every paladin grades and emphasizes these virtues based on his or her own personal ethos and religious background. Paladins may obey all these virtues to the letter and still lose their special status, or flout one virtue in the name of another and still retain paladinhood. In this fashion, a paladin may exist outside an organized hierarchy or even lead rebellions and wars against unjust or evil causes. It is possible under these virtues that one paladin may even fight another, both seeking to defend a different paladin's virtue or interpretation of all of them.

Paladins in the Realms, like priests, are devoted to a particular deity. The most common paladin deities are those which embody action, decision, watchfullness, and wisdom. Torm and Tyr are both popular deities for paladins, as is Ilmater, who stresses the need to suffer to attain one's goals. All these gods are good and lawful in their basic alignment.

Paladins also serve deities who present themselves as being good but not necessarily lawful, and lawful but not necessarily good. These include Azuth and Helm, who are lawful and neutral in their outlook, and Mystra, Deneir, Lathander, and Milil, who are good and neutral. Chauntea and Mielikki are also neutral gand good, but tend to attract more druids and rangers than paladins, though there are exceptions. No gods who claim true neutrality, evil, or chaos in their ethos and morals have paladins operating in their name.

Note here - paladins operate in their deity's name. What isn't mensioned here, but could be read from the 3e, is that secondly paladins represent their orders and follow those orders' code of conduct, and how these orders interpret the deity's dogma. Different orders can have differences, which can lead to schisms and herecies within one and the same religion; something the book titled "Powers of Faerûn" gets into in the chapter about religious leadership. Which could also mean that paladins of the same deity, but from different orders could also end up fighting each other.

Note also, that 3e, you can actually be a paladin of a chaotic deity - Sune. That puts an interesting twist on the "lawful" aspect of paladin, in contrast to the chaotic nature of their deity.

Anyway, the 2E FRCS also kindly presents us with a sidebar with an excert from "Quentin's Monograph"

The Paladin's Virtues

The paladin's virtues are:

• An organized approach brings the most good for all.
  
• Laws exist to bring prosperity to those under them.
  
• Unjust laws must be overturned or changed in a reasonable and positive fashion.
  
• People rule: laws help.
  
• Cause the most good through the least harm.
  
• Protect the weak.
  
• Goodness is not a natural state, but must be fought for to be attained and maintained.
  
• Lead by example.
  
• Let your deeds speak your intentions.
  
• Goodness radiates from the heart.
  
• Give others your mercy, but keep your wits about you.
  

As you see, thesa are fairly un-specific and very different from the cannon D&D paladin virtues. There's nothing here about no lying, no cheating, no poison. Most of those would be covered by the alignment, Paladin's own personal conduct, and the deity's dogma.

So, in total opposition to the cannon D&D Paladin, in Forgotten Realms, the deity's dogma and most importantly - the Paladin's (order's) own interpretation of it, is central to the Paladin. And the Paladin virtues are almost unimportant.


Another note: druids in Forgotten Realms contra Druids in D&D are the same dilemma. While in D&D druids follow the "nature and balance ideal" (as paladin's virtues/ideals) first and foremost, in Forgotten Realms, the nature deity and it's ethos becomes more important.

So to recap: In cannon D&D - Universal Paladinhood takes presedence, gods are only followed as supporters of these ideals, if they are followed at all. In FRCS, gods are all impotant, and the Paladin is the representative of his deity and his order and their ideals; and there is no true Universal Paladinhood.

---

Section 2: What is more important to the Paladin?

So far, I haven't found any stright answer to the order of what is more important. Instead I've found a great description of Paladin's dilemma in the "Book of Exalted Deeds". Remember that it is a cannond D&D book, so it speaks of the "Universal Paladinhood" type of Paladin. It's still a great example.

Divided Loyalties

For better of for worse, a paladin is not just good: she is lawful good, sworn not just to uphold the principles of good but also bound by a code of conduct, and subject to local law as well. Many paladins are also members of a specific deity's church, a knightly order of some sort, or both. Ath the best of times, these various loyalties - her code of conduct, her church's laws, her order's demands, the laws of her nation, and the abstraction of her alignment - are all in harmony, and her path is clear before her. When circumstances are not so ideal, she finds herself torn between conflicting demands: her superior in her knightly order commands her to kill a brutal murderer who has escaped punishment in rout on a legal technicality, for example. Her personal code requires that she punish those that harm innocents, and this killer certainly falls in that category. However, her personal code also instructs her to respect legitimate authority, which includes both her knightly superior and the local law that has let the killer go free. The demands of her good alignment suggest she should punish the wrongdoer, but the demands of her lawful alignment insist that she obey the judgement of the court. It is entirely possible that either her superior or the magistrate in the case is corrupt or even possessed. Whom does she obey? How does she sort out the conflicting demands of her loyalties?

Paladins are by no means alone in this situation. Any character who tries consistently to do good eventually finds himself in a situation where different loyalties are in conflict. Chaotic Good characters might care far less about a potentially corrupt or at least ineffectual court system, but they might have other personal standards or obligations that cause conflict in similar or different situations. In the end, however, many such conflicts boil down to a question of priorities, and for a character who aspires to exalted deeds, good is the highest priority. In the example above, the murderer must at least be captured, if not killed, before he can kill again. If she has reason to suspect corruption, either in the court or in her own order, the paladin must attempt to uncover it, though it might mean being cast out of her order, punished under local law, or both. Har paladinhood and her exalted status remain intact, since she acted in the cause of good even when tat required questioning the legitimacy of authority. Magistrates or knightly superiors who serve the cause of evil while posing as agents of good are not legitimate authority, and the paladin is right for exposing their corruption.

So based on this quote, and on my ramblings in section 1, I'm providing to answers.

For "Universal Paladin"-system:

1) Do Good, in orderly fashion (Paladin's alignment, and personal code of conduct)
2) Follow the Universal Paladin Code.
3) Any other authority the Paladin recognizes - religion, leader of the order, laws of the land, leaders of the land.

For the "Forgotten Realms Paladin"-system

1) Do Good, in orderly fashion (Paladin's alignment, and personal code of conduct, which might include personal interpretation of Quentin's Monograph's Paladin Virtues.)
2) Follow the dogma of your diety (your and your order's interpretation of it, and how it correlates to Quentin's Monograph's Paladin Virtues, and to what is important there)
3) Follow other authority the Paladin recognizes - leader of the order, laws of the land, leaders of the land.

[Razgriz]

To me it looks like both the players and DMs are expecting to see a combination of the D&D and the FRC pladin at the moment.

[mandene]

If I was to combine the two systems I would do it in this manner:

1) Do good, in orderly fashion (Paladin's alignment and personal code of conduct, and interpretation of Quentin's Mongraph's Paladin virtues).
2) Follow the D&D Universal Paladin Virtues (they should fall closely to Paladin's own personal code of conduct)
3) Follow the diety's dogma (your Paladin's, or order's interpretation of it).
4) Follow other authority the Paladin recognizes - leader of the order, leader of the church, laws of the land, leaders of the land, any other organization the paladin belongs to.

[Razgriz]

It could work, nice posts.

[gainreduction]

Aug 3, 2013 6:56:10 GMT -5 mandene said:

Here is my lengthy debate on the subject. I'm going to address OP's question in two different sections. Secion 1 will address the Uiversal Paladinhood vs God-Based Paladinhood. Section 2 will address the question of what thing is more imortant. So here it goes.

---

Section 1: Universal Paladinhood vs God-Based Paladinhood

The answer to the question if paladinhood is universal or god-based would be: Are you playing paladins on FRC based on the "standard/cannon" D&D description of a Paladin, or are you playing the Paladin according to the Forgotten Realms Setting?

You see, there is a big difference between these 2. In cannon D&D people (most importantly clerics and in extension Paladins) can ignore gods alltogether and decide to dedicate their lives to an ideal - that ideal being representation of a certain alignment. For a Paladin that would be the representation of the Lawful Good alignment, of course. Then the books go on describing that Paladin is more than just his alignment, he also follows a code of condact. And thus there is a Universal Paladin Code of Conduct. So, Paladin is first and foremost a Paladin, and religion becomes pretty unimportant, since a Paldin would choose a religion that would support his Paladinhood, or no religion at all.

Now to the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. Differently from cannon D&D, religion is central in everything here. Gods are not just representation of some ideals you can choose to follow, or choose not to follow. Gods are real, people have seen most of them not that many years ago. According to the books, you would be considered wierd, stupid, or even crazy if you say you don't believe in gods. And we also know that it has practical ramifications - if you don't follow a religion, you end up dissolved on the wall in Limbo. So where does it leave the Paladin in FR? In a very different situation than in D&D. Suddenly, Paladinhood is no longer universal - it is based to the Paladin's religion. The 3rd Ed books skim through this, but the 2nd ed Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting  (FRCS) actually has something to say about this:

There is no specific paladin's code, no set of do's and don'ts by which paladins are graded on pass/fail basis. The closest thing to such a code is "Quentin's Monograph," a short treatise on the nature of alignment and paladinhood by a retired paladin. In addition to flowery descriptions of early endeavors and practical advise on the care of weapons and animals, the monograph summarizes what it calls the Paladin's Virtues.

The listing is not all-inclusive, and every paladin grades and emphasizes these virtues based on his or her own personal ethos and religious background. Paladins may obey all these virtues to the letter and still lose their special status, or flout one virtue in the name of another and still retain paladinhood. In this fashion, a paladin may exist outside an organized hierarchy or even lead rebellions and wars against unjust or evil causes. It is possible under these virtues that one paladin may even fight another, both seeking to defend a different paladin's virtue or interpretation of all of them.

Paladins in the Realms, like priests, are devoted to a particular deity. The most common paladin deities are those which embody action, decision, watchfullness, and wisdom. Torm and Tyr are both popular deities for paladins, as is Ilmater, who stresses the need to suffer to attain one's goals. All these gods are good and lawful in their basic alignment.

Paladins also serve deities who present themselves as being good but not necessarily lawful, and lawful but not necessarily good. These include Azuth and Helm, who are lawful and neutral in their outlook, and Mystra, Deneir, Lathander, and Milil, who are good and neutral. Chauntea and Mielikki are also neutral gand good, but tend to attract more druids and rangers than paladins, though there are exceptions. No gods who claim true neutrality, evil, or chaos in their ethos and morals have paladins operating in their name.

Note here - paladins operate in their deity's name. What isn't mensioned here, but could be read from the 3e, is that secondly paladins represent their orders and follow those orders' code of conduct, and how these orders interpret the deity's dogma. Different orders can have differences, which can lead to schisms and herecies within one and the same religion; something the book titled "Powers of Faerûn" gets into in the chapter about religious leadership. Which could also mean that paladins of the same deity, but from different orders could also end up fighting each other.

Note also, that 3e, you can actually be a paladin of a chaotic deity - Sune. That puts an interesting twist on the "lawful" aspect of paladin, in contrast to the chaotic nature of their deity.

Anyway, the 2E FRCS also kindly presents us with a sidebar with an excert from "Quentin's Monograph"

The Paladin's Virtues

The paladin's virtues are:

• An organized approach brings the most good for all.
  
• Laws exist to bring prosperity to those under them.
  
• Unjust laws must be overturned or changed in a reasonable and positive fashion.
  
• People rule: laws help.
  
• Cause the most good through the least harm.
  
• Protect the weak.
  
• Goodness is not a natural state, but must be fought for to be attained and maintained.
  
• Lead by example.
  
• Let your deeds speak your intentions.
  
• Goodness radiates from the heart.
  
• Give others your mercy, but keep your wits about you.
  

As you see, thesa are fairly un-specific and very different from the cannon D&D paladin virtues. There's nothing here about no lying, no cheating, no poison. Most of those would be covered by the alignment, Paladin's own personal conduct, and the deity's dogma.

So, in total opposition to the cannon D&D Paladin, in Forgotten Realms, the deity's dogma and most importantly - the Paladin's (order's) own interpretation of it, is central to the Paladin. And the Paladin virtues are almost unimportant.


Another note: druids in Forgotten Realms contra Druids in D&D are the same dilemma. While in D&D druids follow the "nature and balance ideal" (as paladin's virtues/ideals) first and foremost, in Forgotten Realms, the nature deity and it's ethos becomes more important.

So to recap: In cannon D&D - Universal Paladinhood takes presedence, gods are only followed as supporters of these ideals, if they are followed at all. In FRCS, gods are all impotant, and the Paladin is the representative of his deity and his order and their ideals; and there is no true Universal Paladinhood.

---

Section 2: What is more important to the Paladin?

So far, I haven't found any stright answer to the order of what is more important. Instead I've found a great description of Paladin's dilemma in the "Book of Exalted Deeds". Remember that it is a cannond D&D book, so it speaks of the "Universal Paladinhood" type of Paladin. It's still a great example.

Divided Loyalties

For better of for worse, a paladin is not just good: she is lawful good, sworn not just to uphold the principles of good but also bound by a code of conduct, and subject to local law as well. Many paladins are also members of a specific deity's church, a knightly order of some sort, or both. Ath the best of times, these various loyalties - her code of conduct, her church's laws, her order's demands, the laws of her nation, and the abstraction of her alignment - are all in harmony, and her path is clear before her. When circumstances are not so ideal, she finds herself torn between conflicting demands: her superior in her knightly order commands her to kill a brutal murderer who has escaped punishment in rout on a legal technicality, for example. Her personal code requires that she punish those that harm innocents, and this killer certainly falls in that category. However, her personal code also instructs her to respect legitimate authority, which includes both her knightly superior and the local law that has let the killer go free. The demands of her good alignment suggest she should punish the wrongdoer, but the demands of her lawful alignment insist that she obey the judgement of the court. It is entirely possible that either her superior or the magistrate in the case is corrupt or even possessed. Whom does she obey? How does she sort out the conflicting demands of her loyalties?

Paladins are by no means alone in this situation. Any character who tries consistently to do good eventually finds himself in a situation where different loyalties are in conflict. Chaotic Good characters might care far less about a potentially corrupt or at least ineffectual court system, but they might have other personal standards or obligations that cause conflict in similar or different situations. In the end, however, many such conflicts boil down to a question of priorities, and for a character who aspires to exalted deeds, good is the highest priority. In the example above, the murderer must at least be captured, if not killed, before he can kill again. If she has reason to suspect corruption, either in the court or in her own order, the paladin must attempt to uncover it, though it might mean being cast out of her order, punished under local law, or both. Har paladinhood and her exalted status remain intact, since she acted in the cause of good even when tat required questioning the legitimacy of authority. Magistrates or knightly superiors who serve the cause of evil while posing as agents of good are not legitimate authority, and the paladin is right for exposing their corruption.

So based on this quote, and on my ramblings in section 1, I'm providing to answers.

For "Universal Paladin"-system:

1) Do Good, in orderly fashion (Paladin's alignment, and personal code of conduct)
2) Follow the Universal Paladin Code.
3) Any other authority the Paladin recognizes - religion, leader of the order, laws of the land, leaders of the land.

For the "Forgotten Realms Paladin"-system

1) Do Good, in orderly fashion (Paladin's alignment, and personal code of conduct, which might include personal interpretation of Quentin's Monograph's Paladin Virtues.)
2) Follow the dogma of your deity (your and your order's interpretation of it, and how it correlates to Quentin's Monograph's Paladin Virtues, and to what is important there)
3) Follow other authority the Paladin recognizes - leader of the order, laws of the land, leaders of the land.

A good read, thank you.

[magiuss]

May 12, 2013 23:56:46 GMT -5 Razgriz said:

Detect evil makes it to easy in my opinion. The more you do it the more it becomes a habit. If anything, Holance just uses it for NPCs and I try to find out ic who could be evil or who is.

I thought detect evil was to be ignored on this server.. that it didn't work?.. but I may be wrong... well at least against other players it was not allowed I believe... but as I said.. I may be wrong.. ben a long time since I had my paladin alive.

[Fluffy the Mad]

Jan 23, 2014 1:07:05 GMT -5 magiuss said:

May 12, 2013 23:56:46 GMT -5 Razgriz said:

Detect evil makes it to easy in my opinion. The more you do it the more it becomes a habit. If anything, Holance just uses it for NPCs and I try to find out ic who could be evil or who is.

I thought detect evil was to be ignored on this server.. that it didn't work?.. but I may be wrong... well at least against other players it was not allowed I believe... but as I said.. I may be wrong.. ben a long time since I had my paladin alive.

It can be used, but only with DM oversight. Just like every character carries a lead sheet with them.

[ironpaws]

I personally think it's great that Detect Evil isn't a paladin ability. Sure, it could be fun to use it now and then to confirm suspicions etc. but not knowing if a person is evil or good can lead to some cool RP. It kinda promotes vigilance in the paladin. He has to be kind and gracious, but at the same time he can't let his guard down!

Either way, I really enjoyed the read. Some great posts about Paladin priorities.

My personal view on it is, that the Deity's Dogma and the Paladin Dogma have to walk hand-in-hand: that the Paladin Dogma is the most important, but that the paladin's dogma cannot be defined without parallels being drawn to the Deity's Dogma. A Paladin of Torm will have a dogma that ties in with Torms views on proper behaviour and with the Debts, whilst Tyr will be more on delivering righteous judgement etc.

So the three seem kind of inseperable.

As far as I see it, the challange for a paladin is not so much conflicts between the dogmas he ascribes to, but rather lies in the choosing of the lesser evil. A paladin dilemma (or any dilemma for that matter) is usually not about doing something right and doing something wrong, but about choosing between doing one of two evils.

For normal people, the choice is hard because it affects them personally.

For paladins, the choice is perhaps harder, because it's not just a part of their nature not to do evil: they have actually /sworn/ not to do evil. Even a lesser evil. Which is why the dilemma affects them so much more, I think (or should).

[Razgriz]

Some years have passed, and this thread is still so informative! (Apparently, one of my posts dissapeared for some odd reason though)

Anyway...

May 10, 2013 19:38:12 GMT -5 Munroe said:

I would say it would go:

1.) Paladin oaths.
2.) Personal oaths.
3.) Deity's dogma.

I would say Paladin Code and Personal Code both are the most important, followed by the dogma and then the laws(Just laws of course) of whatever realm the paladin finds himself/herself in.

So, for me it is more like:

1) Paladin Oath -and- Personal Oaths
2) Dogma of the Deity (Or deities in cases like a triadic order)
3) Laws of Cormyr

Why Paladin Oath and Personal Oaths share the same importance? Well, both I would say are connected and related. After all, the paladin was granted blessings and divine grace due to his/her commitment, devotion and nature. The person probably had a high sense of honor, morality, compassion and bravery. This, before answering the call to become a paladin. In other words, the personal beliefs, oaths and principles were, are and will be what makes certain individual worthy in the eyes of a deity. The paladin Oaths become just as important -when- the person is given paladinhood. Granted, some persons could be already living under the specific paladin oath, without beign paladins. I also like to think in the personal oath as part of the potential that someone has for becoming a paladin.

The paladin Oath has defined "does and do nots", but the personal code can be customised. Sacred Vows for instance, are part of the personal codes, but a paladin can choose to take some of these vows or not. Some churches I suppose would need the paladin to take a specific vow or more. Then, there are some paladins and other characters that do not take these vows, but strive to carry themselves in a way that would honor the spirit of the vow. Another example would be that some paladins never use tactics such as Knockdown, disarm or any other disabling effect that would render their foes defenseless. If someone wants to customise a paladin, the personal oath is excellent for this.

There is probably much more I would want to post, but perhaps another time.

[appleseedy]

i just like to point out that 90% of PC's are pretty obvious about their alignment. You don't need to cast detect evil to know that you shouldn't travel with the passionless couldn't care less PC

You should be asking them to prove why they should be allowed to travel with you

[malclave]

Feb 12, 2017 21:06:48 GMT -5 Razgriz said:

1) Paladin Oath -and- Personal Oaths
2) Dogma of the Deity (Or deities in cases like a triadic order)
3) Laws of Cormyr

My take on it, based on various campaigns I've played in and occasionally run in the past, is that the hierarchy is along the lines of:

1) Paladin Code/ alignment
2) Deity's requirements
3) Personal oaths (if any)
4) Rules of the paladin's Order (if any)
5) Civil law


My reasoning is a combination of game mechanics and role-playing, and the latter can certainly vary from game to game, and may be better suited to a tabletop game. It's based on the consequences of a violation.

1) Break this, and you're no longer a paladin.
2) You lose some abilities, such as spellcasting, but might be able to atone, or switch allegiance to a different deity. It won't be easy, though.
3) You might suffer some penalties as it goes to your code of honor, but is mostly roleplay (unless Sacred Vows or something similar is in play) and should be relatively easy to atone.
4) Roleplay penalty only.
5) Think of it as a roleplay opportunity!

[Kolfrosta]

I thought the side bar gainreduction put up about "Paladin's Virtues" was excellent though. Perfect.

[marredwolf]

I think that a paladin is defined by his intentions. the statement that the 'road to hell is paved with good intentions' is not something i think makes much sense. i prefer 'the road to failure..." In many ways the paladin is the law himself, or so he sees it that way, my opinion. He is allowed and encouraged to distinguish between a 'bad law' and a good one. as to what he puts ahead of his belief, rather his god first or the law first or the paladinhood first, should be decided by the paladin himself. A paladin does at times seem like a vigilante when you consider that he may decide to go against the law. it could be as dark as the dark knight himself, like Batman, believing in a real sense of justice but without going thru the process of the system of laws, judges and executioners. heard alot of people saying that i play my own paladin the wrong way. what they dont understand is that i never wanted to be a perfect paladin to begin with.

by saying that im not doing it right just makes a stronger case for my 'flawed paladin' concept. i want to be flawed, as humans are, and not perfect. if you say im doing it wrong chances are that i have succeeded in my attempt to play my character. wolf munroe said it is a very hard thing to do to walk that fine line with a paladin in frc, that its hard to maintaing the paladinhood in frc. i like playing it the hard way then, to this day i havent received a word that ive fallen my flawed paladin is still a a paladin. that is perfect, exactly what i had in mind. not a fallen or failed paladin, just a flawed being trying his best to do good by more means than most paladins are willing to consider.

[Razgriz]

Feb 19, 2017 17:49:16 GMT -5 marredwolf said:

I think that a paladin is defined by his intentions...

Paladins in FR do not consider certain courses of action, because if they do, they risk breaking their oaths. To put it simply, how someone goes about performing some deeds (Actions) is far more important to the gods than why (Intentions). That is how paladins are expected to be played here.

The level of tolerance in FRC for a mistake done is high enough for almost anyone to learn from the experience, do atonement and improve. This, without even gaining evil/chaos points.

Nobody is expecting perfect paladins, or examples of any other class here. Flawed personalities are more interesting than perfect ones most of the time. Still, what folks want to see here is accountability and respect to the setting and lore.

Even if you as a player would rather not see your paladin fall, then at least trying to have him show some sort of regret, shame and then trying to right the wrongs in some way, would speak volumes of you as a player and your character.

Whether your paladin has fallen or not, is not for other players to decide though. Also, he has his own thread, so I would say him and other paladin characters of FRC should be left out of this one. Ask yourself if your paladin has crossed any limits that he should not cross; if he repents and if he has tried to at least seek guidance and a mean to atone since then.

Edit:
If the answer to the above is a "No", then nothing will probably happen to him, but he will not be taken as seriously as you would like. In contrast, if the answer is a "Yes", and the roleplay has been consistent, then maybe a DM will be interested and you could even receive more than what you expected. Little by little that paladin could gain renown and become a symbol in his own way.

[Fenix]

Feb 19, 2017 17:49:16 GMT -5 marredwolf said:

I think that a paladin is defined by his intentions. the statement that the 'road to hell is paved with good intentions' is not something i think makes much sense. i prefer 'the road to failure..." In many ways the paladin is the law himself, or so he sees it that way, my opinion. He is allowed and encouraged to distinguish between a 'bad law' and a good one. as to what he puts ahead of his belief, rather his god first or the law first or the paladinhood first, should be decided by the paladin himself. A paladin does at times seem like a vigilante when you consider that he may decide to go against the law. it could be as dark as the dark knight himself, like Batman, believing in a real sense of justice but without going thru the process of the system of laws, judges and executioners. heard alot of people saying that i play my own paladin the wrong way. what they dont understand is that i never wanted to be a perfect paladin to begin with.

by saying that im not doing it right just makes a stronger case for my 'flawed paladin' concept. i want to be flawed, as humans are, and not perfect. if you say im doing it wrong chances are that i have succeeded in my attempt to play my character. wolf munroe said it is a very hard thing to do to walk that fine line with a paladin in frc, that its hard to maintaing the paladinhood in frc. i like playing it the hard way then, to this day i havent received a word that ive fallen my flawed paladin is still a a paladin. that is perfect, exactly what i had in mind. not a fallen or failed paladin, just a flawed being trying his best to do good by more means than most paladins are willing to consider.

Paladins are not the law, nor do they see themselves as the law. They -follow- the law, and they follow a code. They however have no authority to enact the laws of any country. They are the will and warrior of their deity.

As far as intentions...Not really either. If i killed 30 people with the intention to stop them from doing that in a week, well...thats not Good. Thats a decidedly evil action. Thus, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. You're going to hell because you intended to stop something, but you did it in a sinful manner.

Batman isn't lawful good. CG or LN would be more accurate. He doesn't follow laws, he is a vigilante that actively escapes police custody and acts in ways not sanctioned by laws to achieve a GREATER Good. A paladin doesn't go against the law itself, they act within it. Thats why they are LAWFUL good. A CHAOTIC good paladin might do that, but that is not the sort of paladin that is supported or allowed on FRC.


So far as your paladin...well, you're not flawed. Honestly from many of the examples of things you gave in the past, he should have fallen as a paladin. Like denouncing his faith, or using poison. Things rather blatantly against a lawful good code, as you could review in a post I was recently corrected in. Literal word for word "They do not use poison as it is against their code."

[lucid]

Big time disagree on paladins following laws. If the country is ruled by an evil tyrant, a paladin must oppose him. You just can't oppose him by assassinating him by poisoning his brandy, you have to like brandish your glowing sword and scream something about honor or justice before mowing down his gestapo royal guard to kill him on his own dais steps. There is no 'working inside the law' when you're in a dictatorship...the law is the leader's whim. "Oh well, the law says you're a slave, my hands are tied", said no paladin EVER.

[Viridian Knight]

Feb 22, 2017 1:54:49 GMT -5 @ferrynik said:

I don't have a paladin on FRC, but if i had, the main issue for me would be the tolerance to evil faiths. That's where the views of the goverment and the order would differ. I believe i'm not the first one who spotted that contradiction. Cormyr is considered as generally good and just area but the very fact of support to evil faiths on the high level would be sufficient for a paladin order to consider the goverment as "corrupted". Hence it would demand the ruler to abort the "act of tolerance to evil faiths" and if not, declare something like excommunication with moving to other area... While it's not happening it looks like there's only some good aligned PCs that disagrees to this situation that makes them looks like rebels, while there is really the controversity of co-existing of good and evil faiths and zero tolerance to evil by any lesser self-respected paladins' order.

I would disagree, I could see the majority of paladins as seeing it as the government showing respect too all faiths, even if they dislike the situation and disagree with such.  Such certainly give the paladins both the right and necessity to try and change the laws to limit said faiths and work towards limiting the actions of said evil faiths within the bounds of the law but paladins are not dictators they cannot just see something that they dislike and instantly go "I'ma get my smite on and start a rebellion even though that's chaotic" particularly if such is allowing people the right to decide what their faith is.  While paladins are not to associate or aid evil, they understand they walk a vastly difficult path that isn't for everyone (not even for all that are chosen to be such) and in turn not everyone is a paladin.  Too me, paladins are often beacons, guides, symbols that are meant to inspire people to be better through their words and actions just as much as they're suppose to be warriors that fight for the side of good in the constant struggle between the cosmic forces of good and evil (because good and evil are very much cosmic forces).

This would be vastly different if one could find the laws to be truly unjust, such as encouraging the high hunt, laws that force cities and towns having to offer up humanoid sacrifices to some evil god, laws that automatically remove all rights from a race (allowing them to randomly be beat, murdered, kidnapped, enslaved and what have you simply because they're an elf or a gnome or what have you without anything against such). 

These are all just a handful of examples, I could offer up alot more, but getting carried away with examples isn't a good thing. 

VK.

[malclave]

Feb 22, 2017 0:19:53 GMT -5 @ferrynik said:

And, i believe, the order cannot be currupted becase of the "detect evil" thing and of the general direct control of gods over church and monks'/paladins' orders.

Maybe the Order as a whole cannot be, but individual chapters can be.

This is a Greyhawk, rather than a Forgotten Realms, example, but one game I played saw a remote temple of Heironeous (god of Chivalry) infiltrated by the church of Hextor (god of Tyranny and Heironeous's arch-enemy) by using Lawful Neutral clerics.

[Deleted]

Feb 22, 2017 11:45:55 GMT -5 malclave said:

Feb 22, 2017 0:19:53 GMT -5 @ferrynik said:

And, i believe, the order cannot be currupted becase of the "detect evil" thing and of the general direct control of gods over church and monks'/paladins' orders.

Maybe the Order as a whole cannot be, but individual chapters can be.

This is a Greyhawk, rather than a Forgotten Realms, example, but one game I played saw a remote temple of Heironeous (god of Chivalry) infiltrated by the church of Hextor (god of Tyranny and Heironeous's arch-enemy) by using Lawful Neutral clerics.

FR allows for non-evil cleric followers to work in collaboration with evil cleric followers of the same faith.

Will there be conflict? Probably. Is the NonEvil likely threatened and oppressed ... ? Good chance. Numerous other possibilities.

*Kicks thread back on topic*

Paladins, yay, where ya at? I made one recently and she's adhering quite nicely to the paladin code and not ignoring aspects of her gods dogma entirely because he is LN while she is LG, and it's a faith that can and does have evil followers. So for her, the code is very important, her own principals, but her faith's teachings certainly aren't ignored. Hopefully that's concise enough.

[smacrasmacrasmacra]

Hey gang!  Charts!

[stryker]

I know this thread is old? But this is a topic i am extremely passionate about and would love to chime in on. Like extremely... like perhaps I should not chime in because i could spend years talking about this.