For Those Who Play As Paladins

[Salguod]

I play a paladin, only, and ive examines everyway that a lawful good character can and schould be.
honorful, pure, good-willed, and truthful always.
we all agree with this?
good


the level 2 spell "Undetectable Alignment" i feel should not be a paladin spell.
i can see no reason for a paladin to lie and it goes totally against law and good.

so i dont know if anyone has any pull over what DnD does, but if any of you do, think about this one for when ever 4.0 comes out. or 3.6 or whatever they feel like calling it.

thats pretty much it.

anyone have any thoughts? love to hear them. :P

[Big Evil]

You're entitled to play your paladin as a boyscout if you want too, but I think a paladin should relate closer to it's roots. The knights of templar were not nice people. They extracted justice cruely and swifly. Alot of what they did would in D&D games constitute de-paladinhood. Which is pretty self-contradicting. A paladin is a holy-KNIGHT knights were very hardend, brooding soldiers who were more then ready to kill your parents and toture your dog if it got them further to thier goals.

I see paladins less like Superman, more like Judge Dredd. I could meat them halfway and say they're like Captain America. Not CA as people think he is, read some Cap comics. He's badass. But noble.

[Agdevil]

Except in the issue where he got his ass kicked and had to be saved by a steroids junkie (D-Man). Then he wasn't badass. Guess he was noble but not badass. ... the nobility was questionable in that issue because he was turning to illegal drugs to further himself. BUT he ended it with a slightly indecisive no and a "Don't Do Drugs" pose so I guess hes alright again.

[GeneralOfDarkness]

I play paladins a lot.

And i mean a LOT. i love em, great noobie starting class, and it's fun all round if you want a few spells, and a bunch of immunities.

Undetectible alignment would make it easy for that blackguard general to not be able to know a paladin just infiltrated his ranks, and there is NOWHERE in the code of conduct that says paladins cant be stealthy and use their wits, or infiltrate and destroy evil. Far more effective than going in, holyness blazing in their faces and getting owned in 5 seconds.

Remember the catholic inquisitors during the inquisition? Yeah, they're that zealous. Or can be. I've seen it done.
But as said before, i like playing the Capin America middle road. I dont scream "praise the church" but i still protect the helpless.

"Surrender? You see this A on my forehead? does that stand for france!?"
Ah....he is indeed a badass.

[Big Evil]

Well I fealt most inspired by Cap when he fought Thanos with the Infinity Gaunlet. (He bassicaly became God. Ominpresent, ominipetant, all powerful. With a snap of his fingers he destroyed half the universe.)

Despite knowing there was no way possible Cap could even come close to victory..

Captain America: Thanos, as long as one man stands up to you, you will never win.

Talk about Aura of Courage.

[Salguod]

Naw, im talking Lawful Good - - you know the thing that paladins are.
not judge dredd. in the future as the "police jury and judge"
ok, anyways.

lawful implys not being sneaky, and good implys not lieing.

this is where i am getting no using anything that involves concealing. such as "undetectable alignment"

and paladins are lawful good, if they are not they are blasphemous and would be dead in any campaign. (no spells)

quoting your "holy-KNIGHT" we just change that to "HOLY-knight" so your little logic there wont work.

and no- a paladin wouldnt torture a damn dog. where are you getting that?

[fernworthy]

Good can be generally understood by all.

Lawful, however, can be very fluid. What law does your paladin observe. The common law? His diety's law? His own personal code of conduct? Is his/her law strict or does it allow for alot of discretion?

[peacebringer]

lawful implys not being sneaky, and good implys not lieing

I'm afraid I have to disagree with that statement. A lawful character can still be very sneaky and still live up to his/her own moral code. Also, when a lawful character is dealing with the enemy they can be as sneaky as they need.

There is also nothing that says good people can't lie. In fact, sometimes lying is the good course of action, although it can be a bit shady.

A paladin that believes that the means justify the ends is also a great way to rp them. When I play a paladin, I usually enjoy walking that thin red line that may lead to falling.

To sum it up lawful good doesn’t necessarily need to be lawful stupid.

[loki_ragnarock]

lawful implys not being sneaky, and good implys not lieing.

I am inclined to disagree.

Being lawful simply means that your morality has a set standard; if you believe that it is wrong to stab someone while they sleep, it is wrong to stab anyone in their sleep. If you believe that the good of the many outways the good of the few, you believe it in every instance. If you believe that betraying a friend is wrong, then it is always wrong.
When I DM someone with a lawful alignment, I often put them in moral dilemas just to see if their reaction to the situation is consistant. If it starts to drift, so does their alignment.

Good people can lie as much as they like. A good person can tell his sister that she looks good in her prom dress to boost her confidence and make her feel okay.

[Zargain]

Originally Posted by Salguod

lawful implys not being sneaky, and good implys not lieing.

Not always. Lawful means that your morals are based on some strict guideline which can be an official law or just a personal code of conduct (I mean would devils even be a problem if they couldn't break the law? I don't see pit fiends cringing at breaking a few windows or writing some graffiti.... in human blood...)

Good implies you hold the lives and well being of others sacred and wish to see in general no harm come to anyone so long as they are not evil (and an individual personality cases some would not wish to see harm come to anyone at all (even evil) unless they have actually done something to be punished for)

Is it evil to lie about the location of where a beseiged city's women and children are hiding when captured and interogated by the evil army? Of course not, you lie to save their lives. If anything being truthful is a lawful concept (though lawful people need not always be truthful but the idea of staying truthful is) and paladins uphold good over law any day.

this is where I am getting no using anything that involves concealing. such as "undetectable alignment"

So by that logic a paladin would refuse working with rangers. rogues or anyone else that relies on stealth and gurrela tactics since they rarely 'fight fair" so to speak.

What if the evil-guy's fortress is guarded by a special ward that blocks anyt good-aligned person from entry? Should the paladin just pack up and go home sobbing that the mean old bad man couldn't fight fair? You cast the spell on yourself and charge right in...

[Securis]

To me, Lawful Good reads as someone commited to a code of conduct higher than "self". LG paladins are not about self. They are about defending others from evil. I think a paladin's behavior is also relative to the good diety the paladin is crusading for. A paladin will make choices that produce the greater good and serve justice. There are any number of paradoxical situations.

Let's say Lady Quinn has been captured and is being questioned about forces that oppose her captor. Should she tell the truth? I think that in her fight against her evil captor she can lay deceptions as a strategy to thwart the baddies plans. Remember, omission is a deception as gross as a falsehood.

Lawful Neutral is the alignment where characters follow their own personal codes.

[Jondera]

Originally Posted by Salguod

lawful implys not being sneaky, and good implys not lieing.

Not even true according to the the standard WotC rulebooks.

In Complete Adventurer, there is a prestige class called the Shadowbane Stalker. The requirements list, among other things, being LG, having sneak attack, being able to use Detect Evil as a spell or spell-like ability, and having ranks in the hide skill. The class abilities are also geared towards fighting evildoers, but from the shadows - while still requiring the stalker to be LG, or they lose all those nifty abilities.

The alignments aren't laws - they're guidelines. How you want to play your lawful good character is up to you, but consider the character Robin Hood. Undoubtedly good - helped poor people, risked his life to save others, and actively fought a tyrannical ruler. But that didn't stop him from sneaking around, shooting people in the back, using disguises, or any one of another half dozen different dishonorable or even downright "evil" acts, in the name of "good."

The paladin's abilities and spell lists, likewise, are not requirements. Not every paladin needs to use every class ability or every spell on their list. If your paladin believes that using that particular spell is underhanded and dishonerable, then they won't. But that doesn't mean that other paladins won't use such "underhanded" tactics in the battle against evil.

[loki_ragnarock]

Originally Posted by Jondera

Not even true according to the the standard WotC rulebooks.

In Complete Adventurer, there is a prestige class called the Shadowbane Stalker. The requirements list, among other things, being LG, having sneak attack, being able to use Detect Evil as a spell or spell-like ability, and having ranks in the hide skill. The class abilities are also geared towards fighting evildoers, but from the shadows - while still requiring the stalker to be LG, or they lose all those nifty abilities.

The alignments aren't laws - they're guidelines. How you want to play your lawful good character is up to you, but consider the character Robin Hood. Undoubtedly good - helped poor people, risked his life to save others, and actively fought a tyrannical ruler. But that didn't stop him from sneaking around, shooting people in the back, using disguises, or any one of another half dozen different dishonorable or even downright "evil" acts, in the name of "good."

The paladin's abilities and spell lists, likewise, are not requirements. Not every paladin needs to use every class ability or every spell on their list. If your paladin believes that using that particular spell is underhanded and dishonerable, then they won't. But that doesn't mean that other paladins won't use such "underhanded" tactics in the battle against evil.

Robin Hood was clearly lawful, what with his entire purpose being to raise the funds to pay for Richard's ransom...

[Nomad]

I suppose if I say "Ok, Bloody hell. we get it. The alignment system is up for interpretation and may very well be seen differently by any and everyone. And that is ok."

Someone will disagree with me...

So, instead of trying to sane, normal, astute argument I'll just say - "Oh well, WotC buggered up - they didn't know what they wanted with the Paladin.

They got caught between Holy Inquisitor - doing whatever it takes for the good of humanity (even if destroying humanity is what it takes) and Honourable, Decent never-put-the-boot-in sort of guy who goes around buying cupcakes for the poor crippled hobgoblins he put out of the raiding business last week.

It's not like it's up to us to decide how we want to interpret the rules, or use classes, or give unique motives and personalities to our characteres, so it's all bloody well their fault.

Bastards."

[Salguod]

Alrighty- thanks everyone, and i didnt know about that Lawful Good Sneaky Guy, but thats interesting, maybe i interpereted lawful and good wrong but thats ok.

but was robin hood really lawful good? i think he was chaotic good. becuase he broke the laws, becuase to his moral conscience the laws were wrong. (chaotic) right?

and now im gonna use that "pit fiends spraying graffiti" all of the time.

well thanks anyways