|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 11, 2007 22:50:25 GMT -6
I am going to do more on this tomorrow, but I wanted to start this thread while I am thinking about it.
The OD&D Paladin is my favorite character class to play and I also love to Ref them in the game.
I like to base a more rough and gritty Paladin type on Solomon Kane from Robert E Howard and also I plan to tell you of the Berserker Paladin.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 26, 2007 7:41:43 GMT -6
Paladins IMCWs have a number of influences, and I tend to view them as a dual subclass of both the fighting man and the cleric classes.
Of course there is the classic example of Holger du Danske from Three Hearts and Three Lions, by Poul Anderson. They are very shrewd warriors with a focus on doing the "right thing". He was not set on autokill, but was to some extent pragmatic. You should look at what he did and how he did it. If you haven't read it, it is highly reccomended.
I haven't seen this book yet, but I sure want to read it.
The Pandion Knights from David Eddings’ Elenium and Tamuli series of books are a good example of a Paladin order, but they are not complete goody goody types, they are very tough practical and pragmatic.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 26, 2007 7:42:50 GMT -6
As I have posted elsewhere:
I also model my Paladins after Robert E. Howard's Solomon Kane. I read all I could find years ago, but I just recently got a copy of The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane The adventures of the Legendary Puritan Swordsman and have really enjoyed reading it again after all these years along with some new material not published before.
I have played many Paladins over the years. All except the current one have died in battle, and some of those died from old age more than from the battle itself. I always considered that Paladins do not retire, they fight until they are taken home.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 26, 2007 7:45:28 GMT -6
I snagged this list out of a post on DF instead of taking the time to type in my own list. edit: on the second page I am now posting my own list, I have went back and added material from this list into my own.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 26, 2007 7:47:18 GMT -6
Some people follow the test for Paladin behavior, called "WWSD?" This stands for "What Would Superman Do?"
More to follow:
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 26, 2007 12:17:23 GMT -6
Some people follow the test for Paladin behavior, called " WWSD?" This stands for " What Would Superman Do?" More to follow: Oooh! That's a good one!
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 26, 2007 21:24:03 GMT -6
coffee, I stole that out of a thread at DF, that is why it is in quotes, I think it is a great one, but I don't require all paladins to follow it. But that will become clearer as I post more info. Right now I am posting a lot of options and then I will post what I am currently using.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 27, 2007 2:40:49 GMT -6
Cool, can't wait to see more!
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 27, 2007 9:53:46 GMT -6
Paladins are also one of my favorite classes to play, but they have the greatest potential to be misused. The problem is that many people want to play paladins because of their cool powers (detect evil, lay on hands...) instead of because of their attitudes.
I saw a paladin attack a fleeing orc chef in a kitchen once. He attacked the orc from behind. The orc was unarmed. The player said "it's okay becasue orcs are evil." To me, that's abuse.
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Nov 27, 2007 11:00:35 GMT -6
Finarvyn, Dragonsfoot recently demonstrated yet again how unprofitable that topic is. I think it comes down to what one's game is "about," which may or may not have much to do with real-world philosophy, ecology, or even "rules canon" (of which AD&D offers more). Paladins must hew to a certain code in your campaign, which is your prerogative to define as DM. Debate on the merits of a DM's ruling concerning alignment, the nature of orcs, and so on seems inevitably to devolve into dispute about which is the One True Way. I dearly hope we won't see the notion of "abuse" generalized here beyond "in my campaign."
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 27, 2007 12:56:24 GMT -6
Finarvyn did specify that to HIM it was abuse. I take that as meaning "in his campaign" that's abuse.
Actually, one of the things I like best about this forum is that it's an open exchange of ideas. I've seen no "one true way"ism here. And that's perhaps the thing I like best about this particular forum (other than the fact that it's here at all, which is awesome).
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 27, 2007 15:29:45 GMT -6
Well, all ethic discussions aside, it just seems strange to me that a person could hack down an unarmed foe from behind and somehow justify it as "paladin-like". While I agree that each campaign may have different rules, and each GM certainly has the power to define such actions in their game, it seems like the point of the paladin is to defend the weak and to smite the wicked.
I suppose one could determine that paladins are like clerics in that they might gain their powers by act of a god of the realm, but it seems like allowing a player to be a paladin of a god of "smiting unarmed foes from behind" is a bit of a stretch of the intent of the class.
If you want to create a groovy class wherein the character gets neat powers for doing things like that it's fine, but it just doesn't fit my concept of a paladin at all. I stand by my original statement that, to me, that's abuse of the character class. As DM I would personally have stripped the character of paladin-hood and encouraged him/her to read more Le Morte d'Arthur or similar source material.
Again, that's just me...
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 27, 2007 16:07:43 GMT -6
Hmmm. Just popped over to DF and saw the "paladin" post dwayanu mentioned. Up to 17 pages already, and clearly a topic handled best with asbestos gloves.
On the other hand we tend to have pretty civilized discussions here, so I'm betting we won't run into the same issues as they did. Just my guess....
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 27, 2007 16:25:45 GMT -6
That civility is one of the reasons that this forum feels like home to me.
I've been on a lot of forums over the years, but this one is my favorite. Thought-provoking, civilized discussion without any of the flaming, name-calling and general noise that some forums tolerate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2007 17:25:43 GMT -6
To be honest, I've never played one; however, just about every campaign I've been involved with had somebody playing one...albeit very badly. No, as far as my opinion goes, a Paladin SHOULD NOT cut down a fleeing enemy from behind, no matter what. The purpose of a Paladin is virtue, pure & absolute: giving quarter when asked, caring for the downtrodden, heck, even going as far as giving aid & comfort to an ailing enemy, if the situation warrants it. Striking an enemy form behind, especially one that is fleeing, really goes against what the character class entails. That act is the antithesis of what the Paladin stands for. Just walking into an Orc village & killing all the orcs (men, women & children), just for the sake of being born as an orc isn't an act of charity, courage, honor, or justice-it's pure, unadulterated murder. Period. If the player can't live up to the moral code of the class, don't play it (that's why I never have; I enjoy pure, unadulterated murder... ). Anywhoo, just my op.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Nov 27, 2007 17:40:14 GMT -6
In the AD&D version of Deities & Demigods, they had most of the knights as paladins, but demoted Lancelot to a fighter for his dishonorable actions. Really all Lance did was sleep with his best friends wife (who happened to be the king). That in medieval times is treason. But it seems to imply a high level of personal honor for a paladin
|
|
|
Post by doc on Nov 27, 2007 18:40:09 GMT -6
The idea of the paladin as a knight in shining armor seems to have become iconic for gamers, but I'm curious if that is how EGG originally intended the class to be represented. I always took the idea of the paladin as somebody who was strong and unyielding in his desire to do good things and make the world a better place. I see the class as being tough and very strong-willed, but I never got in the whole "saintly goody-goody" image that seems to hang over the class.
To me, a paladin isn't tied down by religion or alignment. He may follow a god, but his actions are directed by his innate sense of good and justice, not by the dictates of any god or king. He may or may not be lawful good. A paladin may lie if he has to, though he might not feel good about it. A paladin can have sex with whomever he wants, though he would never just "use" somebody for sex. A paladin has little interest in glory or prestige; he is a man of justice, not a knight. He does what he does simply because it has to be done and he is able to do it. My last paladin was a scruffy, drunken brawler in dingy leather armor and carried an old mace. He wasn't pretty to look at, but when the orcs came invading with their catapults and arbalests, he was the one standing atop the city gates with his mace in one hand and a beer stien in the other warning them to keep their distance.
Doc
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 27, 2007 21:30:02 GMT -6
Hmmm. Just popped over to DF and saw the "paladin" post dwayanu mentioned. Up to 17 pages already, and clearly a topic handled best with asbestos gloves. On the other hand we tend to have pretty civilized discussions here, so I'm betting we won't run into the same issues as they did. Just my guess.... That civility is one of the reasons that this forum feels like home to me. I've been on a lot of forums over the years, but this one is my favorite. Thought-provoking, civilized discussion without any of the flaming, name-calling and general noise that some forums tolerate. Cheers to all!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 27, 2007 21:38:44 GMT -6
I postulate that the whole concept of Lawful (or Lawful Good) as we modern humans conceive it out here in the RW and how deities in a mulitiple deity world would conceive it allows for a wide range of variation. The way a lot of people view paladins does a lot of injustice to the whole character class and results in a lot of play that doesn't jib very well with the goal of everyone having a lot of fun in the game. I find that the gritty version of a paladin is a lot more fun for the player and for the group. Solomon Kane hates magic for instance as it is only evil in his experience and his background understanding of it. Yet he is pragmatic enough underneath the fanatic rage/sense of justice that drives him that he allies himself with and accepts the direct help of a pagan shaman that wield powerful magic in a couple of stories. Also see this thread at Enworld, I think it will give you some excellent inspiration for your version of the ultimate gritty paladin. Would you allow this paladin in your game?
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 27, 2007 22:02:49 GMT -6
IMC (current ) There is only one Lawful god but many Neutral and Chaotic gods. However; many Neutral & Chaotic gods masquerade as Lawful. While all Paladins (and all Clerics) worship the same god there are many different types of Paladins with different calling. I hope to post some of the different ones here as time permits.
Some of the things that all Paladins have in common, they are born not made. They all have this thing going on from birth that leads them down the road to Paladinhood. They all have visions from time to time. At the age of 13 they all (similiar to some rites of passage into manhood in some societies) go off for a fast and vigil, where they wait for a vision to tell them the direction that their life should take. There are specific creatures that appear in their visions and each has a specific meaning.
Some of the creatures that they might see are:
ALLIGATOR, DRAGONFLY, OWL, ANT, EAGLE, PEACOCK, ARMADILLO, FALCON, PUMA, BADGER, ELK, RABBIT, BEAR, FISH, RAVEN, BEE, FOX, SKUNK, BEAVER, FROG, SNAKE, BUFFALO, HAWK, SPIDER, BUTTERFLY, HORSE, SQUIRREL, CAT, LIZARD, TURKEY, COYOTE, LYNX, TURTLE, CROW, MOOSE, WEASEL, DEER, OTTER, WOLF, DOG
Edit: Please note that I am not going to list the specific meanings I have assigned. If you do a bit of online research you can see what some of the native American meaning were; however, some of my younger players are on the internet and I don't want to give too much away so I have assigned my own meanings to the animal seen and you should too. ;D
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 28, 2007 2:29:46 GMT -6
I don't have a problem with a gritty paladin.
I used to. I've had the discussion, round and round, in a number of games, of what a paladin is, what he does -- and doesn't do -- and so on.
I've seen DMs expect Paladins to be Lawful Good, and I've seen the expectation of Lawful Stupid.
You know what my idea of a Paladin from fiction is? Mack Bolan, the Executioner (in the original war against the wafia, by Don Pendleton, not the subsequent stuff).
He had a very specific code of ethics, was entirely honorable by his own standards, would never shoot or shoot at a cop, and did his d**ndest to protect civilians. But he got busy an awful lot, too.
Simply put, he answered to a higher calling.
(I was actually going to post this the other day, before the whole discussion got going like it has been, but I got busy at work and had to stop internetting.)
Anyway, there's my two coppers.
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Nov 28, 2007 10:16:20 GMT -6
The D&D rulesbooks don't give the alignments of Law, Neutrality and Chaos much definition. Chaos gets (in Supplement I) the most attention, seemingly equated with (or at least encompassing) "evil." The Paladin is stipulated as continually "seeking for good."
My primary concern as a player is simply that the Paladin should face constraints sufficient to offset the additional powers (which I consider at least "flashier" than the bonuses Greyhawk gives for rolling a 17 in, say, Strength rather than Charisma). I don't want Paladinhood to be a "no brainer."
I've seen in various campaigns not only the familiar Arthurian concept of chivalry, but also more Nordic pagan and Victorian versions. I've seen samurai Paladins bound by bushido, and Prince Valiant types basically "all-American boys" in feudal drag. I've seen fanatical visionaries as driven by nationalism as Joan of Arc, and social revolutionaries or vigilantes whose allegiance was to a higher Law.
They had no common creed, but had in common that each clove to a code of honor more dearly than to life itself. To me, the shibboleth is that a player would rather see a character die as a Paladin than survive at the price of losing the status.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 28, 2007 10:21:07 GMT -6
They had no common creed, but had in common that each clove to a code of honor more dearly than to life itself. To me, the shibboleth is that a player would rather see a character die as a Paladin than survive at the price of losing the status. Very well said. I totally agree.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 29, 2007 19:17:17 GMT -6
I don't have a problem with a gritty paladin. I used to. I've had the discussion, round and round, in a number of games, of what a paladin is, what he does -- and doesn't do -- and so on. I've seen DMs expect Paladins to be Lawful Good, and I've seen the expectation of Lawful Stupid. You know what my idea of a Paladin from fiction is? Mack Bolan, the Executioner (in the original war against the wafia, by Don Pendleton, not the subsequent stuff). He had a very specific code of ethics, was entirely honorable by his own standards, would never shoot or shoot at a cop, and did his d**ndest to protect civilians. But he got busy an awful lot, too. Simply put, he answered to a higher calling. (I was actually going to post this the other day, before the whole discussion got going like it has been, but I got busy at work and had to stop internetting.) Anyway, there's my two coppers. I am a big fan of that original Mack Bolan and I quite agree that he is a paladin in the truest since. I don't put in everything that I might in an all adult campaign since we have children either playing or watching a lot of the time.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 29, 2007 19:20:49 GMT -6
The D&D rulesbooks don't give the alignments of Law, Neutrality and Chaos much definition. Chaos gets (in Supplement I) the most attention, seemingly equated with (or at least encompassing) "evil." The Paladin is stipulated as continually "seeking for good." My primary concern as a player is simply that the Paladin should face constraints sufficient to offset the additional powers (which I consider at least "flashier" than the bonuses Greyhawk gives for rolling a 17 in, say, Strength rather than Charisma). I don't want Paladinhood to be a "no brainer." I've seen in various campaigns not only the familiar Arthurian concept of chivalry, but also more Nordic pagan and Victorian versions. I've seen samurai Paladins bound by bushido, and Prince Valiant types basically "all-American boys" in feudal drag. I've seen fanatical visionaries as driven by nationalism as Joan of Arc, and social revolutionaries or vigilantes whose allegiance was to a higher Law. They had no common creed, but had in common that each clove to a code of honor more dearly than to life itself. To me, the shibboleth is that a player would rather see a character die as a Paladin than survive at the price of losing the status. I quite a agree that the Paladin should have constraints to offset his extra powers. I hope that when I finish outlining how I am currently running paladin, it will get a favorable review. Mostly so far I have been posting a few of my sources of inspiration and the beginning of what I am doing now. And yes, one of the basic of playing a Paladin is death before dishonor.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 29, 2007 20:57:28 GMT -6
I decided to take the time to type up and post my own list of knightly virtues amended with all of the latest available information. It follows here in several posts.
EDIT: BTW This list that follows in several posts is a starting point, if you applied all of it exactly and made the PC toe the line, then it would be extremely difficult for the player to maintain and it would tend to make them all cookie cutter characters; that is why I use these as a starting point in my mind and a guide for the players, but I allow a fair amount of leeway. For instance, I let them know if they are moving close to crossing the line, I give them a lot of feedback and as noted elsewhere, I have them read some of the books that I use as a reference and we discuss before hand what I accept and what I think is going to far. I take this list and leaven it with toughness, pure grit, and pragmatism. Also as I think I noted, I give each Paladin a focus on one or at most two of these and those are the most important for that character with a bit more leeway on the other items. I have found that makes it more fun for the player and the other players. YMMV
************************************************************************************************* Knightly Virtues as exemplified by the Paladin.
Truth: Truth is the foundation of virtue. To be truthful is to be genuine, free, and constant in keeping promises and being loyal to friends, ones liege and especially to ones God. To be truthful is to be honest and conforming to law, justice and to live truly and to govern ones life according to the truth. One who seeks out the truth within himself will surely develop other virtues, such as justice, courage, strength, and humility. Without truth, there is no light, but rather the spiritual darkness of self delusion and self deception, which must surely lead to other vices. Seek truth as sincerely as possible, not for any reason of personal gain, but because it is right. Do not restrict your exploration to a small world, but seek to infuse every aspect of your life with truth and all of the qualities of a Paladin. Should you succeed in even a tiny measure, then you will be well remembered for your quality and your virtue.
Honor: To be truly honorable is to have a true sense of what is right, just and true and to have a true sense of what is wrong, unjust and false. To be truly honorable is to abhor those things that are vile and mean-spirited and to venerate that which is good, lawful and true. The standard against which we measure ourselves, and are measured by others. It is a treasure which if kept grows in value; but once squandered can never be regained. The Paladin’s word must be more certain and sure than any written contract. And let every Paladin consider carefully before making any Oath, and never do so lightly or without due reflection; but rather let him strive to fulfill every Oath undertaken or stand forever bereft of honor.
Justice: A Paladin holds himself or herself to the highest standards of behavior, and knows that the little things are just as important as the big things. Seek always the path of "right", unfettered by personal bias or self interest. Remember always that the sword of justice can be a terrible thing, so it must be tempered with mercy. It is the Paladin’s duty to protect the innocent from harm and to punish the guilty. Fulfillment of this duty often requires physical combat; but battles fought differently are no less important. In all areas of life, the Paladin must strive so far as possible to fight injustice and help the right prevail. A Paladin must seek out the path of "right" without giving in to the temptation of expediency, then you will earn renown and honor beyond measure. Justice acts in conformance with what is right and renders unto all their due. Justice is equitable, upright, impartial, fair and always conforms to the principles of justice in dealing with others. A Paladin knows how to make the hard choices.
*************************************************************************************************
to be continued
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2007 21:42:10 GMT -6
Maybe this discussion shows why its so hard to play a paladin. If its hard to decide what a paladin should be, this is why no one can decide what the paladin should or should not do.
I confess that I always think of King Arthur and his knights when I think of paladins, but I can see from this conversation that not everyone shares this idea.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 30, 2007 6:36:20 GMT -6
Maybe this discussion shows why its so hard to play a paladin. If its hard to decide what a paladin should be, this is why no one can decide what the paladin should or should not do. I confess that I always think of King Arthur and his knights when I think of paladins, but I can see from this conversation that not everyone shares this idea. The fact that we have a lot of different ideas is great, what the player always needs is for the ref to articulate, here is how X character class works IMC so that the player has the proper reference points to start from. If you are using a particular literary reference as a hook to start from, it is very helpful if you make it possible for the player to read that reference so that they understand more fully where you are coming from.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2007 22:45:07 GMT -6
Good list, Crimhthan_The_Great.
|
|
|
Post by tgamemaster1975 on Dec 1, 2007 9:56:27 GMT -6
I am looking forward to seeing where this thread goes, it looks like there is going to be a lot of info posted and I can\'t wait to read it.
|
|