PDA

View Full Version : The Rational Paladin Oath



Acero
2009-12-24, 12:36 AM
My Paladin is starting a new campaign, and there will be a lot of diffuicult moral choices.

i'm thinking of having him take an oath something like this

I promise to do what is neccisary to vanquish this land of those who wish to do it harm. something like that


is it possible to break this oath? how? im still a paladin, i won't be trying to be evil or anything like that. i just dont want to fall if i attack someone stealing from this 'land' and giving it to the poor of some other territory.

Kylarra
2009-12-24, 12:39 AM
Paladin oaths are something you'll want to discuss with your DM, simply because he's the one making the final call.

Krazddndfreek
2009-12-24, 12:40 AM
It really depends on your DM. You should ask him.

I would say that punishing a thief would be in congruence with your oath. So long as your paladin doesn't consciously attack or punish another benevolent soul I'd say anything is fine (such as a criminal stealing from a corrupt official and giving it to kids in the slums).

AslanCross
2009-12-24, 12:44 AM
It all depends on what your paladin's core values are. Establish these and discuss them with your DM.

Samuel Sturm
2009-12-24, 12:52 AM
A Knight is sworn to Valor.
His Heart knows only Virtue.
His Blade Defends the Helpless.
His Strength Upholds the Weak.
His Word speaks only Truth.
His Wrath Undoes the Wicked!

I think it's the Knight's code off of DragonHeart.

Might base it off it, or just straight use it.

Acero
2009-12-24, 12:53 AM
It all depends on what your paladin's core values are. Establish these and discuss them with your DM.

he's not swearing to any king or anything, but to a deity who lived in that area while he was a mortal. the people their have forgoteen him and turned to evil gods.

i'm thinking his Smite Evil might be lighting instead of some weapon thingy.

Devils_Advocate
2009-12-24, 12:54 AM
is it possible to break this oath?
No, and that's the problem. You can do absolutely nothing, and there's nothing that anyone can do to prove that all those who wish to do the land harm won't eventually be vanquished. On the other hand, the odds that you'll personally vanquish them all is basically zero. Frankly, this "oath" strikes me as pretty much vague and meaningless -- a statement of sentiment, not something that restrains your actions.

Personally, I would advise against deliberate partiality by a paladin. I posted on the recently. Just a moment...


Now, source material may waffle on this in an attempt to be many different things to many different people. And this may serve to make the source material, taken as a whole, a bit incoherent. (This is the case for several issues in D&D.) But it's clear that one of the core concepts of the paladin is that a paladin is always supposed to do what's right. And one upshot of that is that if your friends, your government, your leader, your church, and even your god oppose what's right, then screw them.

So, to be blunt about it, paladins are too principled to be loyal to people (for a certain value of "loyal"). That's why a lot of people hate paladins, and also why a lot of people love them. But love 'em or hate 'em, they are what they are.
I strongly endorse the Paladins Are Not Partisans principle.

alchemyprime
2009-12-24, 12:59 AM
Through feast and bounty, famine and drought,
I'll stop all evil, fears and doubts.
All who wish to tread the darkest path
Will taste my blade and righteous wrath!

Or, in its original form....

In Brightest Day, In Blackest Night,
No Evil shall Escape my sight!
Let those who worship evil's might
Beware my power,
Green Lantern's Light!

dyslexicfaser
2009-12-24, 01:07 AM
Personally, I favor a paladin oath that boils down to "the Greater Good."

For if it is in deference to the Greater Good, any number of Lesser Evils are permissable.

Taking away civil rights to maintain public order? Permissable.

Killing one man to warn a thousand? Permissable.

Obviously, I like a little moral grayness even in my paladins. But, uh, maybe that's just me.

nekomata2
2009-12-24, 01:26 AM
Personally, I favor a paladin oath that boils down to "the Greater Good."

For if it is in deference to the Greater Good, any number of Lesser Evils are permissable.

Taking away civil rights to maintain public order? Permissable.

Killing one man to warn a thousand? Permissable.

Obviously, I like a little moral grayness even in my paladins. But, uh, maybe that's just me.

You completely just made me think of the movie "Hot Fuzz" witht he cult of townspeople and their "greater good" justification for killing dozens of hippies...

UserClone
2009-12-24, 01:37 AM
Taking away civil rights to maintain order is entirely the more evil way to go about things, IMO.

tahu88810
2009-12-24, 01:43 AM
The oath, taken from A Song of Fire and Ice by by George R.R. Martin and found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night%E2%80%99s_Watch#Oath
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.

Alter nouns accordingly and you have a fairly stable oath.

Reluctance
2009-12-24, 01:51 AM
Blah. I dislike the flavorful yet vague oaths that show up in fiction. They sound cool, but stand the same risk of going crazy legalese that any other paladin at the table would.

I say talk with your DM, and understand that there's nothing wrong with a vague oath so long as everybody's on the same page. Explain what your god's goals and ideals are, remembering that "get my land and power back" is Neutral rather than Lawful or Good. It'll be easier to go from there.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 02:27 AM
I vow to always uphold the values and principles of my patron deity.

Kol Korran
2009-12-24, 05:57 AM
may i suggest a bit of a different approach? talk to your DM, and ask him to direct your character (at creation) to oppose the main antagonists of the campaign. a general oath is nice, but a specific oath, one with background and flavour to it usually has more... roleplay power, i think the term might be. for example:
"i swear to find the last townspeople of the raised and burned home-ville. i shall seek those responsible and deliver justice, as well as prevent any more harm." more flavourfull things could be added, such as maybe the name of a specific enemy, race, type of magic, location, group or more.

note also that you might take more oaths or revise your own when befitting events compell you too.

general oath are less personal, and so they are less compelling. find an actuall cause, and stick to it!

hope this helps,
Kol.

Atcote
2009-12-24, 06:09 AM
I would say that punishing a thief would be in congruence with your oath. So long as your paladin doesn't consciously attack or punish another benevolent soul I'd say anything is fine (such as a criminal stealing from a corrupt official and giving it to kids in the slums).

I have a DM who likes to play with specifics of such things - I get by by making my Paladins have a lower intelligence score than what I figure I have.

I can't be sure, but I think he would argue that the stealing of the money was still a theft, and while handing out money to kids is a typical 'good' thing, your oath was to protect THE LAND. The official is thereby more likely to do something to the benefit of the land, even unintentional or under force, as opposed to the children whom may amount to nothing in terms of the land, and are more likely to 'squander' it on food and bedding, or have it stolen from them, to the benefit of other, less noble thieves. And it depends on the definition of the 'land'. Is it the earth? The trees? The people? The king/ruling body? The military? Anything not over the border?

Not to start a moral argument here, but as I've had to sit through DMs going to that length and beyond for the sake of adhering to an oath, I'd hate for you to go into it unprepared :P (That, and I'm very bored on Christmas eve).

SmartAlec
2009-12-24, 06:11 AM
Thought Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven nailed this one:

Be without fear in the face of your enemies;
Be brave and upright, that God may love thee;
Speak the truth, always, even if it leads to your death;
Safeguard the helpless, and do no wrong.

Seems to hit the right notes. The right combination of martial defence and moral/ethical example, but without oddities of having to be charitable to the point of giving your sword away to beggars, and such.

Drakefall
2009-12-24, 06:45 AM
Personally, I favor a paladin oath that boils down to "the Greater Good."

For if it is in deference to the Greater Good, any number of Lesser Evils are permissable.

Taking away civil rights to maintain public order? Permissable.

Killing one man to warn a thousand? Permissable.

Obviously, I like a little moral grayness even in my paladins. But, uh, maybe that's just me.

Heh, to me you just highlighted all the "bad" ways paladins can be viewed, because "the greater good" always seems to be pretty wrong to me. I think Nekomata brought up a good example:


You completely just made me think of the movie "Hot Fuzz" witht he cult of townspeople and their "greater good" justification for killing dozens of hippies...

Which is very un-paladin like.

To me a paladin always does the right thing, screw whoever wishes otherwise as Devil's Advocate put it. Take the classic example of sacrificing a baby to prevent it turning into accursed demonspawn and blanketing the world in misery and woe. A good character could easily be seen as going ahead and shoving a dagger into the little fiend-to-be, feeling all guilty and regretful but knowing he's doing it for the greater good. The paladin on the other hand won't kill a baby, because baby killing is wrong. He'd save the baby and quest for years through great danger and giving much personal sacrifice until he damn well found a way to cure the little brat or until it burst into said demonspawn, in which case he'd stab it in the face... or y'know die trying to do that.

So I believe a paladin's code should reflect this. The paladin should always do what is right and honourable above all else, because someone has to.

Mongoose87
2009-12-24, 08:47 AM
Give him the US Postal worker's oath.

Telonius
2009-12-24, 09:10 AM
I vow to always uphold the values and principles of my patron deity.

I use this in all games where I'm DM. (I also houserule that Paladins must take the alignment of their deity - it just makes more sense to me that way).

RandomNPC
2009-12-24, 09:14 AM
i've altered this to be singular, but here's one i enjoy.

A shepard I shall be
for thee my lord for thee
Power hath decended forth from thy hand
So that my feet may cary out thy command
And I shall flow a river forth unto thee
And teeming with souls shall it ever be,
(this bits in latin im not going to try spelling)

It's stated early on to only slay the wicked so that good may prosper, but that prayer (said with 'we' because there were two of them) is what is recited later on.

If you don't know that one you need to find where i live, i'll declaire it movie day and we can watch this one untill you start screaming "they need to be in every major city!"

GreyMantle
2009-12-24, 03:21 PM
What I do for my paladins (the good ones, at least) is essentially have them be all Kantian Ethics-y. You know, "Act only that what you do would become a universal maxim" and such. Therefore everyone has a clear moral standard, but one that may be interpreted differently which leads to all the fun intra-order conflict that can be so enjoyable.

onthetown
2009-12-24, 03:53 PM
If you want to take an oath to vanquish evil all over the land, you're going to want a scapegoat (not very paladin-y, I know) when it's inevitable that you're unable to do so completely. You could swear your family to vanquishing evil, sort of like the oath for killing Xykon that was passed from Eugene to Roy in OotS.

Your character's possible future children may or may not be happy with this.

Mando Knight
2009-12-24, 04:20 PM
You completely just made me think of the movie "Hot Fuzz" witht he cult of townspeople and their "greater good" justification for killing dozens of hippies...

Now, Nicholas Angel, the kick-down-the-door-and-fill-out-all-the-paperwork-in-due-time cop in that same movie, he's closer to how a Paladin should work. (Or at least, near the end of the movie, where he's loosened up a bit thanks to Danny, and is really ticked off at the NWA...)

Evard
2009-12-24, 04:27 PM
Is there such thing as a Rational Paladin?

You could always just say that you will try to do the will of your church unless they become corrupt.

Then you can just go by your churches codes (DM may send your character letters from your church telling you what to do) but also protects your character if your Good church tells you to burn down an innocent town and your character thinks that is wrong/evil.

bosssmiley
2009-12-24, 04:39 PM
"I promise to do what is necessary to vanquish this land of those who wish to do it harm."

That there is a blank cheque for morally dubious actions, and not a fitting paladin oath in any way.

Look at the attitude and actions of Pratchett's Captain Carrot ("The easy way is easy; but that is its' only reward.") or Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics as the basis for actually thematically appropriate and meaningful paladin codes.

Or there's the Kantian Paladin (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=39222) ('do as you would be done by' raised to an absolute ethical code):


# Paladins may not lie or deceive. If no one told the truth, language would be useless.
# Paladins must fulfill their promises. If everyone broke promises, there would be no point in making them.
# Paladins may not use mind-affecting effects. Mind-affecting abilities destroy the autonomy of rational creatures.
# Paladins must slay evil when possible. Remember that not only does an afterlife exist, but one can go there and visit it to watch Evil souls receive rewards from Evil deities. Since killing Evil people makes both them and everyone else better off (because they're no longer around in life to do Evil), it is in fact a moral duty to send successful Evil to the afterlife expediently.
# Paladins may not steal. If everyone stole, the concept of property would be meaningless. This doesn't, however, prevent paladins from killing evil creatures, then taking their stuff.
# Paladins must offer reasonable aid to those needier than themselves. If no one gave appropriate charity, than they could not expect any assistance when they needed it.
# Paladins must seek to develop their talents; thus, most paladins are adventurers. If no one cultivated their abilities, the world would be a poorer place.
# Paladins must not treat animals and similar creatures with cruelty. Deliberate cruelty deadens the feeling of compassion that promotes moral behavior towards rational creatures.


I vow to always uphold the values and principles of my patron deity.

That's the bare minimum requirement for keeping your clerical/paladin powers.

Roderick_BR
2009-12-24, 04:41 PM
(...)
i'm thinking of having him take an oath something like this

I promise to do what is neccisary to vanquish this land of those who wish to do it harm. something like that
(...)
You know, that wording can mean you are technically some sort of tyrant, with a fixed view on what "law" is.
The problem is that "What is necessary". When do you know when you cross the line? The classic "for the greater good", by comming atrocities as long as you justify it as your oath?

Grifthin
2009-12-24, 04:42 PM
A paladin is this:

OK, this is how paladins are supposed to fu**ing act.
None of that "oh well, if you're sorry, truly sorry, there's nothing I can do," horsecrap. No, he coup de graces your ass, because he's a gods damned paladin. His job is killing evil. You know what his job isn't? Being a sympathetic ear for every whiny Neutral Evil scumbag who's only being evil because the world is unfair to him.
You know what unfair is? Being able to know what kind of person everybody is before you even talk to them. Smelling evil so potent on a motherf***er, you want to sink your fingers into his torso and pull **** out until the screaming stops. Having the psychotic urge to murder people who you've never met, for the sole reason that your god decided you ought to be his little whack-a-mole guy, that's unfair. But unlike evil mcBlacknails over there, the Paladin puts on his helmet, sharpens his sword, and then walks through crowds of people, every day, resisting the urge. Seeing evidence of injustice so black it makes him sick, seeing rapists and murderers walk free, watching good men hang from the gallows as evil men pull the lever. Because he's a Paladin, and who will right the wrongs of the world if not he?
* the above heavily edited for language from 4chan of all places.

So essentially what Drakefall said - and I quote:"To me a paladin always does the right thing, screw whoever wishes otherwise as Devil's Advocate put it. Take the classic example of sacrificing a baby to prevent it turning into accursed demonspawn and blanketing the world in misery and woe. A good character could easily be seen as going ahead and shoving a dagger into the little fiend-to-be, feeling all guilty and regretful but knowing he's doing it for the greater good. The paladin on the other hand won't kill a baby, because baby killing is wrong. He'd save the baby and quest for years through great danger and giving much personal sacrifice until he damn well found a way to cure the little brat or until it burst into said demonspawn, in which case he'd stab it in the face... or y'know die trying to do that."

hamishspence
2009-12-24, 04:45 PM
Despite being Chaotic, Drizzt had a tendency to swear oaths a bit like that.

If the oath collided with reality though- he broke it, felt guilty, then figured he was wrong to swear it in the first place.

Specifically, not killing dark elves, after he was forced to kill one in self defence before fleeing Menzoberranzan.

When it came down to it though, when it was necessary- he was able to realize that particular oath was a mistake.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 05:11 PM
That's the bare minimum requirement for keeping your clerical/paladin powers.

its also all that you need, and all that you should take.
If you are taking a vow to never do something that your god ALLOWS, then you are:
1. Not able to serve your god as well
2. Potentially contradicting your god's will, by claiming to know better then your god.

hamishspence
2009-12-24, 05:14 PM
sometimes, being lawful, and yet able to serve a Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral deity, a paladin runs into this. The deity permits certain things, but the Code doesn't.

in a Forgotten Realms novel (Tymora's Luck) a paladin is actually forced to oppose their deity when what their deity is doing is, to them, wrong.

golentan
2009-12-24, 05:23 PM
My oath tends to go along these lines:

First, I shall do no harm to those who will do no harm.
Second, I shall defend those who cannot defend themselves.
Third, I shall seek peace in all things possible.
Fourth, I will defend the peace of others where it is not.
Fifth, I will not allow my pride or wrath to guide my actions. I will not seek vengeance, only justice.
Sixth, I will be loyal and true to that which I believe in.
Seventh, I will obey the spirit of my vows above any other consideration.

I'm not much of one for the flowery poems.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 05:25 PM
sometimes, being lawful, and yet able to serve a Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral deity, a paladin runs into this. The deity permits certain things, but the Code doesn't.

in a Forgotten Realms novel (Tymora's Luck) a paladin is actually forced to oppose their deity when what their deity is doing is, to them, wrong.

at which point they should fall and lose all spellcasting and magical abilities granted to them by said DEITY...

Paladins being disconnected from their deity is the same BS as a cleric worshiping themselves (by the raw it is ok).

hamishspence
2009-12-24, 05:28 PM
As written, if the paladin doesn't break the code, or commit Fall-worthy acts as per PHB, they can't fall.

A deity can't just strip a paladin of their powers- even in Faerun.

That said, once they'd done it, the deity started thinking "maybe it was a mistake after all"

absolmorph
2009-12-24, 05:33 PM
i've altered this to be singular, but here's one i enjoy.

A shepard I shall be
for thee my lord for thee
Power hath decended forth from thy hand
So that my feet may cary out thy command
And I shall flow a river forth unto thee
And teeming with souls shall it ever be,
(this bits in latin im not going to try spelling)

It's stated early on to only slay the wicked so that good may prosper, but that prayer (said with 'we' because there were two of them) is what is recited later on.

If you don't know that one you need to find where i live, i'll declaire it movie day and we can watch this one untill you start screaming "they need to be in every major city!"
I cannot thank you enough for posting that, because I was about to try and find it (but forgot; you reminded me)!
The full prayer in its original form:
And Shepherds we shall be
For thee, my Lord, for thee.
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand
Our feet may swiftly carry out Thy commands.
So we shall flow a river forth to Thee
And teeming with souls shall it ever be.
In Nomeni Patri Et Fili Spiritus Sancti.

They do need to be in every major city, though.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 05:33 PM
As written, if the paladin doesn't break the code, or commit Fall-worthy acts as per PHB, they can't fall.

A deity can't just strip a paladin of their powers- even in Faerun.

That said, once they'd done it, the deity started thinking "maybe it was a mistake after all"

yes, by the RAW you need to live up to a stupid code, and if that means opposing your own god, well tough luck for the god because there is nothing it can do to stop giving you spells, you will take spells and abilities from him/her whether he/she likes it or not.


I cannot thank you enough for posting that, because I was about to try and find it (but forgot; you reminded me)!
The full prayer in its original form:
And Shepherds we shall be
For thee, my Lord, for thee.
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand
Our feet may swiftly carry out Thy commands.
So we shall flow a river forth to Thee
And teeming with souls shall it ever be.
In Nomeni Patri Et Fili Spiritus Sancti.

They do need to be in every major city, though.

but that doesn't actually say a damned thing... its just some latin and thee/thous...

Foryn Gilnith
2009-12-24, 05:36 PM
Paladins being disconnected from their deity is the same BS as a cleric worshiping themselves (by the raw it is ok).

Paladins being disconnected from their deity is about as much BS as a cleric worshipping cosmic Law and Good. Paladins can receive power straight from alignment sources the same way clerics do. Many paladins do so.


tough luck for the god because there is nothing it can do to stop giving you spells, you will take spells and abilities from him/her whether he/she likes it or not.

Who says it's hard for a god to give you spells? Who says the god is even giving you spells? These are all fluff things decided by individual DMs, and aren't very applicable as a universal standard (and this is a general debate, right?)

hamishspence
2009-12-24, 05:36 PM
You're Lawful Good, your deity might be LN or NG. The point of paladins, is being LG and they Fall if they cease to be it.

So, a paladin who sticks to the same style of behaviour as the deity recommends, will eventually risk slipping to another alignment.

Hence- a paladin is LG first, follower of their deity second.

I figure that, in Faerun, the power is funnels through the deity- hence, all paladins need a divine patron there- but, the deity can't exactly shut it off- only the paladin behaving badly will cause it to shut off.

In BoVD and Fiendish Codex 1 and 2, for example, the clerics of demons/devils draw power from the plane (Abyss/Baator) but, the archfiend is the route the power is drawn- thus, various different domains, depending on the fiendish patron.

absolmorph
2009-12-24, 06:00 PM
yes, by the RAW you need to live up to a stupid code, and if that means opposing your own god, well tough luck for the god because there is nothing it can do to stop giving you spells, you will take spells and abilities from him/her whether he/she likes it or not.



but that doesn't actually say a damned thing... its just some latin and thee/thous...
"You gave me power to do as you command, so I'll do so." is another way of saying the English part.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 06:04 PM
Paladins being disconnected from their deity is about as much BS as a cleric worshipping cosmic Law and Good. Paladins can receive power straight from alignment sources the same way clerics do. Many paladins do so.

while worshiping "cosmic good" is BS, clerics can worship themselvesby the raw. no correction was needed.


"You gave me power to do as you command, so I'll do so." is another way of saying the English part.

that, and the whole "I worship you and you are my god" bit...

Foryn Gilnith
2009-12-24, 06:13 PM
while worshiping "cosmic good" is BS

:smallconfused:
We'll obviously have to disagree on this point.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 06:17 PM
:smallconfused:
We'll obviously have to disagree on this point.

it is when it comes to clerics and class balance that is... obviously I am not making an IRL reference here.

potatocubed
2009-12-24, 06:26 PM
This topic raises the main problem of paladin codes:

D&D morality - and most real-world morality - is more or less utilitarian: acts can be more or less good depending on who they affect and in what ways.

The paladin code is deontological: some things (poison use, lying) are just wrong. No excuses. No justifications. It's just wrong.

The two systems cannot mix. If you're a deontologist, utilitarians will keep doing forbidden things in the name of some nebulous 'greater good'. If you're a utilitarian, the deontologist will refuse to do 'obviously good' things in the name of his own personal moral code.

I suspect what the OP is looking for is a suitably heroic paladin oath that fits into the utilitarian moral framework. Perhaps something along the lines of "I vow to seek out evil wherever it hides, and never permit it to go unchallenged. I shall defend the defenceless and raise my voice for the unheard. I pledge my sword to the cause of good and will bring justice wherever I travel, through only the most honourable means."

absolmorph
2009-12-24, 06:28 PM
while worshiping "cosmic good" is BS, clerics can worship themselvesby the raw. no correction was needed.



that, and the whole "I worship you and you are my god" bit...
So, how is that saying nothing?
It seems to be a decent basis for a vow to me.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 06:33 PM
So, how is that saying nothing?
It seems to be a decent basis for a vow to me.

I think you confused several of my posts... look over them again...

I think potatocubed got it... its not about the actual oath, it should just be a safe "any good aligned DnD character will do so anyways" "oath" that sounds really cool...

AslanCross
2009-12-24, 08:54 PM
he's not swearing to any king or anything, but to a deity who lived in that area while he was a mortal. the people their have forgoteen him and turned to evil gods.

i'm thinking his Smite Evil might be lighting instead of some weapon thingy.

That really doesn't say what his core values are. You have to decide whether he's more of a LAWFUL good deity or a lawful GOOD deity, for one, as well as just how far is he supposed to work for the greater good. For example, if burning down an orphanage with the children inside an acceptable loss if it means that the rest of the town can get away, for example.

taltamir
2009-12-24, 09:40 PM
That really doesn't say what his core values are. You have to decide whether he's more of a LAWFUL good deity or a lawful GOOD deity, for one, as well as just how far is he supposed to work for the greater good. For example, if burning down an orphanage with the children inside an acceptable loss if it means that the rest of the town can get away, for example.

neither... if he doesn't burn the orphanage he falls because he didn't save the town. if he does he falls for killing innocent children...

His only option is to charge into the orphanage, then surrender when they hold the children hostage... then die honorably... right after which the evil slaughters the orphans and then the town...

Playing awful stupid sucks...

golentan
2009-12-24, 10:46 PM
neither... if he doesn't burn the orphanage he falls because he didn't save the town. if he does he falls for killing innocent children...

His only option is to charge into the orphanage, then surrender when they hold the children hostage... then die honorably... right after which the evil slaughters the orphans and then the town...

Playing awful stupid sucks...

That's not true. Lawful does not mean stupid.

The paladin should clearly insist that the hostages be released first, because his word is far more likely to be honored than the villain and he sees no point in dying and leaving the village undefended if they would be slaughtered anyway. If the villain refuses, go in to negotiate. Keep him talking while the rogue readies the snipe to end all snipes. If he agrees, wait till the hostages are clear and torch the building if you can't force him to surrender.

You don't even have to lie. "I will not consider discussing terms of surrender until the hostages are released. Afterwards, I will be more than willing to speak to you on the subject." Nowhere did you say who would be surrendering to who.

Glimbur
2009-12-24, 11:07 PM
For a somewhat different philosophical backing for a paladin, consider virtue ethics. This isn't directly action guiding like utilitarianism or deontology, but it is interesting. Basically, you try to act according to virtues, which you learn about from role models. So the oath could be something like

I swear to...
have the courage of a bear defending her cubs,
have the wisdom of a king,
have the compassion of a parent,
and seek justice like those who are wronged.

DragoonWraith
2009-12-24, 11:40 PM
I cannot thank you enough for posting that, because I was about to try and find it (but forgot; you reminded me)!
The full prayer in its original form:
And Shepherds we shall be
For thee, my Lord, for thee.
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand
Our feet may swiftly carry out Thy commands.
So we shall flow a river forth to Thee
And teeming with souls shall it ever be.
In Nomeni Patri Et Fili Spiritus Sancti.

They do need to be in every major city, though.
As pointed out above, it's not an oath, it's a prayer.

Also, you got the Latin wrong. It's "in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, Amen," (though the Saints replace the "amen" with gunshots). It's Latin for "in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy spirit," and, oddly enough, the words are in the same order in the Latin as they are in English (Latin has no real requirements for word order, but it is nevertheless unusual to use the order that English uses; the Romans preferred to put verbs last, for some reason unknown to me), though note that Latin has no articles and therefore the "the"s in the English translation do not have any corresponding words in the Latin one.

"Patris", "filii", and "spiritus" are nouns in the genitive case (from "pater", "filius", and "spiritus"), though because they are from three different declensions (third, second, and fourth, respectively) they have different endings.

And "nomen" (another third declension noun) needs to be in the ablative case because it is the object of the preposition "in" ("in" could take an accusative object, but then it would be "into" rather than "in", and would therefore make very little sense); "nomini" would be the dative. In any case, outside of the nominative singular "nomen", the root of the word is "nomin-", not "nomen-", so "nomeni" is not actually Latin word. The third declension is weird.

Heh, I took Latin for seven damn years, I have to make use of it when I can.

absolmorph
2009-12-24, 11:52 PM
Whether the prayer could be used as an oath is honestly debatable; it looks a lot like an oath to me.
If you changed it a bit, it could work as an oath.