Wanted: Paladin/Lawful experts & aficionados

[madwolf10]

In 30 years, I've rarely played a Lawful alignment, and played a Paladin even less.
But now a Lawful Neutral Paladin of Vengeance is calling to me!!...
I've read the PH (brief) summary, I understand the concept of Vengeance, and even Lawful Neutral to a point (the word "Judge" comes to mine). But... would love some help!

SUPER experience and feedback seen in this forum, so am asking if anyone who has fun experience and valuable ideas/concepts on playing Lawful (Neutral) and/or with the new 5e Paladin concepts??
(well, obv not a lot of playtime experience with the 5e Pallys, but past Pally experience might lend itself to understanding and adapting to these non-LG-only Pally concepts)

I create by brainstorm. considering all angles and perspectives, so don't be afraid to go in-depth or throw at me whatever crazy ideas/thoughts you have, Thanks!!

[rlc]

since you'll be neutral, maybe you can follow the letter of the law, rather than the intentions of it.

[T.G. Oskar]

A key point to consider when playing any character of Lawful alignment is to focus less on the word and more on the meaning. You're not necessarily playing someone who follows the law; you're playing someone who acknowledges the importance of Order. Even a Chaotic character can follow the law when it pleases; in most cases, laws simply enforce what should be common sense. However, a Lawful character will follow the law because it understands the importance of Order; without laws, Chaos will reign and thus the loss of stability.

The key aspects of a Lawful character involve understanding the importance of stability and Order, and how the Law works into this. If a law is disruptive and nonsensical, it's not worth to be a law. Discipline has a lot to do with Order: a Chaotic character may be disciplined, but it doesn't understand (or merely disregards) the importance of discipline. A Chaotic character may understand that, sometimes, a routine is necessary; the Lawful character understands why it's necessary even when it seems like it isn't.

Just like Chaotic characters understand why discipline and stability can be important (but don't necessarily agree that they must be enforced), a Lawful character can understand the importance of free will and liberty of choice, but not why you must stand up for it.

Now, how does this work with a morally Neutral alignment? Well, a Lawful Neutral character focuses on the importance of Order, discipline and stability above anything else. If a law is oppressive to some but fair to others, a Lawful Neutral character will defend it. However, if a law is only fair to a few, a LN character won't necessarily approve of it because it's not entirely fair; in this case, though, it's not because of being noble and good but because the law is pointless (it's not fair and balanced). If a law involves cruel punishment, the Lawful Neutral character will only care that the punishment balances the offense; this will provide stability by showing the importance of living in an Orderly society by showing that an offense is justly dealt with, no matter how cruel the punishment may be.

This is what a Paladin of Vengeance of Lawful Neutral alignment will work with: to mete punishment equivalent to the offense. You don't have to choose a code of laws to follow; if you feel that there is an offense that will break the stability and order of a region, you are duty-bound to enact punishment equivalent to that same offense. It may sound a bit cruel, but "Eye for an Eye, Hand for a Hand" is your creed; however, you don't have to be that literal, particularly when the offense isn't so clear. The important thing is that your brand of justice is not "tainted" by good or evil; a Lawful Good character may sometimes have a conflict where it finds that Justice is better served in some other way, whereas a Lawful Evil character will usually, if not always, find a way to toy with justice in order to reap some benefit. You don't deal with any of those; you strive your best to be impartial, because you find that to be the fairest way.

Now, a word to the wise: I incline a lot towards Lawful characters, but also towards Good characters, so you might want to take this with a pinch of salt, but for the most part, it's solid advice. Just focus on why Order is so important in the world, and you'll understand the mentality of a Lawful character. Understanding why free will is important but also so dangerous is what will really make you a Lawful character (otherwise, you may end up being Neutral).

[Yuki Akuma]

The trick to playing Lawful alignments is to come up with an ethical code your character will almost always try to follow. Lawfulness is about following established modes of behaviour, acting in self-consistent ways, and so on. This isn't to say that Lawful characters can't be spontaneous; it just means that such spontaneity would be rarer than if they were Chaotic.

I would begin by considering why your character decided to take the Oath of Vengeance. Who wronged him? Did someone wrong him? What did they do, if they did?

Also consider where he comes from, and how the people there act. People tend to follow the same ethical codes as the people they grew up around, after all. What, in his view, is expected of him? What about other people? Should one always keep one's word? Never lie? Is it acceptable to take something that doesn't belong to you, if the need is great enough? Should one always listen to their elders? What if they disagree with your goals? Should authority figures always be followed without question?

And, most importantly: should people follow your code of conduct, or do you hold yourself to a higher standard than others?

[Warskull]

I would say a LN Paladin of vengeance has a strong attachment to tradition and the current status quo. He doesn't really question the reasoning and logic behind the traditions, he simply values the traditions.

[Jacob.Tyr]

The trick to playing Lawful alignments is to come up with an ethical code your character will almost always try to follow. Lawfulness is about following established modes of behaviour, acting in self-consistent ways, and so on. This isn't to say that Lawful characters can't be spontaneous; it just means that such spontaneity would be rarer than if they were Chaotic.

I would begin by considering why your character decided to take the Oath of Vengeance. Who wronged him? Did someone wrong him? What did they do, if they did?

Also consider where he comes from, and how the people there act. People tend to follow the same ethical codes as the people they grew up around, after all. What, in his view, is expected of him? What about other people? Should one always keep one's word? Never lie? Is it acceptable to take something that doesn't belong to you, if the need is great enough? Should one always listen to their elders? What if they disagree with your goals? Should authority figures always be followed without question?

And, most importantly: should people follow your code of conduct, or do you hold yourself to a higher standard than others?

Agreeing with this heavily. Your character took an Oath, understanding the why is going to be incredibly important. It doesn't have to be a reaction to some specific act or actions, but the reason needs to be big enough for them to devote their life to it. Approach this with the understanding that this character is Lawful Neutral, and in some way try to make the reason match up with the ideals of someone who values Order,with an O, above other things, even Good/Evil.

Tradition, fairness, rule of Law- these could all be potential targets of this devotion. Figure out what sort of Order is important, think about why it is important to them, and try and work out a situation in which they would devote their life to enacting vengeance on those who threaten it. His vengeance might even be impacted - A traditionalist might punish a thief by cutting off their hand, as has been done for centuries; someone devoted to fairness might force the thief to work off their crime; or perhaps it is important above all else to follow the letter of the law no matter how the punishment seems - putting a thief to death for stealing bread to feed their family because if you let emotion and bias allow you to throw the Law to the side it might turn into a slippery slope.

[madwolf10]

THANKS all! (esp you multi-paragraph dudes :smallbiggrin: ) Good stuff that helps.

[Shining Wrath]

There's two sorts of Lawful - inner, and outer.
Inner has his own code that's important to him for Reasons. Example: someone who has adopted a religion different than his friends and follow the tenets thereof.
Outer has bought into someone else's code for Reasons. Example: a good soldier or judge.

[madwolf10]

There's two sorts of Lawful - inner, and outer.
Inner has his own code that's important to him for Reasons. Example: someone who has adopted a religion different than his friends and follow the tenets thereof.
Outer has bought into someone else's code for Reasons. Example: a good soldier or judge.

THIS.
Thanks Shining Wrath, the Inner is more where I am leaning. Methinks Vengeance might be more along those lines than an Outer code (soldier or judge) to follow since that would mean following the written law, society's rules, as opposed to how *I* read the summary of the Oath of Vengeance...

[Sartharina]

The key aspects of a Lawful character involve understanding the importance of stability and Order, and how the Law works into this. If a law is disruptive and nonsensical, it's not worth to be a law.

However - a Lawful character will still tend to enforce a disruptive and nonsensical law as long as it's on the books, because "nonsensical" and "disruptive" are traits gleaned through personal intuition, which Lawful characters do not trust. And, if you ignore one law because you 'feel' it's wrong, what's to stop someone else from feeling other laws are 'nonsensical' and disruptive'. Lawful characters do not trust personal intuition, because they recognize that everyone is different/unique, but believe that is NOT a "Good Thing".

[TheOOB]

A lawful alignment has little to do with whether or not you follow the law, and while codes of conduct(written or unwriten) are common among lawful folk, they are not a defining feature.

The law chaos alignment, in my opinion, is all about scale. Lawful people tend to take a longer and wider view of issues. That means they tend to make decisions based on tradition and precedence and care more about the long term and far-reaching effects of their actions more than the immediate. Typically for lawful characters the means justify the ends, doing something the "wrong" way may be beneficial for a short time, but it's long term consequences could be great.

A (old school)paladin will refuse to commit an evil act to save lives because then they will be introducing evil in the world and corrupt a truly good person(themselves), which is worse that allowing existing evil to persist, while a chaotic good character would do what they can to save lives right now.

A lawful evil wizard may spare the characters lives because he needs them for some plot, or he needs to keep up his image as a good guy, while a chaotic evil one would usually just get rid of the threat right now.

Every great empire was headed by a lawful character at some point, but many of said empires have crumbled due to laws lack of flexibility.

[madwolf10]

The law chaos alignment, in my opinion, is all about scale. Lawful people tend to take a longer and wider view of issues. That means they tend to make decisions based on tradition and precedence and care more about the long term and far-reaching effects of their actions more than the immediate. Typically for lawful characters the means justify the ends, doing something the "wrong" way may be beneficial for a short time, but it's long term consequences could be great.

Every great empire was headed by a lawful character at some point, but many of said empires have crumbled due to laws lack of flexibility.

I like this stuff too, The OOB, thank you!

[Falka]

In 30 years, I've rarely played a Lawful alignment, and played a Paladin even less.
But now a Lawful Neutral Paladin of Vengeance is calling to me!!...
I've read the PH (brief) summary, I understand the concept of Vengeance, and even Lawful Neutral to a point (the word "Judge" comes to mine). But... would love some help!

SUPER experience and feedback seen in this forum, so am asking if anyone who has fun experience and valuable ideas/concepts on playing Lawful (Neutral) and/or with the new 5e Paladin concepts??
(well, obv not a lot of playtime experience with the 5e Pallys, but past Pally experience might lend itself to understanding and adapting to these non-LG-only Pally concepts)

I create by brainstorm. considering all angles and perspectives, so don't be afraid to go in-depth or throw at me whatever crazy ideas/thoughts you have, Thanks!!

Limits are boring! Join the "Chaotic Paladins club", woooo! :smallbiggrin:

A Lawful character is someone that thinks order, discipline, a tradition or an oath is important for his/her life and he sets it as a moral guideline he must follow at all times, no exceptions made. So they are also inflexible (and why many people don't really like to play Lawful characters. You can't just 'forget about your traditions', morality or oaths to do something. That's what a Neutral character would do. Chaotics simply don't swear anything).

I see a Vengeance Paladin as a Paladin who swore a blood oath against a supernatural entity and will not rest until he sees the Evil he has pledged against wiped from the face of existence. If he needs to break a few eggs for it, he will do it. After all, he's not living for random acts of kindness, neither he needs to be virtuous. He's just a tool for an end, a greater end.

It's a pretty nihilistic concept if you'd ask me. And about as grey as you could get in D&D.

[Grynning]

Two words: Judge Dredd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Dredd#Fictional_character_biography

[TheOOB]

Limits are boring! Join the "Chaotic Paladins club", woooo! :smallbiggrin:

A Lawful character is someone that thinks order, discipline, a tradition or an oath is important for his/her life and he sets it as a moral guideline he must follow at all times, no exceptions made. So they are also inflexible (and why many people don't really like to play Lawful characters. You can't just 'forget about your traditions', morality or oaths to do something. That's what a Neutral character would do. Chaotics simply don't swear anything).

I see a Vengeance Paladin as a Paladin who swore a blood oath against a supernatural entity and will not rest until he sees the Evil he has pledged against wiped from the face of existence. If he needs to break a few eggs for it, he will do it. After all, he's not living for random acts of kindness, neither he needs to be virtuous. He's just a tool for an end, a greater end.

It's a pretty nihilistic concept if you'd ask me. And about as grey as you could get in D&D.

The restitution part of the Oath of Vengeance is what makes the Paladin of Vengeance a good guy. Helping those who have been harmed by evil is very important to them.

I honestly like the new paladin, it's still very lawful good and still has oaths(that are better defined) which can create drama, but if at, one of those dramatic moments, you decide to forsake your oath for the more immediate good(a lawful character doesn't need to be perfectly good all the time), you don't lose all your class ability for the sin of making a good story, you just need to be repentant for your violations.

[Draken]

However - a Lawful character will still tend to enforce a disruptive and nonsensical law as long as it's on the books, because "nonsensical" and "disruptive" are traits gleaned through personal intuition, which Lawful characters do not trust. And, if you ignore one law because you 'feel' it's wrong, what's to stop someone else from feeling other laws are 'nonsensical' and disruptive'. Lawful characters do not trust personal intuition, because they recognize that everyone is different/unique, but believe that is NOT a "Good Thing".

That is an extremely specific type of lawful individual. Either one who reaps benefit from the law and remains willfully oblivious to the people who are disadvantaged by it, one who works in the creation and maintenance of these laws and has no real interest or power to change it and so simply "shrugs" to it, or a robot.

"A robot" is how some people appear to think Lawful people should work and act. Forgetting that the laws of man are made by man, for man. They are not unfailing cosmic truths, they are not principles of natural order, they are not the very pillars of the universe. There likely are laws that are all of these, but none of them are written in the book the town's judge keeps on the shelf behind his desk. Social laws are changed when convenient, with the disclaimer that convenient for people who are working with Law is not the same as daily life "convenient". If a law is nonsensical and disruptive, there are distinct odds that people will not follow it because custom dictates otherwise (and custom is very strong source for human laws), if the "nonsensical and disruptive" law is followed anyway by matter of custom, then perhaps it is not so disruptive and nonsensical to the people who live by it, even if it is strange (or maybe even horrific) to outsiders.

Oscar has a good point on his text. Lawful people like rules, they understand why they are important. My divergence from his stance is that they aren't really worried about The Evils of Free Will so much as they appreciate having a codified social etiquette that is maintained by a recognized authority. Chaotic people think self-regulation works best or should be the norm, maybe for them, maybe for everyone, for whatever reasons they might have (an appeal to natural [dis]order, a belief in the inherent good of people, the simple wish to have none to answer to, and many others).

It is also important to note, as Rich did once, that people are not made of Order. Not unless you grab the subtype somehow. Lawful is not an inherent part of a human's biology. Lawful people can be mistaken about lawful behaviour, they can make bad laws (and remove them), it happens, often, writing law is a creative and perhaps even artistic process. They can also disregard the lawful choice and take a different route if it is convenient and won't rankle them too much (by, say, going against an Oath you swore and take really seriously), they can do it because, again, they are nor entities of Pure Order (and Good/Evil), they have free will and it is a difficult thing to fail to exercise that, unless you have complete detachment from the subject at hand (aka: you don't care, and if you don't care, why are you interacting with it? A question in itself, with many potential answers!).

It is one issue of how people deal with alignment on humans and other mortals. They expect perfect adherence as if from an angel, demon or inevitable. People can fail at more than attack rolls, they can fail at their morals and ethics, and more often than not, not out of malice. A villain can do good, that won't detract from his evil. A hero can screw up. The town guard can look the other way. The army can rebel and take over the kingdom and be no less lawful for it. Alignments (for mortals) are ideals, they are ends, they are not means.

TL;DR: Don't listen to people who think you should play your alignment with the mindset of a 2nd edition Exalted-style primordial (an obsessively-single-minded lunatic with an inhuman mindset).

[Caelic]

I'd take a look at the Code of Hammurabi. I played a Lawful Neutral cleric whose title was "Fist of Justice"--his code was largely modeled on this idea. He came out quite a bit like the Dark Knight incarnation of Batman.

[Falka]

The restitution part of the Oath of Vengeance is what makes the Paladin of Vengeance a good guy. Helping those who have been harmed by evil is very important to them.

I honestly like the new paladin, it's still very lawful good and still has oaths(that are better defined) which can create drama, but if at, one of those dramatic moments, you decide to forsake your oath for the more immediate good(a lawful character doesn't need to be perfectly good all the time), you don't lose all your class ability for the sin of making a good story, you just need to be repentant for your violations.

Not by 'all evil', but the evil that he has swore to destroy. It's important, because the oath also implies that he must choose between the 'lesser and the greater evil'. The Vengeance Paladin acknowledges that he cannot change all the world's misdeeds and that is why he is not righteous.

As the Restitution ethos says: "If my foes wreak ruin...". If the Vengeance Paladin of Kelemvor arrives to a town that has been wrecked by vampires, he must help them since they are his swore enemy. But it it's just "the evil baron McNaughty", well, tough luck. Fight the Greater Evil.

[Falka]

That is an extremely specific type of lawful individual. Either one who reaps benefit from the law and remains willfully oblivious to the people who are disadvantaged by it, one who works in the creation and maintenance of these laws and has no real interest or power to change it and so simply "shrugs" to it, or a robot.

I think it's obvious that a Lawful character will not always follow tradition, his rigid moral code or orderly system of beliefs. The difference between Neutral and Lawful, however, lies in intent. The Lawful tries to follow these codes (as Kant would say, they act in a moral way). Even if nobody's looking (unlike the Neutral, who will act in a legal way only because of the consequences).

[Draken]

I think it's obvious that a Lawful character will not always follow tradition, his rigid moral code or orderly system of beliefs. The difference between Neutral and Lawful, however, lies in intent. The Lawful tries to follow these codes (as Kant would say, they act in a moral way). Even if nobody's looking (unlike the Neutral, who will act in a legal way only because of the consequences).

Yes, precisely. Do note that the particular paragraph quoted was in reference to the individual Sartharina exemplified with a certain air of that being "the standard lawful guy", that is, someone who puts the Written Code, the Laws As Written, above Custom, common sense and tradition as dictated by their upbringing.

In retrospect, I should say that that individual makes no sense at all. The personal intuition of a Lawful person is very different from the personal intuition of a chaotic person and there is no reason for the Lawful person to not trust it unless she is paranoid of herself.

[Malifice]

Playing a LE Paladin of Vengance myself at the moment. Obviously a much darker moral compass that your Paladin.

I sometimes find the Palladium alignment system useful. For mine, the best representation of LE is the 'Aberrant' alignment (which mirrors how I play my character). Here is an edited version:

The cliche that there is “no honor among thieves” is false when dealing with the Aberrant character. This is an individual who is driven to attain his goals though force, power, and intimidation. Yet the Aberrant character stands apart from the norm with his own personal (and twisted) code of ethics. He expects loyalty from his minions, punishing disloyalty and treachery with a swift, merciful death or banishment. An Aberrant character will always keep his word of honor and uphold any bargains. He will define his terms and live by them, whether anyone else likes them or not.

An Aberrant character will …


Always keep his word of honor (at least to those he deems worthy of it)
Lie and cheat to those not worthy of his respect; good, selfish or evil.
May or may not kill an unarmed foe.
Never kill an innocent, particularly a child, hut may harm, harass or kidnap.
Never torture for pleasure, but will use it to extract information and intimidate others.
Will never kill for pleasure, will always have a reason.
May or may not help someone in need.
Will attempt to work within the law.
Respects honor, self-discipline and law and order.
Works with others to attain his goals.
May take “dirty” money, although his twisted code of ethics may prevent him from doing so in some instances.
Never betray a friend. Never.


Lawful. But Evil.

TL;dr - Have a look at the Palladium alignments, you might find some inspiration there.

[Ettina]

However - a Lawful character will still tend to enforce a disruptive and nonsensical law as long as it's on the books, because "nonsensical" and "disruptive" are traits gleaned through personal intuition, which Lawful characters do not trust.

I don't agree.

A law being nonsensical could be decided on purely logical grounds, such as if the law is motivated by an ideal that it actually does nothing to advance, or it contradicts another law, or something similar. Think of Data from Star Trek - he's clearly very Lawful, but he will disobey commands if he considers it the most logical course of action to uphold the ideals he believes in. For example, when he believed a small number of robots had acquired sentience, but the Enterprise crew wanted to force them to sacrifice themselves to save some of their crew members, Data sabotaged the transporter so they couldn't send the robots in.

A Chaotic character will probably disobey orders quite readily, whenever their impulses in the moment lead them to act differently. In contrast, a Lawful character will only disobey orders or laws under a great deal of thought, and only because they violate a law that character views as more important. (In Data's case, he felt that the ideal of not sending innocents to their death against their will took precedence over the lives of a few crewmates.) In addition, Lawful characters are more likely to accept punishment for breaking the rules even when they had good reason to do so.