Good is not Nice

[atemu1234]

How can I do this? I want a Paladin of Honor, but I don't want him pigeonholed into either being a jerk paladin or a nice guy paladin. Any tips?

[sideswipe]

be forcibly nice to people. i mean really nice but if they don't let you then be a **** about being nice.

[AmberVael]

How can I do this? I want a Paladin of Honor, but I don't want him pigeonholed into either being a jerk paladin or a nice guy paladin. Any tips?

This... has a lot of potential answers. Here's one for you:
Play a sort of strong silent type. They're concerned with doing the right thing, but they don't preach or pester about it. They respect others and their choices, but don't let it compromise their own code- they just do what needs to be done, either leading by example or just doing it on their own depending on whether people choose to help them or not. Maybe sometimes this will lead you to doing things a bit more foolhardy or stubborn, but at least you're not demanding the same of other people who haven't made the same commitment.

[Brookshw]

Hmmm......

Know your mind, know yourself, know what you stand for. It's not about coddling, it's not about some rigid code, it's about working, in a way, towards a world that fits what you want and how you see things. You're not out to penalize anyone, criticize, offer absurd flattery, prop up things. You simply know who you are and what your goals are. It doesn't make you a jerk or a nice guy, just a devoted guy.

Also talk to your DM in advance about how you'll treat the code of conduct. Whatever we say, if the DM disagrees you're at a loss so spell it out in advance.

[Blackjackg]

Your character's alignment and class are only the tip of the iceberg as far as personality goes. You can give him most any traits you like. Lawful Good doesn't have to be Captain America every time... it could be James Bond, or almost any major character from the Star Trek franchise.

Speaking of which, a simple way to break a character's personality away from his stats is to channel a fictional character you find interesting. Back in early '96, Dragon Magazine ran an article on the subject-- the suggestions they had for paladins included Luke Skywalker, Popeye, Andy Griffith, Judge Harry Stone (from Night Court) and several of the knights from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Any number of characters could potentially serve as a model, providing interesting character traits and quirks that are not defined by, but still consistent with, your class and alignment.

[Vhaidara]

Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files is a great example. He has a job to do, and it sometimes involves potentially doing unpleasant things. He knows he will regret it, he knows he will struggle with it for years, but he does it, because it has to be done.

Also, Big Ears the goblin speaks wisdom (http://www.goblinscomic.org/12232006/)

[Blackhawk748]

Also, Big Ears the goblin speaks wisdom (http://www.goblinscomic.org/12232006/)

Big Ears is now my go to example, along with Richard Cypher, of how to be a Paladin

[Skysaber]

You need the Quintessential Paladin supplement. That has a section that allows you to build your own code of paladinish behavior to live by.

[Red Fel]

How can I do this? I want a Paladin of Honor, but I don't want him pigeonholed into either being a jerk paladin or a nice guy paladin. Any tips?

Some people say that a black-and-white view of morality is a problem for Paladins. Played badly, it can be. But played awesomely? It makes things really, really great.

See, one version of the Paladin is the compassionate warrior who sees the spark of good in almost everything. In the greedy businessman, he sees a man who just wants to provide for his daughter. In the tyrannical lord, he sees a ruler who just wants to do what's best for his people, even if he's a bit misguided. In the savage orc hunter, he sees a confused warrior trying to protect his family. And he wants to give them a chance.

If they're willing to meet him halfway, if they're willing to make the effort to do the right thing, he sees it as his goal to help them become better people.

If they're not, however... He gave them a chance. When people are accustomed to the smiling, warm, compassionate warrior, and they see his heart turn to stone when faced with evil that rejects his mercy... It can be chilling (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QiR684csQA).

And now, imagine this same person - capable of seeing the spark of good in almost anybody - faced with a being composed of pure evil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#evilSubtype). A being incapable of love (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType), or warmth (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dragonTrue.htm#chromaticDragons), or mercy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#constructType). This person, faced with such evil, faced with a darkness so deep that no light could be found inside... Well, he would have no reason for mercy, now would he?

That's one way to do it. Good doesn't have to be nice, even when it is. Going from campfire-warm to glacier-cold in moments? That's awesome.

[geekintheground]

Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files is a great example. He has a job to do, and it sometimes involves potentially doing unpleasant things. He knows he will regret it, he knows he will struggle with it for years, but he does it, because it has to be done.

Also, Big Ears the goblin speaks wisdom (http://www.goblinscomic.org/12232006/)

oh my god that was beautiful...

[sage20500]

Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files is a great example. He has a job to do, and it sometimes involves potentially doing unpleasant things. He knows he will regret it, he knows he will struggle with it for years, but he does it, because it has to be done.

Also, Big Ears the goblin speaks wisdom (http://www.goblinscomic.org/12232006/)

I second the above statement about Michael Carpenter, Dresden Files is one of the few printed fictional series which actually nails the idea for Paladin. He's just an average guy who does what is needed to be done because he believes with all of his might that's what he's supposed to do. He never questions why things happen because he just has faith that no matter what it will all eventually work out in the end, plus the entire point of his order is to not try and defeat the evil counter part of the Knights of the Cross, but to instead save them if possible.

ex. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThePaladin
"The three Knights of the Cross in The Dresden Files are paladins, complete with holy swords (each of which has had a nail from the crucifiction of Jesus incorporated into it). Taking up one of the Swords of the Cross means accepting a Mission from God to go where they are most needed and help those who need to be saved. Michael Carpenter, the most often-seen Knight in the series, even wears plate armor specifically because it fits the classic paladin style (though his armor is reinforced with kevlar). They're also notable for being one of the most positive portrayals of paladins in all of fiction, being good, honest, kind-hearted people who don't force their beliefs on others and help anyone who truly needs itnote . In fact, they're even more idealistic than the trope description would suggest — their primary mission is dealing with a group of Fallen Angels possession humans — to redeem them, not destroy them."

[Uncle Pine]

How can I do this? I want a Paladin of Honor, but I don't want him pigeonholed into either being a jerk paladin or a nice guy paladin. Any tips?

As soon as I read the thread's title, I knew I was going to link this (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsNotNice). (Brace your tabs: tropes are coming)

EDIT: Incidentally, the page I linked also sports this meaningful quote from the Book of Exalted Deeds:

Good is not nice, polite, well-mannered, self-righteous, or naive, though good characters may be some of these things.

[Psyren]

Big-Ears is a good inspiration. Also O-Chul, and Captain America.

[Firechanter]

I'm about to bring a Paladin into a running campaign (in exchange for my previous character), and the rest of the group is a bit skeptical about that, because there used to be another Paladin in the party before and she was terrible. So I'll have to overcome some prejudice there as well.


That's one way to do it. Good doesn't have to be nice, even when it is. Going from campfire-warm to glacier-cold in moments? That's awesome.

That's pretty much how I intend to play. The first time the party meets him he'll be sitting on some porch stairs playing with kittens and display the widest of toothpaste ad smiles, but the first they'll encounter an evil threat with him he'll turn into a stone-faced killer.

The rest of the group is of mixed alignments, no Evils but a couple of CNs. In such a constellation, it is important for the Paladin to remember that the Code of Honour is his, not theirs to uphold, and not try to make them keep oaths they never made. The Paladin follows the doctrine of his deity, but accepts that other deities have different dogmas their followers adhere to. That's pretty much it. It's not your job to convert everybody to your faith.

[Segev]

"Good is Not Nice" can go a couple of ways. The antihero version is the most commonly-seen. Won't harm the innocent, will protect them, doesn't want to hurt their feelings, but isn't particularly good at being helpful or friendly and also has absolutely no mercy for those who would cause harm. They make the hard decisions and don't find it hard, because mercy is for those who are trying to do good, not for those who mock justice.

The version you seem to be going for is already well-described in this thread. Against evil, it does what must be done. Without revelry or seeking to cause pain, but without shying away from the necessity. This kind of good is actually terrifyingly brutal in battle, because the goal is swift and utter victory of light over darkness. By dealing death swiftly and efficiently to those whose actions condemn them, this kind of good minimizes suffering, even if the surcease is that of the grave.

[thematgreen]

I played my Paladin as a guy who leads by example. He states that he will not accept evil acts being knowingly done in his presence and will work to stop evil that he hears about, but does not expect the same of others, hoping that by choosing to face evil alone he will inspire others to do the same.

He was quiet, unassuming, and friendly when approached. He was not "Super Kawaii OMG I AM GOOD SO I AM SUPER NICE!" but he would welcome those who approached him. He never stole, he always tipped, he helped people when they needed it, but never mendioned it. He refused all payment and just replied "It was the right thing to do".

He never actually ever mentioned he was a Paladin and the group thought he was just a fighter who happened to be a good guy, until I layed on hands someone for the first time at level 7. When the group was like "WHHHHHAAAAT?!" I said that he was a Paladin, but that didn't mean he had to go bragging. I don't think I ever even mentioned my gods name, Sarenrae (http://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Sarenrae).

Picture a really nice and relaxed dude who goes with the flow, but stands up for what he believes in without demanding everyone else does. He's the guy who you can count on without ever even knowing him. He is also the guy who gets righteously scarey when facing evil, not because he is loud but because he lives his convictions and beliefs and stands with those beliefs as a shield. He will die for his friends, he will die for strangers who needs his help, all with a smile on his face.

[Jeff the Green]

I second the above statement about Michael Carpenter, Dresden Files is one of the few printed fictional series which actually nails the idea for Paladin. He's just an average guy who does what is needed to be done because he believes with all of his might that's what he's supposed to do. He never questions why things happen because he just has faith that no matter what it will all eventually work out in the end, plus the entire point of his order is to not try and defeat the evil counter part of the Knights of the Cross, but to instead save them if possible.

Four of the other five knights we meet are also excellent examples. Murphy is a tireless crusader for what is right and the law of the city of Chicago, in that order. She's absolutely terrified by the supernatural evil invading her home because she has no special powers, but fights it anyway because there aren't enough people with special powers around to do it. This tireless devotion makes her the perfect wielder for Fidelacchius, the sword of Faith. (At least until having the whole weight of the fight crushes her and she forgets that vengeance is not Good and her job is to redeem, not destroy.)

Sanya is gruff, bluff, and cheerful and takes everything in stride. Hell, he got his sword from the archangel Michael and is still an agnostic. He does what he does not out of faith or devotion to temporal or divine law, but because he sees the horrors set against the world and realizes that someone has to make terrible sacrifices so that everyone else doesn't have to suffer the depredations of supernatural forces. Where Michael believes that everything will end up for the best our of a near Panglossian belief in providence, Sanya just has a wellspring of hope that probably derives from the fact that he thinks he should have died years ago—and he probably did things to deserve it—and is living a life with purpose and with friends and allies. Thus he carries Esperacchius, the sword of hope.

Shiro never really intended to become a Baptist, but when he accidentally did as a result of not understanding English very well he decided to try to be a good one. Apparently he was such a good one that angels decided to give him Fidelacchius. He is quiet, kind, and deferential except when working, when he is implacable, a tide of steel and icy determination. He is more than willing to give his life in service of Good, but is also determined to sell it for a high price—the circumvention of a prophesy and the breaking of an unbreakable deadly curse.

Butters is kind of terrified by everything going on around him; Thomas was right when he called him a rabbit. But he has the strongest faith of anyone in the series besides perhaps Michael and Shiro, though not in providence or a God, but the promise of Star Wars that Good will always defeat Evil even if it requires horrible sacrifices. It is this faith that reforges Fidelacchius as a freaking lightsaber and breaks Nicodemus more completely than even the combined might and deceit of Mab, Marcone, and Hades could. Despite his self-professed cowardice, he is more than willing to risk his life being supernatural Batman and to sell it just as Shiro did.

Honestly, he probably could have wielded Amoracchius too. He went to medical school but his empathy is so strong he couldn't develop the detachment needed to work on live patients. He will use his medical skills to beat down a villain, but will follow this with bandages. And the driving force of his Batmanning is an inability to watch his city and his friends suffer and do nothing.

[Fax Celestis]

"Good is Not Nice" can go a couple of ways. The antihero version is the most commonly-seen. Won't harm the innocent, will protect them, doesn't want to hurt their feelings, but isn't particularly good at being helpful or friendly and also has absolutely no mercy for those who would cause harm. They make the hard decisions and don't find it hard, because mercy is for those who are trying to do good, not for those who mock justice.

http://imgur.com/gallery/Dn44o possibly?

[hamishspence]

You need the Quintessential Paladin supplement. That has a section that allows you to build your own code of paladinish behavior to live by.

Quintessential Paladin II certainly does - not sure about the first one though.

[Vogonjeltz]

"Good is Not Nice" can go a couple of ways. The antihero version is the most commonly-seen. Won't harm the innocent, will protect them, doesn't want to hurt their feelings, but isn't particularly good at being helpful or friendly and also has absolutely no mercy for those who would cause harm. They make the hard decisions and don't find it hard, because mercy is for those who are trying to do good, not for those who mock justice.

The version you seem to be going for is already well-described in this thread. Against evil, it does what must be done. Without revelry or seeking to cause pain, but without shying away from the necessity. This kind of good is actually terrifyingly brutal in battle, because the goal is swift and utter victory of light over darkness. By dealing death swiftly and efficiently to those whose actions condemn them, this kind of good minimizes suffering, even if the surcease is that of the grave.

Helpful is required for Paladins, friendly is not. Also, take care that doing what needs to be done doesn't become code for the ends justify the means. Doing something right, despite it requiring personal sacrifice, is generally good. Doing something despite it requiring evil, not so much.

[Faily]

You could also focus more on the Lawful-aspect of a Paladin (while still maintaining your Good status, of course). Like a love-child between Judge Dredd and Captain America.

I would also say Saber from Fate/Stay Night would be a suitable example as a Paladin (but I might be biased since I'm currently watching through that show now).

Also, talk with your GM about your Code of Conduct and ask if they/you can write up a specific Code of Conduct for your Paladin. My groups are often of the opinion that a Paladin's code varies from Paladin to Paladin, from Order to Order, and from culture to culture.

Our group's Dwarf Paladin had a Code of Conduct that required him to pay his tithes to a city's smithy, rather than church (unless it was a Moradin church, then it was the same thing), that he would not attack unarmed opponents, he would always offer help first to women and children, he would never take advantage of an opponent's disadvantage (flanking, blinded, stunned, paralyzed, etc) because he had to show that he was "man enough" to fight without resorting to such.

Meanwhile, I've played two Elf Paladins in two different settings worshipping two different deities, and I made an effort to keep their Paladin vows as different as I could within the bounds of Good and Law.

Sheliya, a Champion of Corellon Larethian (D&D 3.5, War of the Burning Sky campaign-setting), have vows that prevent her from ever attacking other elves and she may only use non-lethal force against them if the need arises, that she must give patronage to the arts or create art herself, to always look presentable as an epitome of elves, respect nature, and not lie or decieve someone willingly. However due to the campaign-setting and the fact that Corellon's portfolio does include war, she is allowed to utilize "stealth and superior tactics against the enemies of the elves".

Othariel, a Paladin of Mealiden in Mystara (Pathfinder), have a more classic set of vows that I was mostly inspired by Book of Exalted Deeds. Vows of chastity, abstinence from alcohol and drugs, cannot lie, must show kindness to unfortunate ones, will not accept payment from those who have too little to give (been some cases where the party saved the poor unfortunate village who have nothing left, and she has refused whatever they have offered and replied that they need it more), and will not kill incapacited or defenseless enemies. As two of the party members often in the beginnings did things that went against her code (killing incapacited foes), she became more vocal about her disapproval of their lack of compassion.

[sonofzeal]

Look to fiction. Protagonists can be snarky, surly, or serious without being any less "good". Some try very hard to hide their nobility (Aragorn in the Prancing Pony). Some come from dark backgrounds that they're ashamed of, and weren't always "Good" (Kenshin). Some have personality flaws that occasionally interfere with generally noble motives (Tony Stark). Some have their own dramatic conflicts or tragedies that pull them to act in unexpected ways (Homura in Madoka Magica).


If you're having trouble making a Good character not be merely "nice", it's because you're focusing too much on the "Good" and not enough on the "character".

[Thanatosia]

Yeah, basically read the Dresden files, almost all the good characters are great exemplars of non-jerk Paladins at their finest. No one has even mentioned Harry himself yet, who is certainly an above and beyond any reasonable call-of-duty Paladin personality for sure. Also read the Dresden files cuz they are damn fine books that deserve to be read. And badass as hell to boot.

[Thiyr]

Yeah, basically read the Dresden files, almost all the good characters are great exemplars of non-jerk Paladins at their finest. No one has even mentioned Harry himself yet, who is certainly an above and beyond any reasonable call-of-duty Paladin personality for sure. Also read the Dresden files cuz they are damn fine books that deserve to be read. And badass as hell to boot.

Much as Harry is a great person, I'd not put him at that end of things, especially not when the Knights are there to contrast with him. Paladin of freedom, maybe, but traditional, LG paladin? Not so much. Not when he does breaking and entering without a second thought, has a tendency to injure admittedly evil people out of spite/revenge rather than necessity, and generally does whatever it takes to get things done, regardless of consequences. He'd be the first person to tell you he skirts the line constantly. That said, unless you're Michael, Sanya, or The Other One As Of Skin Game, being good doesn't really do much to help you, and being a (relatively speaking) lightweight means he has to even things out somehow.

Even his goodness could be brought into question at times, especially as of late. The big thing in universe that keeps him more firmly good is that he has good intent even when making bad decisions, which doesn't carry as much weight in d&dland sadly.

Another character that I think would fit decently as an inspiration, though, would be Jim Raynor, of the Starcraft universe. According to his voice actor, he's "...simple, honest, direct and passionate. He does what is right, even if it's the difficult choice. He won't go looking for trouble, but he won't run if it comes looking for him. " That's really about as simple as you can get for that kind of middle ground. The big trick, I find, is to set aside the idea that the alignment is the definitive bit of your character, kinda like sonofzeal was saying. Alignment serves best as a garnish to the character rather than the main focus, at least imo.

[123456789blaaa]

Harry Dresden is one of my go-to examples for Chaotic Good. I also wouldn't make him any kind of paladin. He doesn't champion any force or being (not willingly at least), only his own moral compass.

[Vhaidara]

Another character that I think would fit decently as an inspiration, though, would be Jim Raynor, of the Starcraft universe. According to his voice actor, he's "...simple, honest, direct and passionate. He does what is right, even if it's the difficult choice. He won't go looking for trouble, but he won't run if it comes looking for him. " That's really about as simple as you can get for that kind of middle ground. The big trick, I find, is to set aside the idea that the alignment is the definitive bit of your character, kinda like sonofzeal was saying. Alignment serves best as a garnish to the character rather than the main focus, at least imo.

I personally am more inclined to put Raynor at NG and Matt Horner at LG

[Thiyr]

Harry Dresden is one of my go-to examples for Chaotic Good. I also wouldn't make him any kind of paladin. He doesn't champion any force or being (not willingly at least), only his own moral compass.

While I'd not say he champions any individual, I feel like he does champion for something specific though. Namely, he champions for Chicago, and to a lesser extent, "the little guy" in general. Personality wise I'd say he'd be solid for Pally of Freedom, but that's mostly 'cause after the first few books, he's been real big on letting people decide what they want to do. If he didn't have things to do while still breathing, I get the feeling he'd join Mr. Sunshine's group we saw in Ghost Story.

Though that all ignores his being, yknow, a wizard. Clearly he's a gun-based sorcadin of freedom :P.


I personally am more inclined to put Raynor at NG and Matt Horner at LG

Fair enough, though I feel like Raynor's pretty big on honoring deals, even implicit ones. I see the difference more in a matter of how they hold themselves, Jim being more of the frontier law, Horner being more...clean, i guess (and a bit less weighed down by personal demons that aren't named Mira, but that's beside the point.) Either way, I feel like they both fall in about the same range.


Though both of those remind me why I prefer just cutting the alignment system out altogether. Amusing to discuss, but in-game it just feels like it causes more headaches than its worth.

[Vhaidara]

Yeah, I've personally switched to generally using the MtG color wheel, where Horner is clearly White with a bit of blue hinting in and Raynor is full on Red/White. And Mengsk is Black/White.

[Zombulian]

Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files is a great example. He has a job to do, and it sometimes involves potentially doing unpleasant things. He knows he will regret it, he knows he will struggle with it for years, but he does it, because it has to be done.

Also, Big Ears the goblin speaks wisdom (http://www.goblinscomic.org/12232006/)

Like this? (http://i.imgur.com/HXeyFfg.jpg)

[Vhaidara]

Like this? (http://i.imgur.com/HXeyFfg.jpg)

Yup. Pretty much.

You know, Paladin is an awesome class. I really wish it didn't suck AND have such a bad rep from people who don't know how to RP. I've actually been heckled by a fellow player (who everyone agrees is an ass) because I was playing a paladin. Literally before the game started he dubbed me a Mary Sue. He then switched from his LG monk to a CE ranger. Who I promptly proceeded to beat unconscious because he was abusing his manservant. Right in front of me.

[Extra Anchovies]

Yup. Pretty much.

You know, Paladin is an awesome class. I really wish it didn't suck AND have such a bad rep from people who don't know how to RP. I've actually been heckled by a fellow player (who everyone agrees is an ass) because I was playing a paladin. Literally before the game started he dubbed me a Mary Sue. He then switched from his LG monk to a CE ranger. Who I promptly proceeded to beat unconscious because he was abusing his manservant. Right in front of me.

The main issue I have with the Paladin class is that the Holy Warrior archetype is, ironically enough, better filled (on most ocassions) by other classes. However, there's always the "A" Game Paladin (http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/3407376). It's one of my favorite examples of optimization, because instead of the usual "take a powerful class and make it game-breaking", it takes a low-powered class and makes it pretty darn awesome (not to mention really useful).

[Fax Celestis]

There are a million paladin rewrites. I've written (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?33551-The-How-It-Should-Be-Paladin-v2-0) two (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?181496-d20r-Class-The-Paladin-v3-0). There's no reason to stick with terrible mechanics if you like the fluff so much.

[Vhaidara]

There are a million paladin rewrites. I've written (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?33551-The-How-It-Should-Be-Paladin-v2-0) two (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?181496-d20r-Class-The-Paladin-v3-0). There's no reason to stick with terrible mechanics if you like the fluff so much.

I am well aware. I'm personally partial to Grod's if I'm going defensive and T.G. Oskar's if I'm not, though I haven't looked at yours. The problem is that most people where I am still act like ToB is worse than Wizards, even though I know that they know it isn't (it's kind of funny, since it's the same people who convinced me it wasn't), so getting homebrew approved isn't easy. And any fix, no matter how amazing, is subject to the whim of potential GMs.

[Shinken]

I have one simple answer for this.

na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na BATMAAAN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtoMN_xi-AM)

[jiriku]

Class is not identity. Build an identity for your character. I play a paladin, but he doesn't think of himself as "a paladin". He's the laird of clan O'Bannon and all its holdings, father to three children, decorated officer in the king's army, inheritor and bearer of all his clan's traditions and duties, adventurer, veteran soldier and campaigner. He knows a hundred bawdy tavern songs that soldiers sing, and he's sung them all with a hundred friends who've died in a dozen battles, many of whom he buried himself. He's killed friends with his own blade when they betrayed king and country in rebellion, and he's stood back-to-back in battle with rebels who repented and redeemed themselves. He knows that calling of his life is to serve, and he does so fearlessly and selflessly, but he also enjoys terrible puns and shameless double entendres. Yes, he's a holy warrior called by a god to serve as a living icon for order and good, but that barely begins to define who he is.

When you have a rich, well-developed identity for your character, it will be easy to roleplay him as who he is, and not just an extension of his class mechanics.

[KorbeltheReader]

Your character's alignment and class are only the tip of the iceberg as far as personality goes. You can give him most any traits you like. Lawful Good doesn't have to be Captain America every time... it could be James Bond, or almost any major character from the Star Trek franchise.

Speaking of which, a simple way to break a character's personality away from his stats is to channel a fictional character you find interesting. Back in early '96, Dragon Magazine ran an article on the subject-- the suggestions they had for paladins included Luke Skywalker, Popeye, Andy Griffith, Judge Harry Stone (from Night Court) and several of the knights from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Any number of characters could potentially serve as a model, providing interesting character traits and quirks that are not defined by, but still consistent with, your class and alignment.

So many choices of characters from TV/movies/books one could tap for a paladin. Adding a few not mentioned here: John Wayne in a number of movies; Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly; Katsumoto (Ken Watanabe) from The Last Samurai; Ned Stark, Brienne of Tarth, Jon Snow, Jorah Mormont (or his dad) from A Song of Ice and Fire strike me as possibilities.

Yes, yes, some people will nitpick whether this one or that one is actually NG or LN or blah blah blah, but everyone's conception of alignments is different. Worry about a compelling character more than a model that everyone agrees is unquestionably LG.

[Firechanter]

Gotta say this is one thing where Pathfinder really changed something for the better -- the PF Paladin is pretty awesome mechanically -- however the bothersome vague Code still didn't get really more sensible.

Compared to 3.5, you lose access to the cooler ACFs and Battle Blessing, but on the other hand you get a couple of spells that are Swift from the start. The other positive key changes to the PF Paladin are:
- less MAD: no more Wis needed, both spellcasting and Paladin specials are keyed off Cha.
- Smite: lasts not one attack, not one round, not rounds/level but a full _Encounter_. That's right, you get +Cha to Hit and +level to Dmg until the baddie drops and if it takes all day.
- Lay on Hands: you get more uses and each use heals more. You get easily twice or thrice your normal HP as reserve, AND you can use it on yourself as Swift Action, and I don't need to tell you why that is awesome.
- the Unsanctioned Knowledge feat allows you to add some spells from other classes to your list (Haste is fair game, but unfortunately still no Fly)
- instead of a Mount that probably won't be any use in 3 encounters out of 4, you can get a Divine Bond that boosts your weapon several times per day. Note that this is not tied to a particular weapon, but works with whatever you are holding in your hand.
- and if you like, you can swap that out for a _Domain_, granting you the associated domain spells, and giving you a Planar Ally for _free_, even if you keep him around for a full week.

[Tvtyrant]

Yeah, I've personally switched to generally using the MtG color wheel, where Horner is clearly White with a bit of blue hinting in and Raynor is full on Red/White. And Mengsk is Black/White.

But white is really not good in MTG.

https://warosu.org/data/tg/img/0211/94/1350690515145.jpg

[Extra Anchovies]

But white is really not good in MTG.

https://warosu.org/data/tg/img/0211/94/1350690515145.jpg

See, that's what's good about the color system. It signifies personality traits without paying too much attention to whether something is "good" or "evil".

[Ratatoskir]

So many choices of characters from TV/movies/books one could tap for a paladin. Adding a few not mentioned here: John Wayne in a number of movies; Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly; Katsumoto (Ken Watanabe) from The Last Samurai; Ned Stark, Brienne of Tarth, Jon Snow, Jorah Mormont (or his dad) from A Song of Ice and Fire strike me as possibilities.

Yes, yes, some people will nitpick whether this one or that one is actually NG or LN or blah blah blah, but everyone's conception of alignments is different. Worry about a compelling character more than a model that everyone agrees is unquestionably LG.

You know Jorah Mormont sold people into slavery, right?

[Fax Celestis]

You know Jorah Mormont sold people into slavery, right?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm

[Ratatoskir]

I know about atonement lol. And admittedly I haven't read the last book in the series, but as of a storm of swords he hadn't really done anything atone-y, just swore himself to a girl who he loved. I suppose I shouldn't have said anything without the latest info though

[Vhaidara]

But white is really not good in MTG.

It isn't automatically good, but it is the most inclined to be good, and generally is the most good.

[Thiyr]

It isn't automatically good, but it is the most inclined to be good, and generally is the most good.

I don't know if I'd go that far. I think its more that they're the most inclined to be -lawful-, and that tends to be interpreted as good, especially if you're looking at things from a idyllic standpoint. Heck, the only color I'd say has a hard time being good is black, and that's just due to its self-serving nature. Its been done (Toshiro Umezawa, maybe others but that's less certain), but it's significantly harder to do. Its a heck of a lot easier for White to go evil, though (And I'd say they're arguably a strong contender for Second Most Likely to Go Evil, given what magic has done with concepts xenophobia, overzealous/overbearing laws, etc.

I'd also like to point out that Green gives it a solid run for its money in the "good" category, while also being significantly less likely to go evil.

[Troacctid]

Selflessness is a core component of Good in D&D, and it also happens to be at the core of White's philosophy as well, which is all about putting the good of the community above the good of the individual. So it lines up reasonably well. The disparity often arises when a White-aligned villain decides that the ends justify the means and goes Knight Templar (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KnightTemplar)--they're still White by the color pie, but in D&D, the ends explicitly don't justify the means, so they fall down to Evil.

But I think they are definitely the most inclined toward Good even if they are maybe also the #2 most inclined toward Evil. (They are certainly the #2 most inclined toward villainy, but that has more to do with audience sympathy than D&D alignment.)

[Faily]

Gotta say this is one thing where Pathfinder really changed something for the better -- the PF Paladin is pretty awesome mechanically -- however the bothersome vague Code still didn't get really more sensible.

Compared to 3.5, you lose access to the cooler ACFs and Battle Blessing, but on the other hand you get a couple of spells that are Swift from the start. The other positive key changes to the PF Paladin are:
- less MAD: no more Wis needed, both spellcasting and Paladin specials are keyed off Cha.
- Smite: lasts not one attack, not one round, not rounds/level but a full _Encounter_. That's right, you get +Cha to Hit and +level to Dmg until the baddie drops and if it takes all day.
- Lay on Hands: you get more uses and each use heals more. You get easily twice or thrice your normal HP as reserve, AND you can use it on yourself as Swift Action, and I don't need to tell you why that is awesome.
- the Unsanctioned Knowledge feat allows you to add some spells from other classes to your list (Haste is fair game, but unfortunately still no Fly)
- instead of a Mount that probably won't be any use in 3 encounters out of 4, you can get a Divine Bond that boosts your weapon several times per day. Note that this is not tied to a particular weapon, but works with whatever you are holding in your hand.
- and if you like, you can swap that out for a _Domain_, granting you the associated domain spells, and giving you a Planar Ally for _free_, even if you keep him around for a full week.



Just to point out, Smite Evil in Pathfinder also gives you these following goodies in addition to the Charisma to attack and Level to damage:
- Your Charisma modifier as a Deflection bonus to your AC against the opponent you are smiting (if you add Champion-enhancement to your armor, this increases with +2 Sacred).
- Your Smite Evil *ignores any damage reduction*. This is supergold when facing various evil outsiders, and you're not sure if you should stab them with your cold iron longsword or your silver longsword. You stab them with any damn weapon you please and ignore that Damage Reduction like it was a hot knife through butter. :smallwink:

Bracers of the Avenging Knight also allow you to deal damage as if you were 4 levels higher. And let's not forget that the first attack against evil undead, evil dragons and evil outsiders always do double damage (with a Paladin wielding an Elven Curveblade with a 15-20 critical range, there have been quite some occassions of a bad guy going down on the first blow from her :smallbiggrin: ).

In addition, the Paladin-auras are pretty cool. Granting Smite Evil with *your* bonuses to the rest of the party? That's frickin' awesome. Immunities to charms and compulsions (bonus against it for your teammates). Capstone making all your Lay on Hands maximized. That's 60 HP back as a Swift Action (can be 66 if you have Greater Mercy).

All in all, they did a pretty good job of giving the Paladin interesting and useful spells. On level 1 you get access to Hero's Defiance, which you can cast as an immediate action to hit yourself with a Lay on Hands (that heals +1d6 extra) if an attack would've brought you to 0 or below. This can prevent death. On level 2 you get Paladin's Sacrifice, which is basically "take one for the team"-spell, as it allows you as an immediate action to redirect any harmful spell effect or attack to you from any person within the spell-range. They have spells that key off the auras, and the Litany-spells are often popular too. There's even a spell that allows you to bestow some Paladin-abilities upon any Good person for a period of time (Bestow Grace, lasts 10min/level iirc).

I really like the fluff of the Paladins and enjoy playing them when I get the chance. I was very very happy with the rehaul Pathfinder gave to one of my favorite classes, I really can't compliment it enough.

[Yahzi]

Nobody mentioned Angel, from Buffy the Vampire Slayer?

He's big, he's bad, he's brooding - but he is a Designated Champion of Good and always, always does the right thing (after brooding about it long enough).

He doesn't kill when he can avoid it - but in one of my favorite scenes, during a negotiation he throws a piece of rebar through a car window to kill a psychic that had seriously messed with one of his people. Once a person makes it clear they're not redeemable, he will gank them hard.

[atemu1234]

Nobody mentioned Angel, from Buffy the Vampire Slayer?

He's big, he's bad, he's brooding - but he is a Designated Champion of Good and always, always does the right thing (after brooding about it long enough).

He doesn't kill when he can avoid it - but in one of my favorite scenes, during a negotiation he throws a piece of rebar through a car window to kill a psychic that had seriously messed with one of his people. Once a person makes it clear they're not redeemable, he will gank them hard.

Meh, he'd be a Paladin of Freedom.

From the first episode:

Evil (Vampire) Guy: I do my part, I pay my taxes, and in return I can do whatever I want.
Angel: Really? (Leans in close) Can you fly? (Kicks vamp dude out of a window, at which point he bursts into flames and disintegrates).

[Spore]

My Paladin will try to redeem one of the most vile necromancers in the setting. And he will try hard. I will risk my code of conduct several times and will possibly lead to deaths of innocents. In the setting, overwhelming evil is overtaking the world. And if we can't turn some of them to good and defend the evil the world is inevitably lost anyway (and I will have my fun playing a Paladin of "Redemption" up until it kills him and then ride the wave of evil-but-sort-of-world-defenders along).

[Lord Vukodlak]

Meh, he'd be a Paladin of Freedom.

From the first episode:

Evil (Vampire) Guy: I do my part, I pay my taxes, and in return I can do whatever I want.
Angel: Really? (Leans in close) Can you fly? (Kicks vamp dude out of a window, at which point he bursts into flames and disintegrates).
Fail to see how that disqualifies angel from being a regular paladin.

[Socratov]

Harry Dresden is one of my go-to examples for Chaotic Good. I also wouldn't make him any kind of paladin. He doesn't champion any force or being (not willingly at least), only his own moral compass.

I disagree. If anything, Harry is the epitome of a paladin with a custom made CoC. It's just that his thought processes are a bit different about his city. You see, Harry really takes ownership of Chicago. It's his city. sure he doesn't like breaking and entering, but to save his city, his territory he is willing to go in his territory where he wants to. There a re things he can abide (Johnny Marcone) and things he can't (Nicodemus) and things in between (the lower parts of the vampire courts, the lower denizens of Fearie, etc.)

Like the DnD Paladin, he sometimes has problems with regards to diplomacy (despite his attempts trying), but when the feces hit the fan, he will do something about it, regardless of what he can do about. he may have chaotic tendencies in his methodology, but his intentions, feelings and morals are very lawful. Observe him becoming the winter knight. That screams LG Paladin to me.

[Averis Vol]

I would say a face shrouded in an eternal glare, be silent, be ruthlessly efficient, hold a jaded view of the world ("Everyone has the potential for evil, I practice eternal vigilance against all I meet") be almost painfully blunt (shove past people, don't greet them with much more than a nod of your head... basically throw common courtesy out the window.) and remember your job isn't to comfort people, it's too protect them. the good gods preach love to your fellow man, and that's quite a stones throw away from liking them.

EDIT:


So many choices of characters from TV/movies/books one could tap for a paladin. Adding a few not mentioned here: John Wayne in a number of movies; Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly; Katsumoto (Ken Watanabe) from The Last Samurai; Ned Stark, Brienne of Tarth, Jon Snow, Jorah Mormont (or his dad) Barristan the Bold from A Song of Ice and Fire strike me as possibilities.

Yes, yes, some people will nitpick whether this one or that one is actually NG or LN or blah blah blah, but everyone's conception of alignments is different. Worry about a compelling character more than a model that everyone agrees is unquestionably LG.

I think that fits a bit better. Jorah isn't bad, but he's only doing what he does out of love for daenerys. Barristan the bold on the other hand is a shining example of a paladin who isn't exactly "nice" but always willing to do what's right.

[Thiyr]

Fail to see how that disqualifies angel from being a regular paladin.

Mostly its that he's pretty much got little to no regard for the law in what he does. That's a decent example (He doesn't try to talk the guy away from evil, he doesn't try to nonlethaly apprehend him, he just flat out murders someone who he wasn't in combat with), but I think a better one is how he operates AI. He's a private detective operating without a license, and generally fighting the good fights without regard to the laws.


I disagree. If anything, Harry is the epitome of a paladin with a custom made CoC. It's just that his thought processes are a bit different about his city. You see, Harry really takes ownership of Chicago. It's his city. sure he doesn't like breaking and entering, but to save his city, his territory he is willing to go in his territory where he wants to. There a re things he can abide (Johnny Marcone) and things he can't (Nicodemus) and things in between (the lower parts of the vampire courts, the lower denizens of Fearie, etc.)

Like the DnD Paladin, he sometimes has problems with regards to diplomacy (despite his attempts trying), but when the feces hit the fan, he will do something about it, regardless of what he can do about. he may have chaotic tendencies in his methodology, but his intentions, feelings and morals are very lawful. Observe him becoming the winter knight. That screams LG Paladin to me.

Really? That moreso says CG to me. As does his general "I know the letter of the law, i know the intent of the law, and I'm gonna walk a fine line between them" mindset, and the time he threatens Mavra (and doesn't seem to be bluffing) by saying "You threaten my people, I will join up with the Denarians, I will perform the darkhallow, I will submit to Mab, and I will throw all of that into bringing you down". Knowing full well that the first is basically just straight evil, the second involves copious amounts of murder, the the latter, despite being the lesser of three evils, is still not gonna be a really great thing to do. At best, that's good intentions, and a CG mindset. He just straddles too many lines too closely for me to put him at LG

[Lord Vukodlak]

Mostly its that he's pretty much got little to no regard for the law in what he does. That's a decent example (He doesn't try to talk the guy away from evil, he doesn't try to nonlethaly apprehend him, he just flat out murders someone who he wasn't in combat with), but I think a better one is how he operates AI. He's a private detective operating without a license, and generally fighting the good fights without regard to the laws.

Lawful good means you believe in using law and order to foster good. A paladin is not required to let a lawful evil tyrant stay in power just because he hasn't disobeyed the law. The person he killed was a soulless vampire, which until Spike were completely irremediable unless given a soul like Angel.
Also at no point does lawful good require you try and redeem your foe anymore then chaotic good or neutral good.

The law in question does not recognize the existence of supernatural creatures so from a purely legal stand point you can't murder a vampire or a demon because they don't exist. Because the law does not recognize the existence of supernatural creatures it violating it doesn't mean much when its done for the purposes of fighting them.

Could Angel be a paladin? even discounting Angelus he has enough dark moments of rage that cause him to fall. (like leaving the Wolfman and Hart lawyers to be slaughtered by Drusla and Darla) Could he still be lawful good? sure but I don't think he gets close to Chaotic unless you take his soul in which case chaotic evil. Compared to Spike he's lawful.

[Jeff the Green]

Lawful good means you believe in using law and order to foster good.

You need to follow a code to be LG. You don't need to believe that a code is the only way to be good, or even the best—you could think that there exist people who have genuinely Good impulses and so can more or less ignore rules without a problem but you don't and so need to follow a code to be Good. You don't need to believe that everyone should follow the same code. And you don't need to believe that you should force anyone to follow a code if they don't want.

[Troacctid]

For what it's worth, I think Angel is Neutral Good. He doesn't seem to have strong ties to Law or Chaos.

And he'd be a terrible Paladin; he clearly dumped Cha.

[Thiyr]

Lawful good means you believe in using law and order to foster good. A paladin is not required to let a lawful evil tyrant stay in power just because he hasn't disobeyed the law. The person he killed was a soulless vampire, which until Spike were completely irremediable unless given a soul like Angel.
Also at no point does lawful good require you try and redeem your foe anymore then chaotic good or neutral good.

The law in question does not recognize the existence of supernatural creatures so from a purely legal stand point you can't murder a vampire or a demon because they don't exist. Because the law does not recognize the existence of supernatural creatures it violating it doesn't mean much when its done for the purposes of fighting them.

Could Angel be a paladin? even discounting Angelus he has enough dark moments of rage that cause him to fall. (like leaving the Wolfman and Hart lawyers to be slaughtered by Drusla and Darla) Could he still be lawful good? sure but I don't think he gets close to Chaotic unless you take his soul in which case chaotic evil. Compared to Spike he's lawful.

Honestly, I was just trying to look at the example that was given. It would still feel like kinda shaky ground for paladin, to me, more on the grounds of being honorable than either alignment bit. The disregard for law is more just in how he operates in general, though. As far as my comments about redemption/mercy, that's more a mix of looking at the alignment from a perspective of someone who -isn't- a murderhobo, and that it's more the principle of giving the accused a -chance- to try and be better. It's why I feel Michael (from Dresden) is a much better example of paladin-ishness. Yea, the Denarians are all certified evil guys, who are happy to be where they are. Doesn't stop Michael from at least -trying- to get Nicodemus to rethink his life choices, even if he knows he won't succeed.

As far as the law's stance on the supernatural, it's less the letter of the law that's important to LG, and more the spirit of it. It's why I'd say he's probably more NG than anything.

[Jon_Dahl]

Love the thread title!

I'm always the DM, but if I could play...
I have been thinking about playing LG fighter that doesn't have to worry about its alignment. He would do the minimum, the absolute minimum, to keep the Lawful Good alignment. If lost, I would just work to get it back, but the idea is not to lose it.

I'd inform the DM about this, of course. If it didn't work out, it would be ok. Just a fun experiment, nothing more!

[atemu1234]

Quite frankly, Angel breaks his own code too often to be Lawful. He will do whatever it takes, even if it goes against what he believes in, to help people. Neutral good seems to make the most sense in my mind, as opposed to Angelus, who is neutral evil. Though an argument can be made for both lawful and chaotic evil.

[zilvar]

There's a line from the Honor Harrington universe than I've been dying to use with my paladin.

From TVTropes:

Stated succinctly by Aivars Terekhov when he comes with a task force to the rescue of a planet rebelling against a dictatorial government, combined with a dose of Evil Cannot Comprehend Good. The people he's addressing have several seconds to contemplate his message before the building they're in is vaporized from orbit.

"Why is is that people like you always think you're more ruthless than people like me?"