Paladin Codes: How do you do them?

[Blackhawk748]

Its a general consensus here that the code as written is, well, bad. So i was curious what codes others have come up with.

To be clear im talking about alternate codes for the LG Paladin, not straight up alternate paladins.

[Extra Anchovies]

I prefer paladin ciphers.

Take a look at the various iterations of the Oathbound Paladin (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/paladin/archetypes/paizo---paladin-archetypes/oathbound-paladin) Pathfinder archetype for some good ideas for alternate paladin codes.

[dascarletm]

I believe the paladin code is fine as it is written, given that you give it some leeway. Paladins tend to focus more on the good side of LG, and as such probably don't hold to the code so RAWlike. If the DM can/will interperate the code in such a way it can work.


Though for an alternate code I would go with something like this.

1. Always attempt to do the most good for others.
2. Uphold and maintain order, unless doing so would be in conflict with #1
3. Act with honor in all aspects of life, unless doing so would be in conflict with #1
4. Keep your word and to not deceive others, unless doing so would be in conflict with #1
5. Suffer not the witch to live, burn the heretic, purge the unclean.
Something like that.

[Red Fel]

A good Paladin code, in my mind, is like a good moral code generally - it's personal. Now, creating one is easy if your Paladin belongs to a particular religious or chivalric order - just adapt the order's rules to a more Paladin-like style, and you're good to go. But not every Paladin has that advantage.

Here's a concept I was working on, for example, for a PF character, a Monk/Cleric/Paladin/Champion of Irori. Her code is surprisingly simple. People first and last, always. Treat religious leaders with respect and reverence. Treat political leaders with respect and humility. Just plain treat everyone with respect. It's not complicated. Be merciful towards your enemies and tough (but fair) to your friends. Be sincere in everything you do. Yes, that means no lying. Every day, find a new way to be better, and encourage others to do the same. People first and last, always.
Now, some background - Irori is sort of a Buddha-type figure. He's one of only a handful of mortals who ascended to deityhood, and did so through physical and spiritual rigor. His followers emulate him, but are tolerant of the fact that not everybody does that.

While this character embodies that rigor in her own pursuits, she embodies the tolerance outwardly. She's a surprisingly personable character, because when she's not in "honor and respect mode," she's kind of silly. Warm, friendly, the type who gives out hugs and noogies. She gets serious in combat, and when dealing with officials, but is otherwise just a very pleasant person.

Admittedly, I'm one of those weirdos who loathes the idea that having a branch stuffed into your rectum is a Paladin class feature. But that's how I work a Paladin code.

[jedipotter]

My step one is: The stuff written in any D&D rule book about good and evil and paladin codes is utter crap. At best it is the really out of touch views of one or two very bias and very politically correct people. And at worse it is just utter lies and trickery.

So I ignore all that is written.

A LG paladin needs to cover all the variations of LG, and not just follow the ''by-the-book'' Disney good. And just as important is that the Paladin Code is a warrior code. It is a code for how a powerful, unique, divine, holy warrior should live their life. Not a code so vague that it applies to all vague good people. And a Paladin Code needs to be a bit more basic, and not muddled by all the modern day gray.

I'll post more when I get home....

[Zanos]

My step one is: The stuff written in any D&D rule book about good and evil and paladin codes is utter crap. At best it is the really out of touch views of one or two very bias and very politically correct people. And at worse it is just utter lies and trickery.

So I ignore all that is written.

A LG paladin needs to cover all the variations of LG, and not just follow the ''by-the-book'' Disney good. And just as important is that the Paladin Code is a warrior code. It is a code for how a powerful, unique, divine, holy warrior should live their life. Not a code so vague that it applies to all vague good people. And a Paladin Code needs to be a bit more basic, and not muddled by all the modern day gray.

I'll post more when I get home....
I'm salivating already.

I usually let the player define their own code, as long as we both feel it's within the realm of how we feel a Paladin should be represented. A bit of a cop out answer, I guess, but it's good to know what the player is expecting when they choose to make a Paladin, rather than what I expect.

[BWR]

For any characters dependant on external entities for their powers or any sort of code (so this includes any divine character) I require 3-5 core vows. These vows are the core of their being and their beliefs and violating them in any way (even if unintentional) will be punished, usually with immediate loss of powers which will require at the very least an Atonment to recover, and probably a whole lot more . Examples are "I vow to protect the elven people to the best of my ability, never hesitating to safeguard their lives and lands from those that would offer them harm" or "I vow to serve the king of the land, dedicating my life to his service and the glory of his realm" or "I vow to protect the innocent and the helpless from harm and injustice," or "I swear to cleanse the world of the undead" or something similar.
Additionally I usually require 5-12 secondary vows which are clarifications, exceptions or supporting vows to show dedication. Intentional violations of these will usually incur some sort of penalty except for very good excuses. Examples are "I swear off any mind-altering substance, including alcohol etc., as a symbol of my dedication to the cause and the need to maintain focus at all times" or "I will be courteous and well-mannered in all situations because decency is the cornerstone of civilization and community. Even my mortal enemy shall not hear an impolite word from me." or "I will be honest and forthright in all my dealings, never intentionally misleading anyone else by truth or falsehood."
Certain things, like honesty, courtesy, courage and mercy are required for just about every paladin.

I will discuss the vows and intentions with my players to try to prevent misunderstandings that might cause problems later, especially anything that might cause loss of powers. Despite that it's actually possible to accidentally violate a primary vow and suffer the penalties, I don't usually do this. A paladin with the "protect all elves" vow won't fall because a random elf was harmed in a village they just left, if they have no reason to believe that there is any danger. A paladin who is a bit careless in determining danger level before leaving an area might very well fall because they didn't do their job properly. If you serve a higher power, you get awesome powers but you have stringent standards to live up to.
Paladins are expected to act with honor at all times, but honor can vary from paladin to paladin. I DM for an elf paladin who has no problems with using stealth to scout out enemies or set up ambushes. Once in position, she readies an action to attack and announces her presence (even if she stays hidden) and demands her opponents surrender. If they refuse, she attacks. Other paladins might refuse to use stealth of any sort, considering it a dishonorable tactic. One paladin might happily gang up on creatures or trip, disarm, confuse, etc. an enemy while another might consider anything but single combat dishonorable, avoid dirty tricks and allow enemies at a disadvantage (e.g. prone or disarmed) to remedy the situation.

Paladins specifically often take most or all of the the restrictions from "the Complete Paladin's Handbook", so far the best source on the ethos of paladins I have found, though I'm a bit less strict about what constitutes violations than it is (it's worse than just about any GM you've come across).

[Curmudgeon]

I use the code as written. I do require a pattern of behavior for any alignment change, so that makes "ceases to be lawful good" only a conduct issue over a fairly long duration. I also see no reason to put characters in moral quandaries (do a little harm for the greater good, & c.) so characters who grossly violate the Paladin code of conduct are doing so of their own volition.

[sideswipe]

as a variant (if it has not already been said) have essentially a life long vow or mission, as well as the normal set of self made or deity related code.

for example, a paladin who strives to cleanse the world of taint (the evil kind that actually exists, not the concept) or undead, or to see a kingdom restored to power, or to slay a particular mighty evil, or to always fight against tyranny, or to retrieve a lost artefact of their god.

this not only changes the attitude towards the paladin code from "how do i get around this" to "i live it!".
but it also gives the player a bit more role play material to work with, and potential plot hooks, and a real feeling that things are personal when it comes up.

without this governing mission thing, the paladins can all seem samey.

as for the actual day to day code, it would be dictated by the deity or the order of paladins they come from. so have them right a few hard limit rules that are strict to their deity, not just "be good".

this allows them some lee-way for evil acts without offending their deity. meaning they will not fall unless they persistently be a tool.

[Extra Anchovies]

as a variant (if it has not already been said) have essentially a life long vow or mission, as well as the normal set of self made or deity related code.

for example, a paladin who strives to cleanse the world of taint (the evil kind that actually exists, not the concept) or undead, or to see a kingdom restored to power, or to slay a particular mighty evil, or to always fight against tyranny, or to retrieve a lost artefact of their god.

this not only changes the attitude towards the paladin code from "how do i get around this" to "i live it!".
but it also gives the player a bit more role play material to work with, and potential plot hooks, and a real feeling that things are personal when it comes up.

This, basically. Clerics serve deities, Paladins serve ideas.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I find most of the problems people have with the paladin code, as is, come from their own preconceived notions of good, evil, and honor.

You have to realize that in RL all three are social constructs that will vary, sometimes quite widely, depending on where you are.

In game, however, good and evil are very well defined as a rules construct, whether you agree with those rules on the level of morality or not. Putting your own beliefs aside and using the guidelines as they are written works quite well, in my experience. The only really important detail they forgot was this: do not hold the PC accountable for the actions of the enemy. That and "inaction is not an aligned act."

Honor, on the other hand, is a bit more complex. Since there are no game rules to define it, you default to RL concepts. Like RL, the concept of honor will, necessarily, vary by culture. While the chivalric code of medieval Europe and Japan's bushido have some things in common, they also have a number of wildly divergent ideas, for example.

Because of these points, I play paladins by the book in regards to alignment and work with the DM to properly define honor based on the culture each individual paladin comes from.

[dascarletm]

Honor, on the other hand, is a bit more complex. Since there are no game rules to define it, you default to RL concepts. Like RL, the concept of honor will, necessarily, vary by culture. While the chivalric code of medieval Europe and Japan's bushido have some things in common, they also have a number of wildly divergent ideas, for example.

UA has a variant for honor. :smallwink:

[Kelb_Panthera]

UA has a variant for honor. :smallwink:

Ya know, I forgot that was in there. A quick review of it, however, shows that its existence doesn't change my statement in any meaningful way.

[Scipio_77]

For a mature game and campaign I would couple a culturally relative understanding of lawful with a classic d&d interpretation of "good". This will allow for relatively complex moral challenges for your paladin and also add much nice flavor.

As an example: Last time I played a paladin, I killed quite alot of paladins during the course of my adventures . They were good like my character, but served warring factions and/or lords/ladies. My my paladin was a religious templar who fought in several crusades, and this religiously inspired ideal of lawful often conflicted with politically inspired ideals of lawful.

I would suggest that in a mature game, any paladin creed be fleshed out detail. Merely playing a "good trumps all" character is better left for the chaotic good.

[Yogibear41]

IMO it depends on the Paladin's diety, what exactly they will and will not do.

On a general note something like: Protect the innocent, seek out and destroy evil without using tools of evil, be honorable in your word and actions.


Notice that says nothing about being a goody toe shoes and/or nice guy. A Paladin can be an anti-social jerk, as long as when push comes to shove he comes in and takes care of business.

[OldTrees1]

How do I do Paladin Codes?

First I start by picking 1 virtue that is the focus of the Order(this makes it so they are different). So I would have Paladins of Redemption, Paladins of Justice, and Paladins of Protection as 3 separate LG Orders.

Second I write a few guidelines that help further the goal of the prime virtue. (Ex: Paladins of Redemption seek to understand those they encounter in order to better guide them towards the light.)

This method creates multiple different orders that can come to disagreement (redeem the bandit vs hunt down the bandit vs guard the merchants). Also it is written knowing Paladins strive for perfection but should not fall from mere imperfection.

[jedipotter]

My Code:

A paladin serves the greater Cosmic Law and Good of their chosen faith above all else. The cares more about the concept of good and law then anything or any single individual.

A paladin is a great divine warrior made to battle the most Evil and Chaotic of creatures and items, everything else is a distant second. A paladin is the most elite of the elite, and must focus on the worst types of Evil and Chaotic creatures and items, such a supernatural and magical ones. A paladin is made to kill creatures like fiends, undead and servants of dark powers. By the Doctrine of Free Will, the paladin may act as they will, but the most Evil and Chaotic must come first. Note:So a paladin is not required by the code to stop or act against things like human bandits committing an evil act like robbery. They, of course can act to stop bandits, but they are not required to do so by the code. This is important to both protect the paladin and protect others.

A paladin must always seek out the greatest of Evil and Chaos Evil never rests, and so should not the paladin.

A paladin is not bound by the laws of mortal man As a divine warrior the paladin is Above and Beyond the laws of man. As per the Doctrine of Free Will, a paladin can choose to follow any law they wish to, but the code does not require them to do so.

A paladin leads by example, but it's not a leader. The paladin tells anyone what to do, but instead shows others what to do by example.

A paladin helps those in need, but only in a direct military fashion. Any other forms of help are a distant second. As a great divine warrior, a paladin's focus is fighting evil. Not doing random acts and deeds of good. Again a paladin may choose to help, by they are not required too.

The only punishment for Evil and Chaos is death and destruction The paladin is free to pick a lesser punishment, but death and destruction are the only approved methods in the code.


In my view, the paladin as a stand alone ultimate divine warrior of Good and Lawfullness, has no room for the artificial construct of ''honor'', so it is not mentioned in the Code. Though, again, a paladin is free to act with honor if they wish to, they just are not required to do so.

[atemu1234]

I disagree with the "screw the dying townsfolk let's kill some f***ing demons" implicit in that. Paladins have healing and disease curing for a reason.

[genmoose]

I believe the paladin code is fine as it is written...

I would tend to agree. Sure it's a little out of date; I mean who the heck writes in Ada95 anymore? But overall it's been consistently maintained and with very few fielded defects. We may eventually switch over to C++ or Java though.

[JusticeZero]

"Stay LG and don't blatantly kick any puppies and you'll be fine." I don't know why it needs to be more complex than that.

[jedipotter]

I disagree with the "screw the dying townsfolk let's kill some f***ing demons" implicit in that. Paladins have healing and disease curing for a reason.

I think it's important to point out that a paladins overwhelming primary goal is to fight and destroy evil and chaos. Not run around doing good deeds. The idea that a paladin must toss away their arms and armor to help a dying person is wrong. Again a paladin is a warrior of good, not a saint. Other good people, specifically priests (but not clerics) are the ones that ''help poor towns folk with every little thing they need''.

This is simply put as you don't want the code to force paladins to do menial, trivial works of good. The paladin's primary focus is to destroy the undead that is killing the townsflok, not help every little old lady cross the street. And helping the masses is a distraction. While the paladin wastes time helping townsfolk in small trivial ways, they are letting real evil horrors runs around to harm, corrupt and kill others.

And this is the important part to protect the paladin too. They should not be forced to be a ''good slave''. Any place bigger then a hamlet will have so much stuff that a good paladin can do that they could spend the rest of their life just doing tiny acts of random kindness. And that is not what a paladin should do.

The paladin is made more for curing wounds and disease of evil, dark, magical and supernatural types. A paladin does not toss away his arms and armor put on a robe and be a missionary and heal the sick and wounded. And anything other then slight wounds and a couple of diseases, and a paladin has no other abilities to help.

BUT, note that the paladin is free to do so....they are just not forced to do so, as long as they follow the code.

[Gnome Alone]

"Stay LG and don't blatantly kick any puppies and you'll be fine." I don't know why it needs to be more complex than that.

Thank you for saying the thing I was yelling in my head. Diligently embody goodness. Done. Yeah, I don't get how this is such a complicated thing for so many people. Well, I have a couple ideas.

One, it seems like there's always been a lot of confusion as to whether Lawful has anything to do with legalism. I'd prefer it didn't at all, and there's significant support for that (even "respect legitimate authority" has a lot of leeway; suppose your paladin only respects as legitimate the rotating, freely elected leaders of an anarchosyndicalist commune...) but WOTC and many other players don't always agree. And reading some of Gygax's own writing (always a hilarious trip) it seems like that ambiguity isn't anything new to the game either. So there's a lot of "oooooh I wunner if da paladin gonna break da Law ta be Good" for people that find that an interesting conflict (being a Chaotic Good...ish type meself, I don't, but hey, whatever powers your magitech trains.)

There's also that bit about "not knowingly associating with Evil," and I think either that should be reserved to mean slobbering demon capital-E Evil and not Surly the Embezzlement Rogue, or just recognized as the kind of middle-school quality WOTC fluff description on par with "as a Gnome you are irritated that Swordsages are serious!" best cast gently into Ye Olde Splintery Outhouse.

[Averis Vol]

I generally break it down to:

Be honorable
Defend the weak
Combat evil in all forms it may take
Your word is your bond
Respect the word of your orders elder
Your gift does not make you superior to any man or woman, remain humble and do not abuse your power


At the core, I like the paladins in my world to be walking bastions of justice, honor and compassion; they are the champion of the people, and their gifts are given to them so they might protect the world from evil.

[SiuiS]

A knight is sworn to valor.
Her words speak only truth.
Her heart knows only virtue.
Her sword defends the helpless.
Her might upholds the weak.
Her wrath... Undoes the wicked.

[Jeff the Green]

I prefer them to be deeply personal to the paladin or tied to their order. One may be a jedipotter type paladin, who would cure diseases and injuries in towns they're passing through but given the choice of stopping demons and stopping bandits they'll choose the former, while another may primarily serve a region or country, another a god, and another focusing on the downtrodden. The codes for each of them would vary, and some may allow things (like poison) that another would fall for.

I also like building on them. I'm working on a little homebrew project of knightly orders. A character of any knightly class (Crusader, Knight, Marshal, Paladin, Samurai, Sohei, Soulborn, and relevant PrCs) can join one, and by taking feats gain benefits in exchange for a stricter code. A Knight Mendicant, for example, has a partial vow of poverty but can enchant their armor and weapons.

I like Fax Celestis's homebrew Paladin for a similar reason.

[Warlocknthewind]

This, basically. Clerics serve deities, Paladins serve ideas.

This. Paladins are the epitome of they're ideals, and what they consider their philosophical standards.

I consider the LG paladin's Kantians+. Something is only moral if it can be applied and expected from every single sentient being (in D&D devils and such made from the alignmentstuff are exempt), such as being honest. A society where everybody is always lying doesn't operate, therefore being truthful is the moral standard. The "Plus" comes from actions taken beyond the moral standard. Self sacrifice, great charity, and a willingness to go above and beyond for your fellow man (or whatever).

Basically, if it's what everybody should do it, it's what the paladin does. I let their Wisdom scores decide precisely how they handle it. The lower, the more they've hindered themselves by the lawful aspects and become "lawful stupid", the higher wisdom pallies reinforce their ability to do good by rationalizing it into a "light", granting divine spells.

Uh.. getting off topic. I don't set a strict code. I don't send little omens or what have you. It's about discipline to ensure the purity of one's "Goodness", not about following a set of tradtitions and superstitions. If you do something evil, you know it, paladins have at least decent wisdom scores. You snuff your own light, as an act of unconscious self discipline, leaving a path open for "atonement".

It shouldn't be complicated, that's figuring out how to role play a Paladin of Freedom outside of a rebellion. Just ride the waves between Utilitarianism and Kantism. Don't kill what doesn't deserve it, and even then, probably don't anyway and try to redeem it. Give all your worldly wealth tothose who could make a better life with it.

[Telonius]

In my games, a Paladin takes the alignment of their deity (or cause; I'd work with the player to determine a cause's alignment, as closely as possible). Then, working with the player, I tailor the code to the deity. To take an example of Moradin, the code might end up looking something like this:

My resolve will be as steadfast as the mountain, my honor as sharp as the blade of the axe.
I will uphold the traditions of the Dwarves who have gone before.
I will obey the Soul-forger, the King (or Queen), my commanding officer, and my elders, in that order.
I will bring no shame nor dishonor to Moradin, the Mountainhome, or my name.
I will defend the Mountainhome from all who threaten it, within or without.
I will never surrender, nor will I turn to retreat. If I must meet defeat, it will be after the last breath has left my body.
I will defend the weak, honor the faithful ally, give hospitality to the stranger, and protect those who travel peacefully through the lands of the Mountainhome.
I will never allow an evil to go unpunished, though it take a thousand years to right the balance.

[dascarletm]

Ya know, I forgot that was in there. A quick review of it, however, shows that its existence doesn't change my statement in any meaningful way.

haha. Yeah it's not that great of a variant.

Interestingly enough I just rolled up a pathfinder paladin yesterday. I'm given free reign to come up with a code. I wonder if I should highjack this thread or create my own....:smallconfused: I should probably make my own.:smallbiggrin:

[LoyalPaladin]

IMO it depends on the Paladin's diety, what exactly they will and will not do.
I agree. I play a Paladin of Torm, so at the beginning of our campaign our DM and I established that it would make sense to live by my deity's dogma.


Salvation may be found through service. Every failure of duty diminishes Torm and every success adds to his luster. Strive to maintain law and order. Obey your masters with alert judgment and anticipation. Stand ever alert against corruption. Strike quickly and forcefully against rot in the hearts of mortals. Bring painful, quick death to traitors. Question unjust laws by suggesting improvement or alternatives, not additional laws. Your fourfold duties are to faith, family, masters, and all good beings of Faerûn.

Edit:
I always liked this website (http://easydamus.com/lawfulgood.html) when I needed to explain an alignment more carefully to a player. It is full of goodies.

[Flickerdart]

The thing about Paladins is that (outside of FR because FR is terrible) they are not required to follow a god. Much like the cleric of an ideal, justice and honor is the ideal of the paladin.

Having said that, even without deific or church patronage, paladins love to form orders. Every order could have its own code of various flexibility, and have various stances on Gray Guards, atonement, etc. So you could have a "forget the common folk, let's go die in droves against a balor" paladins, and also have the sensible, useful paladins in the same campaign world.

[SiuiS]

In my games, a Paladin takes the alignment of their deity (or cause; I'd work with the player to determine a cause's alignment, as closely as possible). Then, working with the player, I tailor the code to the deity. To take an example of Moradin, the code might end up looking something like this:

I don't truck with the "paladins are shaped by their gods" idea. Paladins exist separate from specific divinities. Paladins exist and are always paladins and always abide by the ways and methods of paladins, regardless of deity. They may take on the tone and strictures of their chosen deity, but the relationship between the two is one of willing partnership and trust; a paladin is a god's cohort more than follower. Given free reign.

It's also why I default to dragonheart's old code. The paladin's code isn't cerebral, it's something that must be felt and internalized. A paladin's code written in legalese has no soul.

[Threadnaught]

My Code:

I'm gonna have fun with this thing.


A paladin serves the greater Cosmic Law and Good of their chosen faith above all else. The cares more about the concept of good and law then anything or any single individual.

Other than the grammatical errors, there's nothing wrong with this. Though something later on contradicts part of it.


A paladin is a great divine warrior made to battle the most Evil and Chaotic of creatures and items, everything else is a distant second.

Wait, so protect the innocent is not part of the Paladin Code? I haven't read any further than this point and it's expansion yet, so it appears that murdering entire villages to prevent a demonic invasion is following the code.


A paladin must always seek out the greatest of Evil and Chaos

So all Paladins must perform the first step of Pun-Pun's ascension ritual (which involves being Level 1) so they can destroy Pazuzu?


Evil never rests, and so should not the paladin.

Evil does rest, it rests all the time. Only doing something when it can gain from others' misfortune. The most diabolical of Evil doers rest for 8 hours every day, as they have all the power of high level PCs.


A paladin is not bound by the laws of mortal man As a divine warrior the paladin is Above and Beyond the laws of man. As per the Doctrine of Free Will, a paladin can choose to follow any law they wish to, but the code does not require them to do so.

This enforces the Paladin's ability to indiscriminately murder the innocent.


A paladin leads by example, but it's not a leader. The paladin tells anyone what to do, but instead shows others what to do by example.

I don't fully understand this.


A paladin helps those in need, but only in a direct military fashion. Any other forms of help are a distant second.

You use the word "only" a lot while mentioning that other ways are okay. Either the Paladin is only allowed to do the one thing, or that is the Paladin's primary focus and they're allowed to do other things.
So a bunch of farmers are taken for ritualistic sacrifice that'll summon a horde of Demons, which would turn the Material Plane into another part of the Blood War? Kill the Evil Demon worshiping Wizard and leave the farmers to rot in their cells.
It's not like they'd fight any Demons if they were freed.


As a great divine warrior, a paladin's focus is fighting evil. Not doing random acts and deeds of good. Again a paladin may choose to help, by they are not required too.

Yesss, poison the water supply of an entire city to prevent an Evil Cleric from killing them all and raising an army of Undead. Walk the alleys beheading the homeless so they cannot be abducted and transformed into abominations or murdered for XP. Slay the sick visiting a priest for healing so that their sickness cannot be used to infect the military.


The only punishment for Evil and Chaos is death and destruction The paladin is free to pick a lesser punishment, but death and destruction are the only approved methods in the code.

So if a thief steals from a renowned blacksmith, who agrees to create weapons for the Paladin's cause if the Paladin helps to catch the thief. The thief must be killed by the Paladin?
Even if the blacksmith mentions that they are the original thief?


In my view, the paladin as a stand alone ultimate divine warrior of Good and Lawfullness, has no room for the artificial construct of ''honor'', so it is not mentioned in the Code. Though, again, a paladin is free to act with honor if they wish to, they just are not required to do so.

Either it has no room for "honour"/respect for others, or it does but it isn't required. This is something you can't have both ways.


Screw playing as a Druid, I am totally going Paladin in the next PbP you DM. I wanna play me some Chaotic Stupid/Stupid Evil/Chaotic Evil guy and pass it off as Lawful Good.

[Curmudgeon]

The thing about Paladins is that (outside of FR because FR is terrible) they are not required to follow a god.
Nobody is required to follow a FR deity in D&D 3.5; that was a 3.0 thing. The rule that every Cleric has a patron deity is in chapter 1 of Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (page 9); so is the rule for Paladins (page 26). However, 3.5 removed those rules. From page 5 of Player’s Guide to Faerûn:
FORGOTTEN REALMS Campaign Setting: Chapters 1 through 3 of Player’s Guide to Faerûn update and supersede Chapters 1 and 2 of the FORGOTTEN REALMS Campaign Setting.

[Telonius]

I don't truck with the "paladins are shaped by their gods" idea. Paladins exist separate from specific divinities. Paladins exist and are always paladins and always abide by the ways and methods of paladins, regardless of deity. They may take on the tone and strictures of their chosen deity, but the relationship between the two is one of willing partnership and trust; a paladin is a god's cohort more than follower. Given free reign.

It's also why I default to dragonheart's old code. The paladin's code isn't cerebral, it's something that must be felt and internalized. A paladin's code written in legalese has no soul.

Fair enough - it is a houserule of mine in any case. I make some modifications to the Cleric class as well, to have a division of Divine servants: Clerics being the more contemplative (Wisdom) side of the deity's servants, with Paladins being the active (Charisma) side. Paladins (in that formulation) are the paragons of how a follower of that deity is supposed to act, in daily life. Both get their power direct from a deity - or in the case of a Paladin of a Cause, from their personal belief in the cause. Somebody who worships Olidammara, but behaves according to the PHB's Paladin Code - it wouldn't make all that much sense that Olidammara would grant particular power to him as a representative of himself. The character might be a Paladin, but he wouldn't be a Paladin of Olidammara. He'd be a Paladin of a Cause - and that would be completely fine by my houserule. But if Olidammara wanted to grant a special mount, spellcasting, Detect Law, and the rest of the Paladin features to somebody who's totally devoted to him, it seems to me that he ought to be able to do that, too.

[SiuiS]

Wait, so protect the innocent is not part of the Paladin Code?

Why should it be? You're already lawful good, you already care about and protect innocents. Your job doesn't require it as a duty of the job though, so you don't get stuck in any stupid technicality loops by helping an innocent but acxidentally allowig a demon free reign or something. Paladin codes shouldn't be subject to technicalities. They aren't contracts. They are obligations to be performed to the best of the paladin's human capacity.


So all Paladins must perform the first step of Pun-Pun's ascension ritual (which involves being Level 1) so they can destroy Pazuzu?

You're being ridiculous. There is no way that trafficking with a demon to the benefit of a demon falls under "okay" jut because technically it could get you more power. You're still lawful good. Summoning demons for exploits? Not lawful good.



This enforces the Paladin's ability to indiscriminately murder the innocent.

Paladins are lawful good. What game are you playing?



So a bunch of farmers are taken for ritualistic sacrifice that'll summon a horde of Demons, which would turn the Material Plane into another part of the Blood War? Kill the Evil Demon worshiping Wizard and leave the farmers to rot in their cells.
It's not like they'd fight any Demons if they were freed.




Yesss, poison the water supply of an entire city to prevent an Evil Cleric from killing them all and raising an army of Undead. Walk the alleys beheading the homeless so they cannot be abducted and transformed into abominations or murdered for XP. Slay the sick visiting a priest for healing so that their sickness cannot be used to infect the military.



So if a thief steals from a renowned blacksmith, who agrees to create weapons for the Paladin's cause if the Paladin helps to catch the thief. The thief must be killed by the Paladin?
Even if the blacksmith mentions that they are the original thief?


Lawful Good. Paladins are lawful good. Repeat it with me; "first I have to successfully be lawful good, and then I apply the non-alignment paladin code to my behavior".

No wonder everyone hates paladins. If this is how players use them to actively antagonize the table based on technicalities, they're worse than devils.


Fair enough - it is a houserule of mine in any case. I make some modifications to the Cleric class as well, to have a division of Divine servants: Clerics being the more contemplative (Wisdom) side of the deity's servants, with Paladins being the active (Charisma) side. Paladins (in that formulation) are the paragons of how a follower of that deity is supposed to act, in daily life. Both get their power direct from a deity - or in the case of a Paladin of a Cause, from their personal belief in the cause. Somebody who worships Olidammara, but behaves according to the PHB's Paladin Code - it wouldn't make all that much sense that Olidammara would grant particular power to him as a representative of himself. The character might be a Paladin, but he wouldn't be a Paladin of Olidammara. He'd be a Paladin of a Cause - and that would be completely fine by my houserule. But if Olidammara wanted to grant a special mount, spellcasting, Detect Law, and the rest of the Paladin features to somebody who's totally devoted to him, it seems to me that he ought to be able to do that, too.

Aye. We run into the "is the paladin class a job and station or a toolkit?" Dilemma here. I don't like to commit too often, because it's useful both ways. I prefer to decide what the rules are by the game and not by the DM – that is, I don't have hard and fast rules on it that I always use.

[dascarletm]

Many good points.

Thank you. Saved me some time having to type that out me-self.

[LoyalPaladin]

Paladin codes shouldn't be subject to technicalities. They aren't contracts. They are obligations to be performed to the best of the paladin's human capacity.
While I totally agree with you, let's not be racist here. They should be performed to the best of the paladin's ability, regardless of race.

[SiuiS]

While I totally agree with you, let's not be racist here. They should be performed to the best of the paladin's ability, regardless of race.

Humans are a race named after humanity, their higher and most complex ideal. It is not intrinsic to them, it is something intrinsic to goodness and success, which they ostensibly strive for and laud in all races.

Also, linguistically, there's no substitute. I'm too lazy to write several sentences to cover a word that's sloppy =P

[Red Fel]

Humans are a race named after humanity, their higher and most complex ideal. It is not intrinsic to them, it is something intrinsic to goodness and success, which they ostensibly strive for and laud in all races.

Also, linguistically, there's no substitute. I'm too lazy to write several sentences to cover a word that's sloppy =P

Personhood?

That's the one I go with. If somebody in-game asks my Paladins to explain what it means to be a Paladin, they usually just say something along the lines of, "I try to be the best person I can be. And I encourage other people to try, too."

Because Paladins with people skills (as opposed to merely skill ranks) are awesome.

[LoyalPaladin]

Humans are a race named after humanity, their higher and most complex ideal. It is not intrinsic to them, it is something intrinsic to goodness and success, which they ostensibly strive for and laud in all races.

Also, linguistically, there's no substitute. I'm too lazy to write several sentences to cover a word that's sloppy =P
Hahaha. Just thought I'd give you some grief while representing my fellow Aasimar Paladins out there ;D.

[Dgrin]

No wonder everyone hates paladins. If this is how players use them to actively antagonize the table based on technicalities, they're worse than devils.


I believe that's not really how Threadnaught views paladins - that seems more like another way to antagonize jedipotter (no offense to both of you) :smallsigh:

On topic: I agree that paladin's code should depend on the paladin - one cannot simply invent universal code to every paladin in existence. Well, you could... But it's not the best idea. Paladin's code is not something legalised and written somewhere - it is the obligations paladins himself decided to have.


This, basically. Clerics serve deities, Paladins serve ideas.

Thirding that

[SiuiS]

Hahaha. Just thought I'd give you some grief while representing my fellow Aasimar Paladins out there ;D.

I've got a tiefling incarnate you should meet, although it would be nicer if business was left at the door. Much more interested in Law than... Well, anything else save maybe a good opera.

[LoyalPaladin]

I've got a tiefling incarnate you should meet, although it would be nicer if business was left at the door. Much more interested in Law than... Well, anything else save maybe a good opera.
IIIIII'm not sure if that is a threat or a friendly invitation... however, Gallant Holyshield welcomes all sorts of people into his company. You know, so long as they pass the detect evil test.

[Scipio_77]

Unless you can see a scenario where a paladin could rightfully kill a paladin, I will claim most campaigns are doing it wrong or not seeing the interesting moral choices you can land on a paladin character. That isn't to say a paladin always has to be played "maturely" or some such, but it is a class wasted in the hands of pure powerplayers.

An excellent book on "paladin ideals" is the (now ancient) AD&D 2nd edition "Paladin's Handbook". Rulewise it is ofcourse completely obsolete, but it describes a lot of different paladin ideals: Revenge-seeking avengers, chivalric cavaliers, militaristic leaders, nobles, hospitallers defending the innocent, ghost hunters etc etc.

[Angelalex242]

Remember always that Good and Law are important, but Good is more so.

Paladins get along fine with NG and CG. Even clerics of CG. There are times when LG has to lay down the law, and arguments happen when it does, but there is mostly harmony amongst varieties of good. If Evil burns down an orphanage, all varieties of good smite the hell out of it. LG just has a little more planning going in. When it comes time to rebuild the orphanage, all varieties of good collect donations for that purpose. They just differ in how orderly they collect the donations.

I've even had Paladins date CG elves, and it works fine. LG isn't Order every minute of every day. If your elven girlfriend spontaneously wants to take you on a walk through the woods, you don't need to plan out an up to the minute itinerary of the journey.

[Threadnaught]

Why should it be? You're already lawful good, you already care about and protect innocents. Your job doesn't require it as a duty of the job though, so you don't get stuck in any stupid technicality loops by helping an innocent but acxidentally allowig a demon free reign or something. Paladin codes shouldn't be subject to technicalities. They aren't contracts. They are obligations to be performed to the best of the paladin's human capacity.

Don't be so sure of that. If we're calling Genocide Good, then we can't automatically assume Protect the Innocent is something LG people care about.


You're being ridiculous. There is no way that trafficking with a demon to the benefit of a demon falls under "okay" jut because technically it could get you more power. You're still lawful good. Summoning demons for exploits? Not lawful good.

No, you misunderstand. Pazuzu isn't summoned to create Pun Pun, but so the Paladin can fight the biggest, strongest, most Evil and Chaotic being possible. It is the Paladin's duty.


Paladins are lawful good. What game are you playing?

Lawful Good. Paladins are lawful good. Repeat it with me; "first I have to successfully be lawful good, and then I apply the non-alignment paladin code to my behavior".

If an Elf Paladin of Correlon Larethian is to come across any Drow, no matter what actions they've taken or their age, they must kill the Drow. Even if all Drow in the area had earned the Saint Template.
That is the Good action according to the Code as told by jedipotter.

{scrubbed}


I believe that's not really how Threadnaught views paladins - that seems more like another way to antagonize jedipotter (no offense to both of you) :smallsigh:

Indeed, though I still dislike Paladins due to how I'm not a fan of Clerics and their Deity dependence (outside of Eberron) and I find Fighters incredibly boring. Paladins seem to be like that, but with an annoying limitation in the form of behaviour limitations.

Without the specific Protect the Innocent Clause in jedipotter's Code of Conduct, the Paladin basically becomes Commander Shepherd in Mass Effect as a Spectre and can choose between choosing some Paragon and a bit of Renegade or going full Renegade.
We're discussing a game where Good (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsNotNice) is (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PragmaticHero) not (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoralDissonance) Nice (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KnightTemplar).

{scrubbed}

[SiuiS]

IIIIII'm not sure if that is a threat or a friendly invitation... however, Gallant Holyshield welcomes all sorts of people into his company. You know, so long as they pass the detect evil test.

I'll defer the "evil" result to the whole tiefling incarnate thing and plea it's because of the subtype, not the alignment :D

Really though, I'm just rather find of the character (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?184667-SOLVED-CharOp-RP-ratio-decisions&highlight=%DErenoi%F0ia) for social engagements of moral nature. Especially where alignment is concerned.


Don't be so sure of that. If we're calling Genocide Good, then we can't automatically assume Protect the Innocent is something LG people care about.


Paladins are specifically the goodest of their mortal race, however; not Cosmic Good except in where the code says "yeah, annihilating pure evil takes precedence so I'm not going to stop chasing a demon to solve your tax problems. You have a king who has a royal guard, call them. I'm higher on the chain. Don't go over their heads."



No, you misunderstand. Pazuzu isn't summoned to create Pun Pun, but so the Paladin can fight the biggest, strongest, most Evil and Chaotic being possible. It is the Paladin's duty.


This still requires summoning evil to the Prime, which is prime for a reason; everything wants to be here because this is where it gets influence. Pazuzu exists in what is basically hell. Why would you free prisoners in the hopes that after they're roaming the streets with shivs you'll be able to fight them fairly? They're already in jail. They are souls in hell. That's what destroying evil does, it sends evil people to their just fate. You don't undo that because of a technicality especially when that technicality is not the only possible viewpoint.

And how does a paladin go about learning to summon specific demon lords in the first place?



If an Elf Paladin of Correlon Larethian is to come across any Drow, no matter what actions they've taken or their age, they must kill the Drow. Even if all Drow in the area had earned the Saint Template.
That is the Good action according to the Code as told by jedipotter.

I'm sorry, what? Show me JP's quote about elves killing drow. Because that falls strictly under "no, I'm not going to stop your bandits for you as a thing I'm obligated by code to do".


Since Genocide in his Campaigns is a Good act (targeted at dark skinned races)

That's quite the leap.

[jedipotter]

Wait, so protect the innocent is not part of the Paladin Code? I haven't read any further than this point and it's expansion yet, so it appears that murdering entire villages to prevent a demonic invasion is following the code.

The paladin does not directly protect innocents, in a general sense. The paladin is a warrior of the ''best defense is a good offense type''. A paladin is made to kill and destroy, not protect. The paladin still must be Good, that is separate from the Code.




So all Paladins must perform the first step of Pun-Pun's ascension ritual (which involves being Level 1) so they can destroy Pazuzu?

I don't get this one...



Evil does rest, it rests all the time. Only doing something when it can gain from others' misfortune. The most diabolical of Evil doers rest for 8 hours every day, as they have all the power of high level PCs.


Evil outsiders and undead never rest....



This enforces the Paladin's ability to indiscriminately murder the innocent.

How do you make the jump from ''does not have to obey the law'' to ''murderhobo''?




I don't fully understand this.

The paladin is made to stand apart from things like ruling, politics and society. They don't tell others what to do, they just show an example by what they do.



You use the word "only" a lot while mentioning that other ways are okay. Either the Paladin is only allowed to do the one thing, or that is the Paladin's primary focus and they're allowed to do other things.
So a bunch of farmers are taken for ritualistic sacrifice that'll summon a horde of Demons, which would turn the Material Plane into another part of the Blood War? Kill the Evil Demon worshiping Wizard and leave the farmers to rot in their cells.
It's not like they'd fight any Demons if they were freed.

The Code does not limit a paladin to one action. The paladin's primary focus must always be direct military action. And to help those that need such need. So yes, they would kill the cult first. Then free the captured folks.



Yesss, poison the water supply of an entire city to prevent an Evil Cleric from killing them all and raising an army of Undead. Walk the alleys beheading the homeless so they cannot be abducted and transformed into abominations or murdered for XP. Slay the sick visiting a priest for healing so that their sickness cannot be used to infect the military.

Your not making any sense here. How do you go from ''must fight evil'' to ''must kill homeless'', that makes no sense.




So if a thief steals from a renowned blacksmith, who agrees to create weapons for the Paladin's cause if the Paladin helps to catch the thief. The thief must be killed by the Paladin?
Even if the blacksmith mentions that they are the original thief?

And this is exactly way the paladin does not involve themselves with or associate themselves with people in general. So they don't have to put up with this junk. The plantain's focus is fighting real magical and supernatural evils....not being a cop.




Either it has no room for "honour"/respect for others, or it does but it isn't required. This is something you can't have both ways.

Honor is not part of the Code at all, a paladin is free to not have honor, follow a code of honor or make one up themselves to follow.....but they don't have too.



Screw playing as a Druid, I am totally going Paladin in the next PbP you DM. I wanna play me some Chaotic Stupid/Stupid Evil/Chaotic Evil guy and pass it off as Lawful Good.

I think of it as Awesome Good.

[atemu1234]

The paladin does not directly protect innocents, in a general sense. The paladin is a warrior of the ''best defense is a good offense type''. A paladin is made to kill and destroy, not protect. The paladin still must be Good, that is separate from the Code.

The actual code is highly specific about this. Actually, you do have to be good. Also, this is patently untrue. They boost saves, are literally described as defenders of the weak and innocent.


Evil outsiders and undead never rest....

They never sleep. They rest all the time. They go for long periods without being active in the world. There may still be cultists, but you don't always know where they are. This means there will be times when there is not a huge evil to fight. You (or your order, at least) are supposed to be paragons of law and good. News will reach you if there's an evil outsider recruiting cultists or a lich slaughtering commoners and bringing them back as undead.


How do you make the jump from ''does not have to obey the law'' to ''murderhobo''?


Because not having to obey the law can lead someone to slaughtering a harmlessly LE Politician, who never harmed someone in his life, causing massive social and political upheaval and resulting in chaos and death?

Because of the old stereotype of the Genocidal Paladin? You are a paragon of law and good. This involves knowing which fights to pick, and which ones to let be.


The paladin is made to stand apart from things like ruling, politics and society. They don't tell others what to do, they just show an example by what they do.

Actually, yeah they do. They'll be the first to tell you what you're doing wrong. And why is it you don't think they should be allowed to be leaders? They're the only ones that come with a bonafide pedigree of law-and-goodnessosity.


The Code does not limit a paladin to one action. The paladin's primary focus must always be direct military action. And to help those that need such need. So yes, they would kill the cult first. Then free the captured folks.

If they are imprisoned in the center of camp, maybe. You're supposed to take the path of most good and not let the commoners die, so if you have the choice between save the commoners and kill cultists, pick the path that saves the most lives.


Your not making any sense here. How do you go from ''must fight evil'' to ''must kill homeless'', that makes no sense.

Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.



And this is exactly way the paladin does not involve themselves with or associate themselves with people in general. So they don't have to put up with this junk. The plantain's focus is fighting real magical and supernatural evils....not being a cop.

They're supposed to protect law and good. They're supposed to swear fealty to righteous authority, for the divines' sake. They are going to uphold mortal laws, even if they aren't passing out motor tickets.


Honor is not part of the Code at all, a paladin is free to not have honor, follow a code of honor or make one up themselves to follow.....but they don't have too.

I'm going to post the code here to prevent this kind of confusion again.

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any
good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

It seems fairly and completely straightforward on honor, does it not?

[Kelb_Panthera]

The actual code is highly specific about this. Actually, you do have to be good. Also, this is patently untrue. They boost saves, are literally described as defenders of the weak and innocent.



They never sleep. They rest all the time. They go for long periods without being active in the world. There may still be cultists, but you don't always know where they are. This means there will be times when there is not a huge evil to fight. You (or your order, at least) are supposed to be paragons of law and good. News will reach you if there's an evil outsider recruiting cultists or a lich slaughtering commoners and bringing them back as undead.




Because not having to obey the law can lead someone to slaughtering a harmlessly LE Politician, who never harmed someone in his life, causing massive social and political upheaval and resulting in chaos and death?

Because of the old stereotype of the Genocidal Paladin? You are a paragon of law and good. This involves knowing which fights to pick, and which ones to let be.



Actually, yeah they do. They'll be the first to tell you what you're doing wrong. And why is it you don't think they should be allowed to be leaders? They're the only ones that come with a bonafide pedigree of law-and-goodnessosity.



If they are imprisoned in the center of camp, maybe. You're supposed to take the path of most good and not let the commoners die, so if you have the choice between save the commoners and kill cultists, pick the path that saves the most lives.



Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.




They're supposed to protect law and good. They're supposed to swear fealty to righteous authority, for the divines' sake. They are going to uphold mortal laws, even if they aren't passing out motor tickets.



I'm going to post the code here to prevent this kind of confusion again.


It seems fairly and completely straightforward on honor, does it not?

Go back and read JP's first post in this thread (or any of several others in a number of threads). What's actually written in the books is almost utterly immaterial to him.

He's describing paladins as he sees them and how he rules them in his game.

[Ashtagon]

My campaigns have no paladins.

I have templars (no, not based on any monotheistic religion, but on the more generic idea of "warrior who is assigned to a temple"). Same name, different focus. They are martial servants of their deity, and rather than standing for an alignment, they stand for their deity. As long as they can justify their actions to their deity, it's good. there are a few things which will cause an automatic fall, but "questionable" acts get them put on progressively tighter leashes until they prove themselves or rebel.

[atemu1234]

Go back and read JP's first post in this thread (or any of several others in a number of threads). What's actually written in the books is almost utterly immaterial to him.

He's describing paladins as he sees them and how he rules them in his game.

The code is still supposed to preserve the flavor of the paladin, which is what he's horribly maiming.

[LoyalPaladin]

I'll defer the "evil" result to the whole tiefling incarnate thing and plea it's because of the subtype, not the alignment :D

Really though, I'm just rather find of the character (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?184667-SOLVED-CharOp-RP-ratio-decisions&highlight=%DErenoi%F0ia) for social engagements of moral nature. Especially where alignment is concerned.
Hey, it is possible that Gallant (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?385211-How-is-my-Paladin-build&p=18446852#post18446852) and your character could get along just fine. Maybe... haha.



Evil outsiders and undead never rest....
Haha...


Remember always that Good and Law are important, but Good is more so.

Paladins get along fine with NG and CG. Even clerics of CG. There are times when LG has to lay down the law, and arguments happen when it does, but there is mostly harmony amongst varieties of good. If Evil burns down an orphanage, all varieties of good smite the hell out of it. LG just has a little more planning going in. When it comes time to rebuild the orphanage, all varieties of good collect donations for that purpose. They just differ in how orderly they collect the donations.
I can get behind this. I always liked the Superman (LG) and Batman (CG) debate on this. They usually get along just fine, but they tend to get their end result differently. While lawful good doesn't always mean lawful nice, I think that Paladins are held up on a pedestal in society. They are holy warriors and should lead by example, they aren't crazed zealots who murder the masses for no good reason. They would however wade through the nine rings of hell for their deity (or ideal). That's just who they are, a warrior with a just cause. They come off callous to everyone I think, because they don't let evil acts slide. But at least my Paladin would come back after chasing off a demon to make sure that the tax oppressed peasant was okay.

[Kelb_Panthera]

The code is still supposed to preserve the flavor of the paladin, which is what he's horribly maiming.

I know.

He does that. The game he plays with his players is a very different game from what my experience and the forum's general concensus seems to call a typical game. It barely resembles the RAW game at all and he's quite proud of that.

I would never even consider playing at his table but I recognize his right to play however he will with whatever players are willing to subject themselves to it.

[Threadnaught]

I don't get this one...

Pazuzu is one of the biggest, baddest, strongest and most Chaotic Evil of all the Demons. He is easy enough to Summon at 1st level.
Part of Pun Pun's ascension ritual involves summoning Pazuzu and asking for a Candle of Invocation while moving to Lawful Neutral.

Except, instead of following the rest of Pun Pun's ascension ritual, the Paladin in this scenario, would not bargain with the Demon Lord, but attempt to destroy Pazuzu forever. Because it is required as part of the scenario in which Pazuzu can be summoned by speaking his name three times.


How do you make the jump from ''does not have to obey the law'' to ''murderhobo''?

Your not making any sense here. How do you go from ''must fight evil'' to ''must kill homeless'', that makes no sense.

We're preventing Evil Outsiders and Undead from conquering the world, sometimes that means those who would be used to create Undead, or to empower Evil Outsiders must be destroyed to prevent Evil Outsiders or Undead from overrunning the world, or that potential evildoers (http://www.goblinscomic.org/09172005/) be destroyed before they can slaughter those who would fight Evil.
Plus, it's not like a Paladin doing this would indiscriminately kill those who fight against Evil, only those who can't/won't.



I've explained how I can make a Paladin into something that would make Atropus jealous of the number of civilian casualties, but you haven't managed to explain yourself without introducing a few new contradictions to the code.
We're done here.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Some nits i just can't leave unpicked.

When you try to summon pazuzu by calling his name three times, he immediately knows where he'll be arriving, the alignment of the caller, and whether they intend to bargain with him or not. He can then choose -not- to answer the summons.

[dascarletm]

Also, I believe there is a certain Knowledge DC to know this is even a thing....

[Rubik]

My favorite paladin code is as follows:

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Start.

[Threadnaught]

Some nits i just can't leave unpicked.

When you try to summon pazuzu by calling his name three times, he immediately knows where he'll be arriving, the alignment of the caller, and whether they intend to bargain with him or not. He can then choose -not- to answer the summons.

Damn it Kelb, thanks for pointing out my mistake you spoil sport. :smallyuk:

Okay then, maybe this Paladin Code of Conduct isn't as bad as I first thought.

[Gnome Alone]

My favorite paladin code is as follows:

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Start.

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Select, Start.

You Fall and lose all your cheating at Contra paladin powers. Luckily there's an Atonement spell.

[atemu1234]

Damn it Kelb, thanks for pointing out my mistake you spoil sport. :smallyuk:

Okay then, maybe this Paladin Code of Conduct isn't as bad as I first thought.

No, I still think it's fairly bad.

[Gnome Alone]

And how does a paladin go about learning to summon specific demon lords in the first place?

"I'm, um, asking for a friend, who's just, uh, curious."

[atemu1234]

"I'm, um, asking for a friend, who's just, uh, curious."

A DC 10 Knowledge (Giantitp) check.

[jedipotter]

The actual code is highly specific about this. Actually, you do have to be good. Also, this is patently untrue. They boost saves, are literally described as defenders of the weak and innocent.


And first I utterly do not care whatever someone who I'm very opposed to scribbled down in a book years ago on page 42. So don't waste the time with the ''actual'' code.

And a paladin does ''defend'' and ''protect'', but killing and destroying evil.



They never sleep. They rest all the time. They go for long periods without being active in the world. There may still be cultists, but you don't always know where they are. This means there will be times when there is not a huge evil to fight. You (or your order, at least) are supposed to be paragons of law and good. News will reach you if there's an evil outsider recruiting cultists or a lich slaughtering commoners and bringing them back as undead.

So where does the idea that ''evil sleeps for long periods'' come from? Where do you see centuries of peace and happiness and good?

And my point is the paladin must always be looking for that great evil...not sitting around and not doing trivia good things.



Because not having to obey the law can lead someone to slaughtering a harmlessly LE Politician, who never harmed someone in his life, causing massive social and political upheaval and resulting in chaos and death?

And this is why a paladin's primary focus is magical and supernatural evil, not ''bad politicians''. Paladin's are above and beyond such trivial things like politics.



Because of the old stereotype of the Genocidal Paladin? You are a paragon of law and good. This involves knowing which fights to pick, and which ones to let be.

A paladin wants to kill and destroy evil. So, yes, in a ''genocidal'' way. I don't know the sterotype your talking about though...




Actually, yeah they do. They'll be the first to tell you what you're doing wrong. And why is it you don't think they should be allowed to be leaders? They're the only ones that come with a bonafide pedigree of law-and-goodnessosity.

Because paladins are elite warriors, not leaders. they must always ''be in the trenches fighting evil'', not sitting at a desk singing papers.



If they are imprisoned in the center of camp, maybe. You're supposed to take the path of most good and not let the commoners die, so if you have the choice between save the commoners and kill cultists, pick the path that saves the most lives.

It's not a choice for my paladins: they will always kill the cultists.



They're supposed to protect law and good. They're supposed to swear fealty to righteous authority, for the divines' sake. They are going to uphold mortal laws, even if they aren't passing out motor tickets.

And my paladin is free to do so, of his own free will, if they wish too.....they simply do not have to.

You confuse ''paladin'' with ''generic good guy'' a lot.


We're preventing Evil Outsiders and Undead from conquering the world, sometimes that means those who would be used to create Undead, or to empower Evil Outsiders must be destroyed to prevent Evil Outsiders or Undead from overrunning the world, or that potential evildoers (http://www.goblinscomic.org/09172005/) be destroyed before they can slaughter those who would fight Evil.

Yes? A paladin must try and stop evil before it gets too bad. So, yes, if a paladin meets and evil 1st level cultist they kill them on the spot, they don't sit around and wait for the cultist to preform some dark and evil plan.



I've explained how I can make a Paladin into something that would make Atropus jealous of the number of civilian casualties, but you haven't managed to explain yourself without introducing a few new contradictions to the code.
We're done here.

My code is better. What contradictions do you see?

[Rubik]

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Select, Start.

You Fall and lose all your cheating at Contra paladin powers. Luckily there's an Atonement spell.Except mine is a Lawful-Gradius variant, not the standard Contra-Good one.

[atemu1234]

{scrubbed}


And a paladin does ''defend'' and ''protect'', but killing and destroying evil.

I don't really know how to argue this, seeing as you seem to be ignoring first party material whenever it suits you.


So where does the idea that ''evil sleeps for long periods'' come from? Where do you see centuries of peace and happiness and good?

And my point is the paladin must always be looking for that great evil...not sitting around and not doing trivia good things.

Except that it isn't always there, and while I agree they should be fighting evil, they should also be making sure the others around them aren't dying for no reason. Like needless attrition.


And this is why a paladin's primary focus is magical and supernatural evil, not ''bad politicians''. Paladin's are above and beyond such trivial things like politics.

So now you're saying they should be leaving the city to fight something they don't even know is there yet? As opposed to doing the smart thing and waiting for your order to scry out a new foe for you to fight? Because that's a better solution than, "I'm going to spin around in circles with a hand extended and travel in the direction I'm pointing once I'm dizzy."


A paladin wants to kill and destroy evil. So, yes, in a ''genocidal'' way. I don't know the sterotype your talking about though...

{scrubbed}

Also, "Evil" isn't a race. It's an alignment. So hunting down all members of a race that's mostly evil and killing them without even attempting to save them, explain the error of their ways, and slaughter them down to the last woman and child is bad.


Because paladins are elite warriors, not leaders. they must always ''be in the trenches fighting evil'', not sitting at a desk singing papers.

{scrubbed}

Anyway, paladins aren't just supposed to be elite warriors. They're supposed to be good, to be smart, and smart, tactical people help win wars. Not just random fights.


It's not a choice for my paladins: they will always kill the cultists.

Do I have to explain that free will should be a thing in D&D?


And my paladin is free to do so, of his own free will, if they wish too.....they simply do not have to.

You confuse ''paladin'' with ''generic good guy'' a lot.

And you confuse your houserules with RAW a lot. Also, the irony of you trying to defend free will is... palpable.


Yes? A paladin must try and stop evil before it gets too bad. So, yes, if a paladin meets and evil 1st level cultist they kill them on the spot, they don't sit around and wait for the cultist to preform some dark and evil plan.

What about due process? Immediate execution based on alignment seems fairly chaotic, and especially when alignment-detector fooling magic exists.


My code is better. What contradictions do you see?

A few. You seem to think that one can be a paragon of good and let people die in favor of death and destruction, for one. In fact, a lot of that code contradicts the meanings of [Law] and [Good].

[Gnome Alone]

Except mine is a Lawful-Gradius variant, not the standard Contra-Good one.

I have failed my Knowledge (Konami Code) check. If only there was a PrC in the multiverse that could mask my shame.

[LoyalPaladin]

My code is better. What contradictions do you see?
I don't think contradictions are the big deal for your code. I think think the main issue Atemu sees in your "revised" code is that it changes the Paladin from a holy force for good (http://easydamus.com/alignment.html#goodvsevil) into a religious extremist zealot.

Edit:

You seem to think that one can be a paragon of good and let people die in favor of death and destruction, for one. In fact, a lot of that code contradicts the meanings of [Law] and [Good].
Oh, there is also this.

[Flickerdart]

I have failed my Knowledge (Konami Code) check. If only there was a PrC in the multiverse that could mask my shame.
There's a Bluff (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fools/20030401c) use that might interest you.

[jedipotter]

{scrubbed}

Yup.



I don't really know how to argue this, seeing as you seem to be ignoring first party material whenever it suits you.

Yes, I don't feel forced to obey and follow some scribbles written down years ago. I, in fact, change and alter dozens of things written in the books.




Except that it isn't always there, and while I agree they should be fighting evil, they should also be making sure the others around them aren't dying for no reason. Like needless attrition.

Keep in mind the paladin is free to take actions like ''helping others in your way of helping others'', the point is simply that the Code does not force the paladin to do so. A paladin can choose to do it, and it's a very good thing to do, but they are not forced to do it like a slave by the Code.



So now you're saying they should be leaving the city to fight something they don't even know is there yet? As opposed to doing the smart thing and waiting for your order to scry out a new foe for you to fight? Because that's a better solution than, "I'm going to spin around in circles with a hand extended and travel in the direction I'm pointing once I'm dizzy."

The Code is just the pure basics. The Paladin must always actively seek out evil and not get distracted by trivial things. How the paladin does that is up to them. Should they be part of an order that has great diviners then that is just fine for them to tell the paladin where some evil is to be found. Otherwise, yes, the paladin must just ''wander''.



Also, "Evil" isn't a race. It's an alignment. So hunting down all members of a race that's mostly evil and killing them without even attempting to save them, explain the error of their ways, and slaughter them down to the last woman and child is bad.

Remember the first party stuff you were trumpeting? Well, it says good is good and evil is evil. Alignment in first person is objective: cast a good spell that harms evil people, and anyone harmed by that spell may be killed with no questions asked.



Anyway, paladins aren't just supposed to be elite warriors. They're supposed to be good, to be smart, and smart, tactical people help win wars. Not just random fights.

Ok, I'll give you ''good''. But why do you say paladin's must be smart? Paladin's have no intelligence based abilities and sure don't have a ton of intelligence based skills. And how do you get that a paladin is a ''tactical person that helps in war''? What ''war'' powers and abilities does a paladin have? What can a paladin do to ''help'' and army?

It would seem clear that a paladins focus is more of the single big evil target and the small groups of evil targets. The paladin can smite on a single foe, but a paladin does not have ''smite legion''.




Do I have to explain that free will should be a thing in D&D?

My code is full of free will.




And you confuse your houserules with RAW a lot. Also, the irony of you trying to defend free will is... palpable.


I never do...unlike others. The question/discussion here is ''how do you do Paladin Codes? It's not ''how do you blindly follow the paladin code written on page 42?''.




What about due process? Immediate execution based on alignment seems fairly chaotic, and especially when alignment-detector fooling magic exists.

Due process, as a law of man, is something a paladin is above and beyond. And immediate execution could not be more lawful.




A few. You seem to think that one can be a paragon of good and let people die in favor of death and destruction, for one. In fact, a lot of that code contradicts the meanings of [Law] and [Good].

Where does my Code say a paladin must be in favor of letting people die?

For example: a portal opens and demons pour out to attack the town in the middle of the day with innocents all around. What does the paladin do?

My paladin rushes over to fight the demons. Period.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Paladin codes: how do I do them?

I don't. Paladins are just a stack of class features.

Moral codes come from the player and the character interacting with the world, not with the player interacting with the rules. If a player wants to be subjected to the full Paladin code as written - or to the Solomnic Codes, or whatever! - then they'll tell me. If they want to be a Paladin for some smackin' and castin', then I'll just be glad they're not playing a Divine Power Cleric. Ain't no worries.



The only time I've ever had a character fall Paladin-style was, uh, in a Dragonlance campaign I was running, and it seemed an appropriate punishment for a Lawful Good cleric who tried to sell a bunch of orphans as slaves in a bar. Wouldn't have been so bad if he hadn't tried to sell 'em to the avatar of Reorx. Wouldn't have been so bad if he hadn't been a Reorx-worshipping Dwarven Cleric with the Good and Dwarf domains.

[dascarletm]

And you confuse your houserules with RAW a lot. Also, the irony of you trying to defend free will is... palpable.


I'm unsure why there is so much RAW obsession going on in a thread about how people individually handle codes.

If I may...

You seem to be imagining a slight, or imagining that this is a discussion about how RAW paladin codes work. This is not the case.

Its a general consensus here that the code as written is, well, bad. So i was curious what codes others have come up with.

To be clear im talking about alternate codes for the LG Paladin, not straight up alternate paladins.

The constant barrage of attacks towards jedipotter's posts pertaining to how he or she runs certain aspects of his or her game is unnecessary, and not very polite. In this case I don't think the code is all that bad actually. It basically boils down to:

Destroy Evil

Prioritize greater evils.

You are above moral laws and pettiness.

You need not conform to any other structures (mortal or divine) besides the destruction of evil.

[Rijan_Sai]

2 quick things:
1)

My favorite paladin code is as follows:

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Start.


Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Select, Start.

You Fall and lose all your cheating at Contra paladin powers. Luckily there's an Atonement spell.

I may be failing my own (Knowledge: Konami Code) check here, but I thought that the "Select" part was dependent on whether there were one or two players in the game Paladins in the party.

2)
I may be reading it wrong, but it seems from the responses that JP sees the Paladin as more Judge Dread, instead of Superman.

That is all. I have no practical experience with Paladins and their code to comment further on this.

[Threadnaught]

What contradictions do you see?

{scrubbed}

Also the thing about potential evil doesn't refer to actual evil. It refers to "not evil but could become evil in the future", which describes everything that isn't already evil.

{scrubbed}

[jedipotter]

I don't think contradictions are the big deal for your code. I think think the main issue Atemu sees in your "revised" code is that it changes the Paladin from a holy force for good into a religious extremist zealot.

Well, ok, I see the paladin as a Holy Religious Zealot. That is exactly what I'm aiming for, so done.


2)
I may be reading it wrong, but it seems from the responses that JP sees the Paladin as more Judge Dread, instead of Superman

Judge Dread is a much better fit, but then I've only seen the two Judge Dread movies and never, ever read a single Judge Dread Comic. But of the things in the movies:

Judge, Jury and Executioner I do firmly believe the paladin is this. And this is why a paladin has weapons and abilities like smite evil. To kill, point blank. If the paladin was made to be a cop that catches bad guys and brings them to trial then the paladins abilities would be more like ''only using a net or club'', can do a ''stunning attack'' and can ''hold bad guys' by making holy handcuffs''.

But at the same time this is exactly why the paladin greatly avoids trivial evil. The paladin does not run around on the streets looking for a pick pocket, they are looking for undead.

Uphold the Law My paladin cares nothing for the laws of man, buy the Code. A paladin is free to join law enforcement if they wish and enforce laws...but they are not required too. By default a paladin does not have to follow any law of man, though again, they may choose too....but they are not required to by the Code.

[SiuiS]

Except mine is a Lawful-Gradius variant, not the standard Contra-Good one.

Wait, that did something in Gladius?


Oh, goody. Now we're ignoring first party material when it disagrees with your remarkably narrow world view. We're doing this now, I suppose.


Hard stop.

We are discussing everyone's houserules of how to run paladin codes. Why are you upset someone is houseruling their paladin codes? That's not narrow world view at all that's why the thread exists.


I'm unsure why there is so much RAW obsession going on in a thread about how people individually handle codes.

If I may...

You seem to be imagining a slight, or imagining that this is a discussion about how RAW paladin codes work. This is not the case.


The constant barrage of attacks towards jedipotter's posts pertaining to how he or she runs certain aspects of his or her game is unnecessary, and not very polite. In this case I don't think the code is all that bad actually. It basically boils down to:

Destroy Evil

Prioritize greater evils.

You are above moral laws and pettiness.

You need not conform to any other structures (mortal or divine) besides the destruction of evil.

All this. Thanks, mate. :)


Look over your posts and read them carefully. Take notes.

{scrubbed}



Also the thing about potential evil doesn't refer to actual evil. It refers to "not evil but could become evil in the future", which describes everything that isn't already evil.
{scrubbed}


{scrubbed}

[atemu1234]

Hard stop.

We are discussing everyone's houserules of how to run paladin codes. Why are you upset someone is houseruling their paladin codes? That's not narrow world view at all that's why the thread exists.

I wouldn't say I'm personally upset, but we are discussing normalized paladins here (IE accomplishes the same thing fluff-wise, but does not restrict the character in the same way or worse). However, JP's version does not accomplish the same thing, contradicts itself, and I was pointing it out.

[Red Fel]

I wouldn't say I'm personally upset, but we are discussing normalized paladins here (IE accomplishes the same thing fluff-wise, but does not restrict the character in the same way or worse). However, JP's version does not accomplish the same thing, contradicts itself, and I was pointing it out.

Bottom line: Never engage JP on house rules or RAW. JP has his own definitions of both, and if they work for him and his table, fine.

I happen to think it's sloppy and presumptuous that he phrases his posts in terms of "this is how things are" rather than "this is how they are at my table," but I think he makes an effort to at least start some of his posts with "In my games," so that's something.

So let's get off of JP, and back onto the fact that apparently a whole lot of Paladins have 30 lives, which is proof that the class is seriously overpowered.

[jedipotter]

I wouldn't say I'm personally upset, but we are discussing normalized paladins here (IE accomplishes the same thing fluff-wise, but does not restrict the character in the same way or worse). However, JP's version does not accomplish the same thing, contradicts itself, and I was pointing it out.

What contradictions? Where?

[atemu1234]

What contradictions? Where?

{scrubbed} I absolutely posted that, and other people have quoted it...

The actions you describe as "good" is wholesale slaughter of evil creatures. Which, defined by RAW and by common sense, is not just evil, but [Evil].

[Rubik]

Wait, that did something in Gladius?Gradius. (Gladius is something else altogether.)

Gradius paladins have 30 lives when they abide by their Konami Code of Conduct. They can gain 30 more every time they input the command I mentioned earlier.

Gladius paladins just have swords, which all paladins want, and most get.

[jedipotter]

The actions you describe as "good" is wholesale slaughter of evil creatures. Which, defined by RAW and by common sense, is not just evil, but [Evil].

Not true.

Ok, lets take bandits. They are commonly found in any D&D world. Now if the good player characters hear that ''a group of bandits has set up in Two Sword Pass'' do they:

A. Disarm themselves completely of all weapons and spells and then reach out to the bandits and try to open a dialogue with them to address their grievances and try to find someway to bribe or pay tribute to the bandits so they stop attacking, robbing and killing innocent people.

B. Set off to find the bandits and capture them. So only using weapons like nets and bolas, do the character's try to catch all the bandits alive and bring them back to town, put them in jail, and then wait around to testify at the ''alleged bandits'' fair trial.

C. Set off to find the bandits and kill them.

Well, both RAW and Common Sense are just fine with C.........

[Andry]

To quote Godfrey of Ibelin from Kingdom of Heaven "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; that is your oath."

[SiuiS]

I wouldn't say I'm personally upset, but we are discussing normalized paladins here (IE accomplishes the same thing fluff-wise, but does not restrict the character in the same way or worse). However, JP's version does not accomplish the same thing, contradicts itself, and I was pointing it out.

See, that's where things fall apart. Some pretty reasonable people don't see these contradictions and in fact see the code as effective at what it does and fully in line with what the standard code is. This leads me to believe that the resistance isn't to the code, but to the language and the person who posted it.


Gradius. (Gladius is something else altogether.)

iPhone autocorrect.

[Gnome Alone]

I may be failing my own (Knowledge: Konami Code) check here, but I thought that the "Select" part was dependent on whether there were one or two players in the game Paladins in the party.

If true (and weirdly, I don't wanna look it up, don't know why) that would explain why I thought it had to have the Select in there, because I always played Contra with either my dad or my little brother. That thing is way too hard and tedious to go it alone.

Oh man, if I had an electronodevice capable of making fancy pitchers 'n the like, I would totally make one of those memes with the phrase "It's dangerous to go alone, take this" and then the old man is handing him the Konami code. That this would be unwieldy and hard to draw properly only adds to its appeal.

[Haruki-kun]

The Winged Mod: Guys, please try to be more respectful towards each other when discussing this issue. This thread is veering into dangerous territory.

Also, please drop the discussion on the Konami Code. It is wildly off-topic.