LN Paladins?

[lunasmeow]

I've seen Lawful Good, obviously. Devoted to Good.
I've seen Lawful Evil, Devoted to Evil.

What about Lawful Neutral? Devoted to balance in all things, believing that being devoted to Good no matter what the situation, would be just as destructive as being devoted to Evil. Follow a Neutral God, and be devoted to Neutrality. Does this exist? I'd allow it as a DM, but this is for a campaign in which I'm a player. The DM allows official books, but nothing from specific realms, so no Faerun specific, greyhawk specific, etc.

[Karl Aegis]

Dragon Magazine #310. It doesn't have very good class features, the same as every other paladin. You're better off playing a cleric.

[lunasmeow]

Is Dragon Magazine considered "official"? I don't know it's origins.

[aspekt]

Is Dragon Magazine considered "official"? I don't know it's origins.

In the sense that it was the official publication of TSR and then WotC, yes it's official.

However, these things are always up to the discretion of the table as a whole, if not the DM.

You and the DM might have fun homebrewing a Lawful Neutral paladin. I've considered it a few times over the decad...*ahem* years and would have no issues with it. I've just never had a player express an interest in playing one.

I assume this is in a d20/3.5 setting. I just did a quick search and it looks like there are a number of resources avaliable.

[jedipotter]

All the ''generic'' D&D books say a paladin must be LG. So if your looking by-the-book, the answer is no.

It's possible, and they are out there....just not in generic D&D.

[atemu1234]

All the ''generic'' D&D books say a paladin must be LG. So if your looking by-the-book, the answer is no.

It's possible, and they are out there....just not in generic D&D.

Well, to be fair, he referenced a Paladin of Tyranny, which isn't exactly generic-kosher.

[LoyalPaladin]

I did always find it odd that a Paladin didn't need to match their Deity's alignment. I'd think that as a champion of their cause, a deity would require a matching alignment? It also totally screws the evil deities. But, as a Paladin of Torm that doesn't really both me.

[GreatDane]

Sounds like you're looking for the Incarnate, from Magic of Incarnum. They devote themselves to a single extreme of the alignment grid, and must be neutral with regards to the other (they must be NE, NG, LN, or CN).

That said...

I've seen Lawful Good, obviously. Devoted to Good.
I've seen Lawful Evil, Devoted to Evil.
This confuses me. Are the paladins of honor you encounter not equally devoted to Law and Good? The paladin code demands both respect for authority and care for the innocent, and doesn't emphasize one over the other.

[Red Fel]

I did always find it odd that a Paladin didn't need to match their Deity's alignment. I'd think that as a champion of their cause, a deity would require a matching alignment? It also totally screws the evil deities. But, as a Paladin of Torm that doesn't really both me.

Not every Paladin has a patron deity. Paladins are more associated with the ideal of their code; they may adopt deities, but it's hardly a prerequisite.


This confuses me. Are the paladins of honor you encounter not equally devoted to Law and Good? The paladin code demands both respect for authority and care for the innocent, and doesn't emphasize one over the other.

Eeh... That's complicated. The thing to remember is that the Paladin Code "requires" a Paladin to be honorable (the L in LG), but penalizes him for being Evil (the G in LG). The emphasis is, or should be, I think, on the G over the L. The G is the primary focus; the L tells you how you achieve the G.

I do agree, however, that you have to have at least some focus on the L, or else you're hardly a Paladin at all.

That said, another option for the LN champion-of-a-thing is the Ruby Knight Vindicator. Yes, they can be LG or LE, too, but their patroness (matron?), Wee Jas, prefers her Lawful with a side of Neutral.

[goto124]

I figured LNs were just... well.. law keepers.

[LoyalPaladin]

Not every Paladin has a patron deity. Paladins are more associated with the ideal of their code; they may adopt deities, but it's hardly a prerequisite.

That said, another option for the LN champion-of-a-thing is the Ruby Knight Vindicator. Yes, they can be LG or LE, too, but their patroness (matron?), Wee Jas, prefers her Lawful with a side of Neutral.
I suppose that's true. Sucks to be a deity without Paladins though.

Gotta love me some Wee Jas.

[Red Fel]

I suppose that's true. Sucks to be a deity without Paladins though.

I don't think Cyric minds. Or Talos.

And to be fair, there are deity-specific Paladin-esque classes. The Champion of Corellon Larethian is a uniquely special failmaster, for instance, and he works for a very CG Robin Hood wannabe. Gruumsh is CE, but the Eye of Gruumsh is a thing. In fact, a lot of deities - even Chaotic ones - have their own not-quite-Paladins.

[Vhaidara]

I suppose that's true. Sucks to be a deity without Paladins though.

Actually, it's better. You see, a LG deity has a split of Paladins and Combat-focused Clerics. Gods who don't get Paladins just get the Clerics, who are better because Paladins are bad.

[Flickerdart]

This confuses me. Are the paladins of honor you encounter not equally devoted to Law and Good? The paladin code demands both respect for authority and care for the innocent, and doesn't emphasize one over the other.
Paladins of Honor fall for any evil act, or gross violations of their code. Chaotic acts that are not covered by the code, and minor violations of the code, do not make them fall. Additionally, there is no rule against teaming up with Chaotic characters, nor Smite or Detect against them, in the standard Paladin model.

[LoyalPaladin]

Actually, it's better. You see, a LG deity has a split of Paladins and Combat-focused Clerics. Gods who don't get Paladins just get the Clerics, who are better because Paladins are bad.
I think you are confused, if you look at my alignment you will clearly see an L followed by a G. So clearly Paladins are good.

I think in all seriousness though, if you disregard the entire system and just go off fluff, most deities would want Paladins?

[Flickerdart]

I think in all seriousness though, if you disregard the entire system and just go off fluff, most deities would want Paladins?
Paladins have a code that does not necessarily match the deity's tenets. Clerics are a much safer bet, dogmatically.

If the god is specifically in the market for martially oriented holy warriors, there are a ton of PrCs such as Divine Crusader and Pious Templar tailor-made for them.

[Corsair]

I would think a LN Paladin would be less dedicated to Neutrality and more dedicated to absolute Order. Neutrality isn't really a moral position you get great champions for, the Omnicidal Neutral is kind of an absurd alignment concept.

[(Un)Inspired]

I think in all seriousness though, if you disregard the entire system and just go off fluff, most deities would want Paladins?

Why? I'm not sure I understand.

[LoyalPaladin]

Paladins have a code that does not necessarily match the deity's tenets. Clerics are a much safer bet, dogmatically.

If the god is specifically in the market for martially oriented holy warriors, there are a ton of PrCs such as Divine Crusader and Pious Templar tailor-made for them.
I was thinking more along the lines of my previous statement. If their alignment was based off their deity, they would be a good champion of any deity's cause.


I did always find it odd that a Paladin didn't need to match their Deity's alignment. I'd think that as a champion of their cause, a deity would require a matching alignment?


Why? I'm not sure I understand.
As above. I'd think most deities would want a champion of sorts. A lot of them tend to create their own version of a Paladin. I guess I am talking more along the lines of fluff than class features.

Thematically it'd be "Paladins are Paladins are Paladins."
Systematically its "If it walks like a Paladin and talks like a Paladin, it is probably a Cleric/Crusader hybrid that prestiged into Ruby Knight Vindicator."

[(Un)Inspired]

As above. I'd think most deities would want a champion of sorts. A lot of them tend to create their own version of a Paladin. I guess I am talking more along the lines of fluff than class features.

Thematically it'd be "Paladins are Paladins are Paladins." systematically its "If it walks like a Paladin and talks like a Paladin, it is probably a Cleric/Crusader hybrid that prestiged into Ruby Knight Vindicator."

I believe I understand what you mean about deities wanting the champions that have the fluff of a paladin; not necessarily the mechanics.

What I don't understand is why. Why do you think most deities would want that?

[Crazysaneman]

In my games, I allow players to play a paladin of whatever alignment they want, but they must adhere to a strict code relevant to that alignment. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever had a DM that couldn't be persuaded.

Alternatively, if you're looking to play a paladin that becomes a bit jaded you could check out the Grey Guard PRC. Still must be LG but you develop the ability to justify your actions your own way, and the code loosens considerably. Also, it allows for some intense RP.

[LoyalPaladin]

I believe I understand what you mean about deities wanting the champions that have the fluff of a paladin; not necessarily the mechanics.

What I don't understand is why. Why do you think most deities would want that?
Most deities have a cause they need furthered and having the pocket champion who has made that his life's goal is what I would think is the best fit? I mean, unless your goal is to heal hundreds of people a day or magically enthrall the masses.

By lore, Paladins are pretty good at the "Quest for this" or "Uphold that" genre of tasks.

[Flickerdart]

I was thinking more along the lines of my previous statement. If their alignment was based off their deity, they would be a good champion of any deity's cause.
There are more deities than alignments. Each one has different tenets for how his followers should act. Paladins have a different, additional code on top of that, which might conflict with those tenets - perhaps this is an LG deity of forgiveness, but by RAW a paladin cannot travel with an Evil companion to redeem him.

[Red Fel]

Thematically it'd be "Paladins are Paladins are Paladins."
Systematically its "If it walks like a Paladin and talks like a Paladin, it is probably a Cleric/Crusader hybrid that prestiged into Ruby Knight Vindicator."

Which is why, generally speaking, if someone tells me they want to play a Paladin, I ask if they mean the class (capital-P Paladin) or the shining knight champion concept (small-p Crusader, Cleric/Ordained Champion/Fist of Raziel, Incarnate, etc.).

It's like when somebody says they want to play a Samurai. Or a Ninja. Or a martial artist Monk. There are other (better) ways than the classes that carry those names, and finding a different avenue often gives you more flexibility in the execution of your concept.

[(Un)Inspired]

Most deities have a cause they need furthered and having the pocket champion who has made that his life's goal is what I would think is the best fit? I mean, unless your goal is heal hundreds of people a day or enthrall thousands of people. By lore, Paladins are pretty good at the "Quest for this" or "Uphold that" genre of tasks.

By fluff I don't believe paladin are more competent at achieving goals than wizards, cleric, fighter or rogues.

I believe the default fluff for a paladin is that they are champions of an alignment. That alignment can coincide with a deity's goals but by default a paladins life goals are alignment based.

Any of the other classes, fluff wise, have less obligations that would lead them from following a deity's exact needs.

[LoyalPaladin]

Which is why, generally speaking, if someone tells me they want to play a Paladin, I ask if they mean the class (capital-P Paladin) or the shining knight champion concept (small-p Crusader, Cleric/Ordained Champion/Fist of Raziel, Incarnate, etc.).
Which is totally fair. I actually agree with that 100%. Paladins can and usually are outshone by other classes. People don't usually play Paladins for the class features.


There are more deities than alignments. Each one has different tenets for how his followers should act. Paladins have a different, additional code on top of that, which might conflict with those tenets - perhaps this is an LG deity of forgiveness, but by RAW a paladin cannot travel with an Evil companion to redeem him.
Perhaps it would be better to houserule a Paladin to be within a step of his deity's alignment, but have his code be based on that deity's dogma then? I mean, I'd have no problem with that. Despite my username, I really do recognize that Paladin isn't a high tier class with to die for class features. But in reference to Red Fel's post, I enjoy the capital P archetype.

[(Un)Inspired]

Perhaps it would be better to houserule a Paladin to be within a step of his deity's alignment, but have his code be based on that deity's dogma then? I mean, I'd have no problem with that.

Once you do this what is the fluff difference between a paladin and a cleric?

[LoyalPaladin]

Once you do this what is the fluff difference between a paladin and a cleric?
Hmmm... I would probably say a Cleric is designed fit the "heal the masses and lead the lost ones home" archetype. Where as a Paladin is designed to go where his faith takes him and stop the acts of <insert opposing alignment here> doers, with a small amount of blessings from his patron.

[Vhaidara]

Hmmm... I would probably say a Cleric is designed fit the "heal the masses and lead the lost ones home" archetype. Where as a Paladin is designed to go where his faith takes him and stop the acts of <insert opposing alignment here> doers with a small amount of blessings from his patron.

And this is why my brew is as fluff neutral as possible. Your class determines your abilities. Who you are and what you do should be chosen, then you pick classes that fit the character. A Paladin makes a much worse stopper of opposing acts than a Cleric or a Crusader, so I posit that the Paladin class is a terrible choice for the big P Paladin archetype.

[(Un)Inspired]

Hmmm... I would probably say a Cleric is designed fit the "heal the masses and lead the lost ones home" archetype. Where as a Paladin is designed to go where his faith takes him and stop the acts of <insert opposing alignment here> doers, with a small amount of blessings from his patron.

Can you explain why these should be the fluff ideas behind the two classes?

I've never had that particular impression of the cleric or the paladin.

[Flickerdart]

Perhaps it would be better to houserule a Paladin to be within a step of his deity's alignment, but have his code be based on that deity's dogma then? I mean, I'd have no problem with that. Despite my username, I really do recognize that Paladin isn't a high tier class with to die for class features. But in reference to Red Fel's post, I enjoy the capital P archetype.
For sure. Customizable paladin codes are a must regardless of any other changes, and the falling mechanic is stupid and should go away as well. FaxCelestis had a pretty cool homebrew version of the paladin where as he levelled up he took Mantles, which granted him new abilities but also placed additional restrictions on his code. I think he ended up scrapping it because the beta version was super exploitable, but the general idea of powers matching the code is a good one.

[LoyalPaladin]

Can you explain why these should be the fluff ideas behind the two classes?
Actually, after rereading the Player's Handbook entries I'd like to shift my view a little. The Cleric and Paladin both share the means to further their deity's goal. They also both make fine champions. But I also now understand why a Paladin is Lawful.


A good cleric, for example, helps those in need. If, through noble acts, he can improve the reputation to his god or temple, that’s even better. An evil cleric seeks to increase his own power and that of his deity, so that others will respect and fear both.
Furthering a higher cause is secondary to Clerics. Evil Clerics seek to increase their own power and Good/Neutral Clerics seek to improve the world.


The compassion to pursue good, the will to uphold law, and the power to defeat evil—these are the three weapons of the paladin. Few have the purity and devotion that it takes to walk the paladin’s path, but those few are rewarded with the power to protect, to heal, and to smite. In a land of scheming wizards, unholy priests, bloodthirsty dragons, and infernal fiends, the paladin is the final hope that cannot be extinguished.
Paladins are given the ability to smite evil and stand strong against the forces of darkness. They don't seek recognition and they actively put themselves in situations that are dangerous. Not because they are stupid, but because that is what they are. They are the bastion of hope. If they aren't willing to be that, then who else will?

[ObnoxiousKender]

I figured LNs were just... well.. law keepers.

I have found that what confuses a lot of people about the 'lawful' (lawful good especially.) is that they must always abide to the paladins lawful good code of conduct. This is untrue in my opinion. To be lawful you simply need to keep a personal code of conduct or have a set of rules to abide by.
The Assassin's in Assassin's Creed are all Lawful neutral. They have a creed that they follow to the letter; so they are of the lawful alignment.
So Just because your lawful good doesn't mean that you are a law keeper.

[ObnoxiousKender]

In my games, I allow players to play a paladin of whatever alignment they want, but they must adhere to a strict code relevant to that alignment. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever had a DM that couldn't be persuaded.

Alternatively, if you're looking to play a paladin that becomes a bit jaded you could check out the Grey Guard PRC. Still must be LG but you develop the ability to justify your actions your own way, and the code loosens considerably. Also, it allows for some intense RP.

I like this. It's what I do/did when I dm'd.

[Flickerdart]

I figured LNs were just... well.. law keepers.
When trying to figure out how a paragon of a particular alignment behaves, it's helpful to look at that alignment's outsiders. LN gives us Modrons and Formians - races who live in regimented societies and follow strict rules that minimize the individual and maximize the whole. There are also Inevitables, who hunt down the breakers of very specific laws.

True Neutral is about "keeping." LN is not about the status quo, it's about enforcing conformity on everyone you can.

So an LN version of a paladin would be one that tries to get other people to adopt his code (or possibly a watered down version or one specific tenet) and fights forces that oppose it. He would try to bring civilization to tribes and probably not get along too well with any kind of druid. While the standard paladin's powers glorify him as a beacon, an LN paladin would act subtly and probably have more group defensive buffs.

[lunasmeow]

Uh... Thanks everyone, but this debate is completely unnecessary. The issue was answered with the first reply to my original post.

Dragon Magazine #310 already has a LN Paladin class. It is called Enforcer.

[Vhaidara]

Uh... Thanks everyone, but this debate is completely unnecessary. The issue was answered with the first reply to my original post.

Dragon Magazine #310 already has a LN Paladin class. It is called Enforcer.

Yeah, which is why we felt okay turning this into a general discussion of LN Paladins.

[lunasmeow]

Yeah, which is why we felt okay turning this into a general discussion of LN Paladins.

Ah. I thought you guys were still on about whether it was possible or not, and using examples to support or deny. Debate on! And thanks!

[goto124]

The Assassin's in Assassin's Creed are all Lawful neutral. They have a creed that they follow to the letter; so they are of the lawful alignment.
So Just because your lawful good doesn't mean that you are a law keeper.

Those Assassins are keepers of their OWN 'law' :smallbiggrin:

And the government they're opposing are also Lawful, and think the Assassins are Chaotic?

[ObnoxiousKender]

Those Assassins are keepers of their OWN 'law' :smallbiggrin:

And the government they're opposing are also Lawful, and think the Assassins are Chaotic?

Lawful characters don't have to follow their governments laws, simply their own. so that makes them a lawful organization. And two lawful people/organizations can fight each other to protect their laws/creeds. Lawful neutral is a nice alignment because you can make your own laws to abide by.

[atemu1234]

Lawful characters don't have to follow their governments laws, simply their own. so that makes them a lawful organization. And two lawful people/organizations can fight each other to protect their laws/creeds. Lawful neutral is a nice alignment because you can make your own laws to abide by.

Also, lawful versus lawful is not without precedent. We don't define alignments by them being staunchly against the opposite.

[Flickerdart]

And the government they're opposing are also Lawful, and think the Assassins are Chaotic?
Lawful vs Lawful is pretty much the only consistent mortal conflict.

Good is willing to forgive. Evil is willing to crush the enemy, or accept tribute. Chaos is fickle and has no interest in drawn-out conflict. But Law is dogmatic and unyielding, interested not in killing but in order. And how can order be brought to the enemy if not by the vanquishing of their armies and the re-education of their people?

[lunasmeow]

Lawful vs Lawful is pretty much the only consistent mortal conflict.

Good is willing to forgive. Evil is willing to crush the enemy, or accept tribute. Chaos is fickle and has no interest in drawn-out conflict. But Law is dogmatic and unyielding, interested not in killing but in order. And how can order be brought to the enemy if not by the vanquishing of their armies and the re-education of their people?

Pretty much. Think of the "rules of war" that we're supposed to abide by. Two countries, in the real world, at war. Each with their own laws. Doesn't matter if they're "good" or "evil" they're both lawful.

[Andezzar]

Well, to be fair, he referenced a Paladin of Tyranny, which isn't exactly generic-kosher.How so? Isn't Unearthed Arcana generic D&D?


I think you are confused, if you look at my alignment you will clearly see an L followed by a G. So clearly Paladins are good.Paladins start with L, end with D and in the middle there is a lot of awful goo. SCNR

[atemu1234]

How so? Isn't Unearthed Arcana generic D&D?

Paladins start with L, end with D and in the middle there is a lot of awful goo. SCNR

Yes, but it's outright listed as a variant rule, hence not really belonging to the generic d&d.