Paladin of Heresy

[Xuldarinar]

I had thought of a broad notion and I wanted to see what the playground could do with it. A paladin who champions the concept, or an entity, of heresy.

Are there any archetypes that would be better for this concept? What about secondary classes that would lend themselves to the concept?

Are there any problems that would have to be solved for this to work?

How would you envision one to behave and view the world?

[legomaster00156]

The Inquisitor (ironically) would be a better fit than a Paladin. For that matter, the Cleric has a "Heretic" archetype.

[Psyren]

Inquisitor is obviously the better choice, but if you want to stick with Paladin...

Basically, "heresy" in this context would mean going against the church. Which Paladins can certainly do - their code takes precedence - but it does beg the question of why they were in such a church to begin with, since most deities that have paladins in the first place have churches that a paladin's (or antipaladin's) code would agree with.

Unless of course this is a follow-up to your "changing deities" thread, in which case we're assuming a setting where that sort of thing can happen.

(Ninja'd on Inquisitor)

[Xuldarinar]

Inquisitor is obviously the better choice, but if you want to stick with Paladin...

Basically, "heresy" in this context would mean going against the church. Which Paladins can certainly do - their code takes precedence - but it does beg the question of why they were in such a church to begin with, since most deities that have paladins in the first place have churches that a paladin's (or antipaladin's) code would agree with.

Unless of course this is a follow-up to your "changing deities" thread, in which case we're assuming a setting where that sort of thing can happen.

(Ninja'd on Inquisitor)

Im aware that better options perhaps exist in other classes, and I am not quick to disregard them. What got me thinking initially was actually something other than the other thread. I was poking around different deities and demigods, seeing what deific obedience, or demonic obedience, provides. When I came upon Sifkesh, it occurred to me that demonic obedience doesn't have an alignment requirement. Dwelling on this, I toyed with the notion of a Paladin who devoted themselves to Sifkesh. Perhaps they were one that attempts were made by her followers to corrupt them, and rather than falling or repelling it per say, they took to revering Sifkesh and heresy itself, in a sense. Rather than presenting the question here as Paladin of Sifkesh, I figured the general notion of a paladin of heresy would be flexible enough to toy with, see what one can come up with.

[LudicSavant]

I had thought of a broad notion and I wanted to see what the playground could do with it. A paladin who champions the concept, or an entity, of heresy. The word heresy means nothing at all without context, since the word just means "belief or opinion contrary to some doctrine". Absolutely any idea can be classified as heretical in the context of one philosophy or another.



Basically, "heresy" in this context would mean going against the church.

"The" church? Which church is that?

[Xuldarinar]

The word heresy means nothing at all without context, since the word just means "belief or opinion contrary to some doctrine". Absolutely any idea can be classified as heretical in the context of one philosophy or another.

Well, lets discuss that.

Sifkesh has heresy as part of their portfolio, so that is one starting point. What does it mean to have heresy as part of a deity's portfolio (or demigod's as the case may be)? What about Ayngavhauls, otherwise known as heresy devils? What aspects of these entities, and others that may be associated with heresy, connect them to heresy, and how can we take that and fit it to at least be compatible with the Lawful Good alignment?


Another is simply addressing a vector. For instance: Lets say this paladin is someone who champions heresy. Not in the sense that they endorse one particular heretical view, but rather they promote heresies in general and protect people who hold to them, and by extension heterodoxy.

[The Grue]

Sifkesh has heresy as part of their portfolio, so that is one starting point. What does it mean to have heresy as part of a deity's portfolio (or demigod's as the case may be)?

Sounds to me like it means nothing. The definition for "heresy" was given earlier in this thread, and by that definition a deity or demigod that promotes a doctrine of heresy is self-contradictory; dogmatic adherence to a doctrine of heresy would require rejection of orthodoxy, but since orthodoxy is heresy that would entail one embrace orthodoxy. It's paradoxical.

[Xuldarinar]

"It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue."


Sounds to me like it means nothing. The definition for "heresy" was given earlier in this thread, and by that definition a deity or demigod that promotes a doctrine of heresy is self-contradictory; dogmatic adherence to a doctrine of heresy would require rejection of orthodoxy, but since orthodoxy is heresy that would entail one embrace orthodoxy. It's paradoxical.

I was thinking of some sort of argument I could give but... all I can say is if we go with that, it would explain why she provides the madness domain.

[The Grue]

war is peace

freedom is slavery

orthodoxy is heresy

[Psyren]

"The" church? Which church is that?

Presumably if they are being heretical, they're part of an organized religion - an orthodoxy. If there isn't an orthodoxy, there is no heterodoxy; if there isn't a standard, there's no way to deviate from that standard. Does that make sense?


Im aware that better options perhaps exist in other classes, and I am not quick to disregard them. What got me thinking initially was actually something other than the other thread. I was poking around different deities and demigods, seeing what deific obedience, or demonic obedience, provides. When I came upon Sifkesh, it occurred to me that demonic obedience doesn't have an alignment requirement. Dwelling on this, I toyed with the notion of a Paladin who devoted themselves to Sifkesh. Perhaps they were one that attempts were made by her followers to corrupt them, and rather than falling or repelling it per say, they took to revering Sifkesh and heresy itself, in a sense. Rather than presenting the question here as Paladin of Sifkesh, I figured the general notion of a paladin of heresy would be flexible enough to toy with, see what one can come up with.

Sifkesh's definition of "heresy" is not the same as yours. Hers basically means "hates divine casters" - much like the Lilitu from 3.5, which are also she-demons.

[Milo v3]

Well, a paladin who champions heresy would be much easier than a paladin who serves a god of heresy. Since paladins don't get their powers from worship of specific entities, you could simply be a paladin who has looked at holy wars and decided they are too destructive and inflict too much evil on the world, even if some holy wars are in the name of good deities. So he becomes a paladin of heresy, trying to stop gods from meddling with the lives of mortals and give mortals freedom from the tyranny of gods (though still acknowledging that many gods have good intentions).

[Baroncognito]

You should be a paladin of Hershey instead.

That said, a Paladin who followed a doctrine of Heresy would probably have to follow the orthodox doctrines of a different god. Perhaps a different god every day. But still using the name of the god she actually worships.

Either that, or you'd have to be playing Calvin Ball.

"Well, we just cross the third parallel, can we stop? I need to hop on one foot while eating a ration."

-"We crossed the third parallel last week and you didn't do that."

"Right, we were in a tripod zone, Did you notice that I'd put on a prosthetic leg?"

Edit:

Don't forget Sikfesh saves those who save their ticket stubs.

[Vogie]

You would have to craft a world where this would make sense. There could only be one Diety, empowering all divine casters, and the paladin would be opposing that. The religious order in Caprica comes to mind, where there is an accepted pantheon of gods, and the protagonists are effectively heretics. In Game of Thrones Lore, there is a group that believes in the "Drowned God", a diety that is already dead, which the other religions believe is heresy.


Sifkesh's definition of "heresy" is not the same as yours. Hers basically means "hates divine casters"
Well, that makes it significantly easier. If that's your basis, you're looking at a "Antimagic" wizard or a divine version of the Spellbreaker or Witch Hunter Inquisitor... and a paladin would fit that bill.

You'll end up being in the same boat as Scar from Fullmetal Alchemist (I'm using divine magic to hunt and destroy users of divine magic! Because Reasons!) but I think it could be done.

[ThinkMinty]

I had thought of a broad notion and I wanted to see what the playground could do with it. A paladin who champions the concept, or an entity, of heresy.

Are there any archetypes that would be better for this concept? What about secondary classes that would lend themselves to the concept?

Are there any problems that would have to be solved for this to work?

How would you envision one to behave and view the world?

Yes, it's called the Anti-Paladin (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/alternate-classes/antipaladin).

[Elder_Basilisk]

I think the concept needs some refinement.

If you are looking for a paladin or anti-paladin who champions some particular heresy, there is no problem. If you're looking for a "paladin" who champions "heresy" in general, you'd probably have to be looking at an anti-paladin serving a kind of malicious trickster god who delights in confusing and destroying the faiths of other deities. (Maybe if they're evil gods, you could make a paladin of freedom CG type fit there--maybe. However, to set the character on Golarion, it's a lot easier to imagine such a character working to convert people from following Asmodeus to Milani, Cayden Calien, et al than trying to get them to follow a kinder, less lawful Asmodeus who doesn't really exist).

However, the concept of a champion of Heresy as such without reference to particular gods or churches is self-defeating. Why does he champion something that will change every day, calvinball style? Once a heretical cult gets big enough to win, does he switch to championing the former orthodoxy? Such a character might exist, but would be a champion of Chaos rather than heresy. Indeed, he can't be a proper champion at all because such a character could not openly proclaim his goal. He would pose as a champion of particular heresies or beliefs, but they are not the true objects of his devotion and would change as soon as another mask offered the opportunity to create more heresy.

[Xuldarinar]

Well, whether they are a paladin who protects heretics or actively pursues divine spellcasters to take them out, they are going to need tools. So, what sorts of things give them advantages against divine spellcasters? Below, is not an all inclusive list but a list of things off the top of my head.


Feats

Demonic Obedience (Sifkesh): While demons are opposed in alignment, atleast for practical reasons a paladin could offer prayers to one. The main reason for this one is the benefit that comes in at 16th level. The benefit being they gain SR 11+HD vs spells cast by the worshippers of one religion, and this can be changed once per day. Were they a paladin/demoniac, it could come in much sooner, but that can't happen and my aim here is a paladin, not an antipaladin.



Traits

History of Heresy: Problem? Paladins gain divine spellcasting. Warrior of the holy light, stone lord, or other archetypes that remove their spellcasting or replaced it with another type would solve this.



Secondary Classes

Cavalier: Being one of the first law, though perhaps requiring a small tweak for our purposes, it does have resources to combat divine magic. This tweak becomes slightly greater if we wish to use this with demonic obedience, if we count a demon lord as a "patron deity". Semantics.
Magus: The following arcana could prove useful for the concept: Arcane Scent, Lingering Pain, Reflection, and Spellbreaker.
Sorcerer: Div bloodline's 9th level power provides a tool against divine spellcasters. This, of course, could also be gained via feats.
Summoner: Your eidolon, although not as effective as that of a summoner's, can possess a spell resistance. Its something.
Wizard: Picking up the Abjuration (Counterspell) school can allow one to make it harder for their foes to cast spells. The later benefit specific to it does little good, especially if you toss out the paladin's spellcasting entirely. No discoveries stand out to me, though I think True Name could prove useful, if one can find a creature that would mess with divine casters or casters in general.




I know the concept itself is odd, and from some vectors is contradictory, but that could be seen as the point.

[Psyren]

Demonic Obedience (Sifkesh): While demons are opposed in alignment, atleast for practical reasons a paladin could offer prayers to one. The main reason for this one is the benefit that comes in at 16th level. The benefit being they gain SR 11+HD vs spells cast by the worshippers of one religion, and this can be changed once per day. Were they a paladin/demoniac, it could come in much sooner, but that can't happen and my aim here is a paladin, not an antipaladin.


There is just no way this can work without being in a world where "paladin" has no meaning. You're literally worshiping a demon, that goes far beyond "association."

[Seto]

I remember such a discussion a few months ago on these forums, about "can blasphemy/heresy be absolute or do they only make sense in the context of a preexisting doctrine ?" My answer was "the closest you can come is disdain and defiance against what inspires a sense of the sacred in others". That's mostly for blasphemy. Blasphemy is not in essence a crime against a god, but against the sacred. Heresy is close but not quite the same : it's a crime against the absolutism and univocity of truth.
Heresy in the absolute sense (such as in a portfolio) would be a form of aggressive relativism/skepticism/nihilism (choose one according to how extreme you want to be), since it rejects the very notion of faith and truth (whatever may this faith be). The most complacent it could be is "whatever God you choose, mix their teachings up with the teachings of wisdom from some other God/source". The most extreme is "Spit on teachings altogether. Oh, and kill those who would teach you about "the truth", because that's the only way to free your mind and contemplate the void of existence. They're weak anyway since they fool themselves and try to drag you along."

You can fit a variety of alignments in there. Although it's the least likely to work (heresy screams Chaotic to me), you could probably even find a LG follower of Sifkesh bent on heresy. But a Paladin ? Honestly, that seems antithetical. To me, a Paladin is a holy warrior unwavering in their beliefs. Which could be heretic beliefs, sure, but only if you've got an orthodoxy (see Eadric in the excellent Tales of Wyre by Sepulchrave). But since we wanted "heresy" without context, it doesn't work.
In short : - being both a Paladin and a heretic is easy enough, in the context of a certain faith.
- I've made the argument that you can come close to being an "absolute heretic", sans precise religious context.
- I don't see, however, how you could reconcile those two.
My suggestion ? Just take a LG follower of Sifkesh (Inquisitor for example) who's very zealous at being a heretic, and call them a Paladin if you like, but make sure this designation can be understood as ironic. You've got a guy who's the opposite of a Paladin, but every bit as single-minded and Juggernautian as one, and you call him "Paladin" to emphasize the defiance he represents and to make faiths afraid.

(Ok, so that was my attempt at a philosophical answer attained through conceptual argument. Really, though ? Psyren is right. For the purpose of being a follower of Sifkesh, just decimate Clerics, she'll be pleased).

[Xuldarinar]

I'll concede largely. In the way being approached, you are right, it doesn't make a lot of sense. In protecting heretics, it could, but even then there are some issues to work out.


There is just no way this can work without being in a world where "paladin" has no meaning. You're literally worshiping a demon, that goes far beyond "association."

Im gonna have to contest this one. Lets first look at what the paladin can do:


A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies 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 good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Now, what part of this does demon worship go against? Lets begin.

Is worshipping a demon, or an evil deity, in of itself an evil act? Conversely, is worshiping a good deity in of itself a good act?

Associates: I see nothing here truly conflicted. If you consider one's patron their associate, then we can invoke that the paladin believes they seek to defeat a greater evil. If we consider those that follow the same deity as associates, then a paladin cannot worship a Lawful Neutral deity because surely they have LE followers.

Conceptually, the thing I see the greatest problem with is this: ".... a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority.." But thats just me.

[Psyren]

Associates: I see nothing here truly conflicted. If you consider one's patron their associate, then we can invoke that the paladin believes they seek to defeat a greater evil. If we consider those that follow the same deity as associates, then a paladin cannot worship a Lawful Neutral deity because surely they have LE followers.

You're missing the part where it says "A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good." In other words, you are actually falling for doing this over and over and continually begging for your powers back. Worse still, it only forces you to seek atonement - it does not promise you will be granted such. Atonement requires you to be "truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds" or it will not work - which a paladin who fully intends to go right back to doing the thing that made him atone in the first place indefinitely would not be. Worse, it is "deliberate" - so even if you somehow convince the Powers That Be that you're actually sorry despite continually flagrant and purposeful violations, you also need a cleric who's willing to pay the intercession costs on a routine basis just to help maintain your farce.

"Association to defeat a greater evil" is meant to be a limited and short-term situation, and the onerous mechanical requirements on such a paladin enforce that. It is not at all tenable for a long-term situation without heavy houseruling.

[Xuldarinar]

Alright. I'll concede on that.

Now, if the paladin class doesn't work, which classes could be used to emulate a paladin that would work in concept?

The ones that come to mind first are, honestly: Cavalier (Order of the first law comes to mind), Magus, Medium (maybe a relic channeler?), and Occultist (maybe a battle host?).

[Psyren]

Inquisitor is definitely the best for this concept; any of the others can work with divine flavor as an Evangelist as well (which continues most of their class features.) Separatist Cleric was also mentioned.

[upho]

What a wonderful little thought-provoking challenge you've presented, blending philosophy, flavor and mechanics. I like it!

Anyhow, these two responses really got me thinking about a potentially viable "classic pally" concept that could at least be heresy-ish:

Well, a paladin who champions heresy would be much easier than a paladin who serves a god of heresy. Since paladins don't get their powers from worship of specific entities, you could simply be a paladin who has looked at holy wars and decided they are too destructive and inflict too much evil on the world, even if some holy wars are in the name of good deities. So he becomes a paladin of heresy, trying to stop gods from meddling with the lives of mortals and give mortals freedom from the tyranny of gods (though still acknowledging that many gods have good intentions).
Heresy in the absolute sense (such as in a portfolio) would be a form of aggressive relativism/skepticism/nihilism (choose one according to how extreme you want to be), since it rejects the very notion of faith and truth (whatever may this faith be). The most complacent it could be is "whatever God you choose, mix their teachings up with the teachings of wisdom from some other God/source". The most extreme is "Spit on teachings altogether. Oh, and kill those who would teach you about "the truth", because that's the only way to free your mind and contemplate the void of existence. They're weak anyway since they fool themselves and try to drag you along."
My immediate thought when reading Milo's post was a "pally of practical atheism", which could house both the LG alignment as well as heresy. This would of course require that we slightly bend the definition of the word "heresy" to fit with the context of a pally in a typical fantasy setting like for example Golarion. Meaning a setting that otherwise only has LG pallys and CE antipallys, but most importantly where the most consistent and all-encompassing doctrine related to religion is simply that everyone is, or is assumed to be, supporting some kind of supernatural entity - be it nature spirits, demon lords or major deities. That support could be direct and intentional through active worship and service (most divine caster classes), or more or less unintentional and indirect simply through for example alignment, behavior, interests, occupation, philosophical outlook and/or lifestyle, or even just because whatever supernatural entity happens to dislike the same people/creatures as you currently happen to dislike. Regardless, there is an entity just perfect for you, and there are people that knows this and will label you accordingly, even if you happen to be totally ignorant of that entity's existence.

Except in the case of active non-support of any and all such entities. A kind of practical atheism in a world where the existence of gods is proven virtually every day. And as Milo said, such an active anti-deitism even has a very sound support in the very real problems and horrors all these supernatural entities create for mortal souls simply by existing. Most importantly, such a stance would most certainly be regarded as heretic by every worshipped being in existence, as well as their worshippers. A pally of anti-deitism would basically say: "If you are not mortal and native to the material plane, but worshipped by mortals or meddling in the affairs of mortals, I oppose you and all your followers. We are much better off without you and your ilk. I give you all my big fat finger!"

Couldn't this be a viable LG heretic pally?

[Xuldarinar]

-snip-
Couldn't this be a viable LG heretic pally?

I would say so, and i think that is an interesting approach to the problem presented. Thank you. I had not considered, atleast in emphasis, the possibility of a anti-deist paladin.

[DarkOne-Rob]

Now, what part of this does demon worship go against? Lets begin.

Is worshipping a demon, or an evil deity, in of itself an evil act? Conversely, is worshiping a good deity in of itself a good act?

Associates: I see nothing here truly conflicted. If you consider one's patron their associate, then we can invoke that the paladin believes they seek to defeat a greater evil. If we consider those that follow the same deity as associates, then a paladin cannot worship a Lawful Neutral deity because surely they have LE followers.

Conceptually, the thing I see the greatest problem with is this: ".... a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority.." But thats just me.
I think this needs to be done. Given that he is a forum-recognized expert on the topic of evil (and what it is/is-not)...

Red Fel (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?80567-Red-Fel), Red Fel (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?80567-Red-Fel), Red Fel (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?80567-Red-Fel)

[LudicSavant]

Most importantly, such a stance would most certainly be regarded as heretic by every worshipped being in existence, as well as their worshippers.

A nitpick: This is actually a huge assumption, and is most certainly not certain. It is just as easy to imagine a deity that believes deities shouldn't be worshiped as it is to imagine a human pharaoh who believes pharaohs shouldn't be worshiped. There is no contradiction there. The fact that something is worshiped doesn't necessarily mean that it thinks that it should be, or that anything that doesn't is heretical.

[Pyrite]

In a world where the existence of gods is a verifiable fact, and where those gods communicate with their higher clergy through spells like commune and regularly send heavenly servants to carry out their will, and where many of the specifics of the deities are concrete fact, then Heresy, as a universal concept, can only refer to the idea of twisting or misrepresenting the will of (at least one of) the gods, or saying things that all of the gods would rather not be said. There are only a few reasons to do this:

To lie, and misrepresent the nature of the gods or the world to people for some reason or another, maybe just to sew chaos, or thwart the will of the gods, or simply to convince people to give you material possessions. Convincing people that demon princes are actually gods of good, and that they should donate to you to support their cause, would be one example of this, as would convincing Erastil worshipers that Erastil hates Elves. Razmir is probably the most prominent heretic, claiming that he is a god when he isn't.

Or to tell the truth that the gods don't want people to hear. This might vary from church to church: some aspects of the history of some of the gods might be considered heretical, even though they are true: For instance, that Lamashtu freed the Barghests from Asmodeus might be considered heretical in the church of Asmodeus.