The Nine Paladins of Legend :P

[deathbymanga]

So, if you look over the different existing Paladin Oaths, they tend to fall under different alignments. Ancients is a Neutral good, Vengeance is Chaotic Good, and Devotion is LAwful Good. One could argue that Oathbreaker is a Chaotic Evil class, though I'd wait for a legitimate Anti-Paladin Oath for that one.

I haven't gotten SCAG yet so I don't know what the Oath for that one is yet, but what do you think? What other Paladin Oaths could fit the other 4 alignments?

[rollingForInit]

So, if you look over the different existing Paladin Oaths, they tend to fall under different alignments. Ancients is a Neutral good, Vengeance is Chaotic Good, and Devotion is LAwful Good. One could argue that Oathbreaker is a Chaotic Evil class, though I'd wait for a legitimate Anti-Paladin Oath for that one.

I haven't gotten SCAG yet so I don't know what the Oath for that one is yet, but what do you think? What other Paladin Oaths could fit the other 4 alignments?

The one in SCAG is most definitely 100% Lawful. Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral, mostly. Could, perhaps, be stretched to Lawful Evil depending on flavouring. It's all about loyalty to the crown.

Don't think that Vengeance has to be CG. Could be a Neutral alignment as well, imo. And could easily be flavoured as Evil.

[SharkForce]

vengeance could also easily be lawful neutral.

but really, i don't think any of the oaths are really set in stone for alignment.

[deathbymanga]

The one in SCAG is most definitely 100% Lawful. Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral, mostly. Could, perhaps, be stretched to Lawful Evil depending on flavouring. It's all about loyalty to the crown.

Don't think that Vengeance has to be CG. Could be a Neutral alignment as well, imo. And could easily be flavoured as Evil.

Yeah, ironically, a friend just gave me a copy of the book after I made this thread, so yeah, Crown is definitely Lawful Neutral.

I feel Vengeance is still a Good aligned Oath, since it's still about thinking of others. If there are those hurt by your sworn enemy, then you must help them. that strikes me as a very "good" oath.

I feel a True Neutral Oath would be something like the machine Paladin or the Vulcan Paladin. the Balance Paladin. the Paladin devoted to preserving balance between good and evil, lawful and chaos. They fight to give order to anarchy, but also freedom to those oppressed.

[woodlandkammao]

Yeah, Oath of the Crown is perfect Lawful Neutral material.

I could imagine true neutral as some kind of balance-obsessed paladin. Call it Oath of Preservation or something. Not sure how it would work mechanically. maybe a bit heavier on the healing?

[deathbymanga]

Yeah, Oath of the Crown is perfect Lawful Neutral material.

I could imagine true neutral as some kind of balance-obsessed paladin. Call it Oath of Preservation or something. Not sure how it would work mechanically. maybe a bit heavier on the healing?

maybe have it be a Bard-ish class where they can impose buffs and de-buffs to balance a fight? might be fun.

[Joe the Rat]

Vengeance can work on LE fairly well as well - and makes the "reparations" part of the oath an obligation, not a reminder.

You could work up an oath for (or "centered on") each alignment, but I don't know if we really need to have Myrikhan, Garath, Lyan, Paramander, Fantra, Illrigger, and Arrikhan again.

Especially not the Paramander.

[deathbymanga]

Vengeance can work on LE fairly well as well - and makes the "reparations" part of the oath an obligation, not a reminder.

You could work up an oath for (or "centered on") each alignment, but I don't know if we really need to have Myrikhan, Garath, Lyan, Paramander, Fantra, Illrigger, and Arrikhan again.

Especially not the Paramander.

I'm not familiar with any of those. were they 4e?

[Shining Wrath]

Crown is Lawful X. You are loyal to the rulers, so if the ruler is Baron Harkonnen, you're LE, and if the ruler is Elrond, you're LG.

I'm uncomfortable with any Paladin as Chaotic. I suppose if you swore your oath to yourself, in some sense, it works; but if you swore your oath to someone else, that's not chaotic. They don't have to have heard you swear the oath for it to be sworn to them, e.g., "I swear by the blood of my parents to wreak vengeance upon their murderers" is going to bind you not only to being a Vengeance Paladin, but to honor your parents by your deeds.

[Joe the Rat]

Other way. Dragon #106 "A Plethora of Paladins" - Paladins for the other 7 alignments (After Paladin and Anti-Paladin)

They came with all the issues of 1st edition alignments. When True Neutral meant "actively balancing," not "don't care."

[deathbymanga]

Other way. Dragon #106 "A Plethora of Paladins" - Paladins for the other 7 alignments (After Paladin and Anti-Paladin)

They came with all the issues of 1st edition alignments. When True Neutral meant "actively balancing," not "don't care."

I feel in a Paladin's situation, you kind of have to be a Paladin of Balance if you go True Neutral. unless you wanna go the emo paladin "I made the Oath of Nothing matters so why bother"


Crown is Lawful X. You are loyal to the rulers, so if the ruler is Baron Harkonnen, you're LE, and if the ruler is Elrond, you're LG.

I'm uncomfortable with any Paladin as Chaotic. I suppose if you swore your oath to yourself, in some sense, it works; but if you swore your oath to someone else, that's not chaotic. They don't have to have heard you swear the oath for it to be sworn to them, e.g., "I swear by the blood of my parents to wreak vengeance upon their murderers" is going to bind you not only to being a Vengeance Paladin, but to honor your parents by your deeds.

a Chaotic Neutral Paladin could be one devoted to Anarchy or communism or even democracy. a sorta Anti-Crown Paladin. He refuses to accept anyone's right to rule over another and has made his quest to promote his own brand of politics.

[SharkForce]

Crown is Lawful X. You are loyal to the rulers, so if the ruler is Baron Harkonnen, you're LE, and if the ruler is Elrond, you're LG.

I'm uncomfortable with any Paladin as Chaotic. I suppose if you swore your oath to yourself, in some sense, it works; but if you swore your oath to someone else, that's not chaotic. They don't have to have heard you swear the oath for it to be sworn to them, e.g., "I swear by the blood of my parents to wreak vengeance upon their murderers" is going to bind you not only to being a Vengeance Paladin, but to honor your parents by your deeds.

having one element of an alignment doesn't mean you're that alignment. you can follow a ruler who is chaotic evil and be chaotic evil while still having loyalty to that ruler. you can make an oath that you intend to keep as a chaotic person and not become instantly lawful.

[Shining Wrath]

I feel in a Paladin's situation, you kind of have to be a Paladin of Balance if you go True Neutral. unless you wanna go the emo paladin "I made the Oath of Nothing matters so why bother"



a Chaotic Neutral Paladin could be one devoted to Anarchy or communism or even democracy. a sorta Anti-Crown Paladin. He refuses to accept anyone's right to rule over another and has made his quest to promote his own brand of politics.

Which is not really, to my mind, compatible with a solemn oath and tenets to which you must always adhere. "I will not allow anyone to rule over anyone else" breaks down fast when confronted by parents of toddlers, among other situations easily imagined.

Chaotic Evil is even worse, of course, because breaking your solemn vow ought to be part of your solemn vow ....

[Shining Wrath]

having one element of an alignment doesn't mean you're that alignment. you can follow a ruler who is chaotic evil and be chaotic evil while still having loyalty to that ruler. you can make an oath that you intend to keep as a chaotic person and not become instantly lawful.

If you are a Paladin of the Crown Oath, you are lawful. Go read it if you haven't. You are an upholder of rule, of law. Period. It's in the oath.

So the issue is are you upholding good, neutral, or evil rules & rulers? If you've taken that oath, you are absolutely keeping the existing power structure in place with religious fervor. And that can be good or bad, depending on said power structure.

[deathbymanga]

Which is not really, to my mind, compatible with a solemn oath and tenets to which you must always adhere. "I will not allow anyone to rule over anyone else" breaks down fast when confronted by parents of toddlers, among other situations easily imagined.

Chaotic Evil is even worse, of course, because breaking your solemn vow ought to be part of your solemn vow ....

that's just as extreme as the generic Lawful Stupid Paladin attacking the party rogue for doing anything roguish.

You can be an anarchist and not be the joker. Robin Hood fought for the rights of the common man against a corrupt ruler. Didn't mean he felt that all ruling classes should be abolished.

Also, how does being Chaotic Evil mean you have to break your vow to make your vow?

Maybe have a Paladin who vows to show the world how cruel and disjointed it is. One who's obsessed with making everyone chaotic evil? He could get a bunch of enchantment spells like Suggestion and have the power to pit enemies against one another.

[Corran]

Personally, I think that a vengeance paladin could be very well incorporated by a lawful neutral, or even lawful evil alignment. Consider a paladin who goes around hunting ferociously and killing criminals in the name of the law, but deep down he is doing it out of revenge because of some deep scars from his/her childhood (classic story, where mommy and daddy died by criminals). Of course such an event might have pushed this individual into a belief that law and order are essential in order for evil to stay at bay, and maybe (s)he is fooling himself/herself to an extent that (s)he is doing what (s)he is doing for the right reasons. Of course for that behaviour to be lawful, it would require a setting where the law is harsh, or some order of law-fanatics (perhaps a sect of Erathis with a cruel and merciless approach to the enforcement of the law) at which that paladin belongs to. The lawful neutral part comes from his complete and unfailed devotion to the letter of the law. The lawful evil part could be incorporated by a complete lack of empathy and if that paly consciously kills (within the limits of the law) for the sake of satisfying his own need for vengeance. Of course, alignment only shows in dire straits, so I expect that in-game acts of that character could specify his alignment much better than I could theoritically guess at. Though I think that such an approach to the oath of vengence could accomodate (lawful) neutral and evil alignments.

''I hunt down the wicked so that no one else may suffer what I have, and I show no mercy because mercy is evil in disguise....'' Lawful Neutral

ps: Played one such paly in an old campaign, and his interaction with the church of Pelor was something to behold!!!!

[deathbymanga]

I disagree that the Vengeance Paladin is such a selfish, single-minded class, considering their oath declares that they think of everyone impacted by their enemy's actions. If a village is burning down and their foe is running away. he'd still help with the burning village first, because those affected are just as important

[Shining Wrath]

I disagree that the Vengeance Paladin is such a selfish, single-minded class, considering their oath declares that they think of everyone impacted by their enemy's actions. If a village is burning down and their foe is running away. he'd still help with the burning village first, because those affected are just as important

That's what keeps the Vengeance Paladin from being the Punisher.

[deathbymanga]

That's what keeps the Vengeance Paladin from being the Punisher.

exactly, the punisher is Chaotic Neutral (or Lawful Neutral, depending on how you interpret it). not giving a **** about life or those caught in the crossfire, just obsessed with personal vengeance and glory.

and that's why I feel the Vengeance Paladin, is still a good-aligned class. they still care about the everyday commoner who's also hurt by those who do evil.

[SharkForce]

If you are a Paladin of the Crown Oath, you are lawful. Go read it if you haven't. You are an upholder of rule, of law. Period. It's in the oath.

So the issue is are you upholding good, neutral, or evil rules & rulers? If you've taken that oath, you are absolutely keeping the existing power structure in place with religious fervor. And that can be good or bad, depending on said power structure.

no, you really aren't forced to be lawful.

it's the law-chaos axis, not the legal-illegal axis.

a city where the only law is "you can do whatever you want to do and can get away with" is going to be almost entirely chaotic in alignment (and probably no better than neutral on the good-evil axis), even though every single person in the city is going to be following that law, including anyone who is opposing the ruler. a paladin who represents a CE ruler of that city would go around, as a most likely CE individual themselves, forcing others to do what the ruler wants, because the ruler wants to do that and can get away with it.

having *one* aspect of a certain alignment does not mean you must be fully dedicated to that alignment.

[Shining Wrath]

no, you really aren't forced to be lawful.

it's the law-chaos axis, not the legal-illegal axis.

a city where the only law is "you can do whatever you want to do and can get away with" is going to be almost entirely chaotic in alignment (and probably no better than neutral on the good-evil axis), even though every single person in the city is going to be following that law, including anyone who is opposing the ruler. a paladin who represents a CE ruler of that city would go around, as a most likely CE individual themselves, forcing others to do what the ruler wants, because the ruler wants to do that and can get away with it.

having *one* aspect of a certain alignment does not mean you must be fully dedicated to that alignment.

A CE ruler who has servants who obey his orders and seek always to uphold his rule is a CE ruler with LE servants. I suggest you look at the entry for Angels in the MM, where they are all LG even if they serve CG gods.

[Malifice]

I feel Vengeance is still a Good aligned Oath, since it's still about thinking of others. If there are those hurt by your sworn enemy, then you must help them. that strikes me as a very "good" oath. .

You missed the 'show no mercy and genocide and murder is totes not only OK, but your core principles' bit I see.


The tenets of the Oath of Vengeance vary by paladin, but all the tenets revolve around punishing wrongdoers by any means necessary.

Paladins who uphold these tenets are willing to sacrifice even their own righteousness to mete out justice upon those who do evil, so the paladins are often neutral or lawful neutral in alignment.

The core principles of the tenets are brutally simple.
Fight the Greater Evil. Faced with a choice of fighting my sworn foes or combating a lesser evil.
I choose the greater evil.
No Mercy for the Wicked. Ordinary foes might win my mercy, but my sworn enemies do not.
By Any Means Necessary. My qualms can’t get in the way of exterminating my foes.
Restitution. If my foes wreak ruin on the world, it is because I failed to stop them. I must help those harmed by their misdeeds.

My vengance paladin is LE. I willfully engage in genocide, pogroms, torture and outright murder. For the 'greater good' of course.

In fact, sticking to those principles above, I struggle to see how any vengance paladin isnt Evil aligned (or at best Neutral).

[SharkForce]

A CE ruler who has servants who obey his orders and seek always to uphold his rule is a CE ruler with LE servants. I suggest you look at the entry for Angels in the MM, where they are all LG even if they serve CG gods.

no, that would imply that loyalty is not just a lawful trait, but a trait which it is impossible to have unless you yourself are lawful.

which is absolutely moronic. chaotic individuals are perfectly capable of feeling loyalty towards other creatures. the most chaotic beings in existence, the slaadi, which are not just regular chaotic but literal incarnations of chaos, are capable of following orders to the point that gray slaadi are noted as being essentially an extension of their death slaad master's will. if an incarnation of pure chaos can loyally and unquestioningly follow something to the point that it is practically considered to be a part of that something, then so can other chaotic individuals.

having one lawful trait does not make you lawful.

raistlin majere can feel a debt of obligation to his former companions to the point of saving them from various threats (iirc up to and including an ancient wyrm green dragon who probably had special gifts given to him by a greater goddess), and yet still be chaotic evil.

lord soth, a being cursed to become a death knight for betraying and murdering innocents, and filled with a hatred of all living things, a vile servant of a god who is chaotic evil, and who is himself also chaotic evil, can display an exceptional amount of uncharacteristic loyalty to a mortal human woman, to the extent of serving her even when she stretches the terms of agreements upon which his loyalty is supposedly predicated.

drizzt do'urden, a chaotic good ranger, can be extremely loyal to his close friends, repeatedly risking his life for them and helping them accomplish their goals when there is little to nothing for him to gain for himself, and repeatedly putting his own life in danger for their sake.

a chaotic individual is not incapable of loyalty.

[Malifice]

no, that would imply that loyalty is not just a lawful trait, but a trait which it is impossible to have unless you yourself are lawful.

A CE minion could serve a CE ruler out of fear, not out of any sense of loyalty or respect for authority.

Look at CE clerics of CE gods and churches. They dedicate their very being to the beings they serve, and are wholly devoted to them.


chaotic individuals are perfectly capable of feeling loyalty towards other creatures.

I would say they are more motivated to serve via fear, rather than any sense of loyalty or obligation.

Chaotic creatures with a code are still Chaotic. Look at the Sith 'code' (a good example of a chaotic code) and the Sith 'order' or the Sith 'rule of two' (itself frequently broken).


having one lawful trait does not make you lawful.

Agreed, but I think we have to look at the reasons for obedience itself. Obedience is neither inherently lawful nor chaotic in nature.


raistlin majere can feel a debt of obligation to his former companions to the point of saving them from various threats (iirc up to and including an ancient wyrm green dragon who probably had special gifts given to him by a greater goddess), and yet still be chaotic evil.

And yet he betrayed and attempted to kill those same friends and even brother (on several occasions).


lord soth, a being cursed to become a death knight for betraying and murdering innocents, and filled with a hatred of all living things, a vile servant of a god who is chaotic evil, and who is himself also chaotic evil, can display an exceptional amount of uncharacteristic loyalty to a mortal human woman, to the extent of serving her even when she stretches the terms of agreements upon which his loyalty is supposedly predicated.

Again; you mistake loyalty for love. The two are not the same thing.


drizzt do'urden, a chaotic good ranger, can be extremely loyal to his close friends, repeatedly risking his life for them and helping them accomplish their goals when there is little to nothing for him to gain for himself, and repeatedly putting his own life in danger for their sake.

He risks his life for good people, because he's good.


a chaotic individual is not incapable of loyalty.

Being loyal out of a sense of obligation, honor and duty is lawful. Doing it just because youre too scared not to (and would betray or kill your superior if you could) is another thing alltogether.

[SharkForce]

- a CE minion *might* obey out of fear. or they might obey out of loyalty, respect, etc. it is a lawful trait, but again, a single alignment trait doth not an alignment make.

- the point was that raistlin, in spite of being CE, was perfectly capable of feeling some measure of loyalty. if it is impossible to feel any amount of loyalty as a CE being, then raistlin could not have felt it. but he did.

- the specific instance of kitiara pulling a technicality on lord soth was when she prevented him from obtaining the soul of laurana (or rather, knowingly permitted laurana to escape), who he was basically looking to turn into his undead wife (more or less). if he was capable of feeling love but not loyalty, i would expect him to have responded quite differently... for example, by not being interested in laurana in the first place if he was in love with kitiara, or by being extremely angry and unwilling to forgive kitiara for letting laurana escape. he does neither of those things. instead, he stays loyal.

- drizzt risks his life for good people, yes. he also feels an exceptional bond of loyalty to his friends that goes beyond his general willingness to help others.

chaotic beings are perfectly capable of loyalty. they are less likely to feel loyalty in general than lawful individuals, and likely reserve it for those they feel deserving. but they still are capable of loyalty.

if it is rare to see such loyalty in a chaotic being, well, it is rare to see a paladin in general, too. i don't see anyone saying that paladins can't happen just because they're rare.

[Malifice]

- a CE minion *might* obey out of fear. or they might obey out of loyalty, respect, etc. it is a lawful trait, but again, a single alignment trait doth not an alignment make.

Doing something out of fear is not lawful. It is not a lawful act to comply with an intimidate check for example!

Lawful impiles acting out of duty, honor and obligation. Not out of fear. A cleric of Cyric obeys becuase he knows he'll be killed by his master if he doesnt (and will likely be killed even if he does), and secretly covets the power of his master. He would betray him to save himself at a moments notice. A cleric of Bane on the other hand serves out of a sense of duty and loyalty. He sincerely believes that an ordered fascist society under the heel of Bane is a 'good' thing for society in general. He serves out of duty - not out of fear.


- the point was that raistlin, in spite of being CE, was perfectly capable of feeling some measure of loyalty. if it is impossible to feel any amount of loyalty as a CE being, then raistlin could not have felt it. but he did.

Raistlin never acted out of loyalty. Raistlin only helped his friends and family when it suited Raistlin to do so. He helped them stave of Takhisis purely to keep her in the abyss so he could kill her himself personally. He betrayed and abandoned everyone once they served their purpose to him. Crysania, Caramon, Tanis , Kitiara... everyone.


- the specific instance of kitiara pulling a technicality on lord soth was when she prevented him from obtaining the soul of laurana (or rather, knowingly permitted laurana to escape), who he was basically looking to turn into his undead wife (more or less). if he was capable of feeling love but not loyalty, i would expect him to have responded quite differently... for example, by not being interested in laurana in the first place if he was in love with kitiara, or by being extremely angry and unwilling to forgive kitiara for letting laurana escape. he does neither of those things. instead, he stays loyal.

Again; you mistake love for loyalty and honor. The most dishonorable and evil of people can love. Soth showed his love for Kitiara by ultimatelty betraying her to Dalamar and letting her die to join the ranks of the undead.

CE people can have families and experience love. But that love is always ultiamtely destructive and self serving.

A lawful character serves his master out of a sense of honor, duty or loyalty. Love is an entirely different thing to those qualities.


- drizzt risks his life for good people, yes. he also feels an exceptional bond of loyalty to his friends that goes beyond his general willingness to help others.

So? He doesnt follow anyone elses code, answers to no master, and has rebelled against everything his society holds dear. He is clearly chaotic. He does things his way they way he (as a good person) thinks they should be done.

For a textbook example of lawful (and getting back to dragonlance) look at Sturm. He follows the Solamnic order despite them being branded as outcasts and having no actual leadership. He follows out of a sense of duty and honor. It was his ultimate sacrifice that reestablished the order from the wilderness. He kept his word, didnt lie or cheat and was rigid in his beliefs.


chaotic beings are perfectly capable of loyalty. they are less likely to feel loyalty in general than lawful individuals, and likely reserve it for those they feel deserving. but they still are capable of loyalty.

Nah man. Now youre straying into the LE territory. A LE person is loyal to those that deserve it according to their code. The only way you get a CE person to follow you is to cow them into submission through fear and threats, and they will betray you if they can get away with it and it benefits them.

Darth vader is CE. He betrays literally every one and every order and orginisation he belongs to. The Jedi, the Sith, the Republic, the Empire, his best friend, his secret apprentice, his wife. Everyone. He never keeps his word, and acts outside of the normal rank structure and heirarchy (both as a Jedi, and as a Sith in the Empire).


if it is rare to see such loyalty in a chaotic being, well, it is rare to see a paladin in general, too. i don't see anyone saying that paladins can't happen just because they're rare.

Depends on the Paladin. A CG Decvotion Paladin of Cayden Cailen (in Golarion) is very different to a LE vengance paladin of Bane (in Faerun).

[KorvinStarmast]

but really, i don't think any of the oaths are really set in stone for alignment.Folks need to read and heed this point.

[Falcon X]

No alignments are set in stone, but when I read them the first time, my impressions were:
Oath of the Ancients = Neutral Good
Oath of Vengeance = Lawful Neutral

[SharkForce]

Doing something out of fear is not lawful. It is not a lawful act to comply with an intimidate check for example!

Lawful impiles acting out of duty, honor and obligation. Not out of fear. A cleric of Cyric obeys becuase he knows he'll be killed by his master if he doesnt (and will likely be killed even if he does), and secretly covets the power of his master. He would betray him to save himself at a moments notice. A cleric of Bane on the other hand serves out of a sense of duty and loyalty. He sincerely believes that an ordered fascist society under the heel of Bane is a 'good' thing for society in general. He serves out of duty - not out of fear.



Raistlin never acted out of loyalty. Raistlin only helped his friends and family when it suited Raistlin to do so. He helped them stave of Takhisis purely to keep her in the abyss so he could kill her himself personally. He betrayed and abandoned everyone once they served their purpose to him. Crysania, Caramon, Tanis , Kitiara... everyone.



Again; you mistake love for loyalty and honor. The most dishonorable and evil of people can love. Soth showed his love for Kitiara by ultimatelty betraying her to Dalamar and letting her die to join the ranks of the undead.

CE people can have families and experience love. But that love is always ultiamtely destructive and self serving.

A lawful character serves his master out of a sense of honor, duty or loyalty. Love is an entirely different thing to those qualities.



So? He doesnt follow anyone elses code, answers to no master, and has rebelled against everything his society holds dear. He is clearly chaotic. He does things his way they way he (as a good person) thinks they should be done.

For a textbook example of lawful (and getting back to dragonlance) look at Sturm. He follows the Solamnic order despite them being branded as outcasts and having no actual leadership. He follows out of a sense of duty and honor. It was his ultimate sacrifice that reestablished the order from the wilderness. He kept his word, didnt lie or cheat and was rigid in his beliefs.



Nah man. Now youre straying into the LE territory. A LE person is loyal to those that deserve it according to their code. The only way you get a CE person to follow you is to cow them into submission through fear and threats, and they will betray you if they can get away with it and it benefits them.

Darth vader is CE. He betrays literally every one and every order and orginisation he belongs to. The Jedi, the Sith, the Republic, the Empire, his best friend, his secret apprentice, his wife. Everyone. He never keeps his word, and acts outside of the normal rank structure and heirarchy (both as a Jedi, and as a Sith in the Empire).



Depends on the Paladin. A CG Decvotion Paladin of Cayden Cailen (in Golarion) is very different to a LE vengance paladin of Bane (in Faerun).

yes. those people were generally not very loyal.

but they were all loyal in some ways to certain people. raistlin could have gained power without saving the lives of his friends. lord soth could have killed kitiara long ago and had her turned into an undead creature. drizzt will go to extra lengths to protect those he feels some loyalty towards.

they are chaotic individuals. they mostly don't display great loyalty towards things. but they can be loyal. sometimes. if you are loyal to only one thing and everything else is unimportant to you, you can very easily be chaotic. being loyal to something or someone doesn't make them not chaotic... it just means that they're not completely 100% chaos (and even then, as noted, chaotic beings are sometimes loyal as well).

[deathbymanga]

look at Belkair from Giants. He's a pure Chaotic Evil sadist. He loves to inflict pain and destruction on the world. But he's also a realist who's grown over his life and learned that if he just cuts his losses and backstabs everyone, they'd all eventually turn on him. So he started learning to play fair. He found people he likes and he stands by them through the thick of things. he's still chaotic evil. but he's loyal to his friends, because he doesn't want to loose them

[SharkForce]

so i've done some further checking into slaadi, and i'm really not sold on the "rules exclusively through fear" thing.

a death slaad has a number of gray slaad servants who are its loyal instruments on the prime material plane. so how does the death slaad maintain their grip at such great distances? the odds of a death slaad killing a gray slaad in a single round are essentially zero. the gray slaad will likely heal from a full round of attacks in under a minute, even if the death slaad gets a full surprise round.

meanwhile, both have plane shift 1/day, which means that the gray slaad can just go someplace else. the death slaad has no inherent ability to even tell what plane the gray slaad has gone to, let alone where on that plane, and the death slaad has no practical means of preventing the gray slaad from doing so. once on a different plane, the death slaad has no means given to it to spy on any gray slaad servants (which can assume any humanoid form they wish, good luck tracking them down), and even less means of enforcing its will on them.

this story simply does not check out. the gray slaad certainly won't win if it stands there and gets into a slugfest with the death slaad one on one, but as far as needing to live in fear of the death slaad? not really. it has far too great of an ability to escape to be expected to fear the death slaad to the point of total obedience and becoming an extension of the death slaad's will absent some other reason for obedience.

and since there is no realistic threat the death slaad can make to the gray slaad, i'm forced to conclude that the gray slaad must feel *some* measure of personal loyalty to death slaadi in order for every example of gray slaadi to be a servant of a death slaad.

[deathbymanga]

so i've done some further checking into slaadi, and i'm really not sold on the "rules exclusively through fear" thing.

a death slaad has a number of gray slaad servants who are its loyal instruments on the prime material plane. so how does the death slaad maintain their grip at such great distances? the odds of a death slaad killing a gray slaad in a single round are essentially zero. the gray slaad will likely heal from a full round of attacks in under a minute, even if the death slaad gets a full surprise round.

meanwhile, both have plane shift 1/day, which means that the gray slaad can just go someplace else. the death slaad has no inherent ability to even tell what plane the gray slaad has gone to, let alone where on that plane, and the death slaad has no practical means of preventing the gray slaad from doing so. once on a different plane, the death slaad has no means given to it to spy on any gray slaad servants (which can assume any humanoid form they wish, good luck tracking them down), and even less means of enforcing its will on them.

this story simply does not check out. the gray slaad certainly won't win if it stands there and gets into a slugfest with the death slaad one on one, but as far as needing to live in fear of the death slaad? not really. it has far too great of an ability to escape to be expected to fear the death slaad to the point of total obedience and becoming an extension of the death slaad's will absent some other reason for obedience.

and since there is no realistic threat the death slaad can make to the gray slaad, i'm forced to conclude that the gray slaad must feel *some* measure of personal loyalty to death slaadi in order for every example of gray slaadi to be a servant of a death slaad.

what does this have to do with Paladins and Alignment?

[SharkForce]

what does this have to do with Paladins and Alignment?

as noted earlier, if an incarnation of pure chaos can display personal loyalty, then there isn't much room to say it is impossible for any other creature.

[deathbymanga]

as noted earlier, if an incarnation of pure chaos can display personal loyalty, then there isn't much room to say it is impossible for any other creature.

ah, makes sense

However, I thought Death Slaadi could mind-control other slaadi using Control Crystals

[Fralex]

A paladin is essentially a warrior so devoted to their ideals that it grants them magical abilities. No matter what alignment you have, a paladin could conceivably work as long as you make a point to be a champion for that alignment's ideals. A chaotic paladin just needs to be consistently chaotic, and have a fleshed-out reason for doing so.

I prefer to view the law/chaos axis as the cooperative/pragmatic scale in the Keirsey Temperment Sorter. Keirsey uses the words cooperative (complying) and pragmatic (adaptive) when comparing the differing temperaments. People who are cooperative pay more attention to other people's opinions and are more concerned with doing the right thing. People who are pragmatic (utilitarian) pay more attention to their own thoughts or feelings and are more concerned with doing what works.

[SharkForce]

ah, makes sense

However, I thought Death Slaadi could mind-control other slaadi using Control Crystals

it's a variant for slaadi to have control gems at all. if they do, the death slaad is not particularly well-equipped to use them; you need either imprisonment, wish, or a DC 20 medicine check (and an unconscious slaad) to obtain a control gem, if the slaad even has one (if they haven't been in contact with the spawning stone at some point in their life, they don't). the death slaad does not have access to either of those spells, although it is at least the only slaad theoretically capable of making the medicine check successfully, as other slaadi all have negative wisdom modifiers.

so while theoretically possible, it's pretty unlikely. furthermore, you would need to hold on to the gem constantly, and they're about the size of a human child's fist. good luck holding on to a bunch of those while also wielding a greatsword.