Paladin Code of Conduct

[RedScholarGypsy]

Given the recent speculation about Hinjo joining OotS and such, I went back over the Pal's CoC to see if it'd be feasible, when I noticed a couple of things.

Also, do realize that while I'm writing my thoughts, they are no where near opinions, let alone firmly-held beliefs. I'm looking for intelligent ideas and debates, not classism flaming or arrogant dismissal.

1) "A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act."
Fine, I understand no evil, but why is Chaotic allowed? The Paladin is restricted to Lawful good, not just Good. Some would argue, correctly I feel, that this would limit the character incredibly. However the whole point of a Paladin, from a role-playing standpoint, is to force you to new heights of creativity by placing you in such a tight role. I enjoyed my paladin(I'm chaotic good/neutral, depending on who you ask) because I did my best to resist the STick Up Bunghole(STUB for short :smalltongue: ) class feature.

This is important to remember as Hinjo can commit Chaotic acts, such as ignoring his own rulings, and alter Belkar's sentence if for the greater good.

2) "a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, ... help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."

So what happens in the case of a Lawful Evil tyrant? It harms innocents in pursuit of its own greed and such, and the paladin must help those in need, i.e. the peasants, but the Tyrant doesn't use any unlawful means, and just to make it a clincher, never made a new rule to benefit its own greed, just used all the old rules and loopholes therein. Most would say Good triumphs Lawful, but then would not the help be towards chaotic ends?

I ask this because what if Daimyo Kubota becomes the legitimate ruler of AC? (We don't know the laws of AC, it could happen). Will Hinjo have to respect his rule?

[CardinalFang]

Probably not, because insubordination in a time of war, and attempted assassination of the rightful leader makes Kubota a traitor and a usurper. Paladins get to fight those kinds of people.

[Jefepato]

1) It's my view that the standard paladin, though required to be lawful good, is meant to be more focused on good than on law. (The fact that paladins can smite evil but not chaos bears this out.) Besides, the code of conduct is already fairly restrictive, especially since the paladin isn't all that powerful a class.

2) Why would an evil tyrant who abuses the laws out of greed be considered "legitimate authority?"

[RedScholarGypsy]

1
2) Why would an evil tyrant who abuses the laws out of greed be considered "legitimate authority?"

Definitions I found: 1. according to law; lawful: the property's legitimate owner.
2. in accordance with established rules, principles, or standards.

Common sense thinking of what the word means, yea, a tyrant wouldn't be legit, but by the actual definition, as long as it's lawful, it's technically legit. Given the weight of Lawful versus Good inherent in the game, I would hope they'd use a word that had both good and lawful conotations, such as 'Just', instead. Again, just playing devil's advocate for some thought.

[CardinalFang]

Definitions I found: 1. according to law; lawful: the property's legitimate owner.
2. in accordance with established rules, principles, or standards.

Common sense thinking of what the word means, yea, a tyrant wouldn't be legit, but by the actual definition, as long as it's lawful, it's technically legit. Given the weight of Lawful versus Good inherent in the game, I would hope they'd use a word that had both good and lawful conotations, such as 'Just', instead. Again, just playing devil's advocate for some thought.

Lawful doesn't mean obeying the local ruler or laws of the country. It means obeying natural, just order. A paladin isn't required to obey a tyrant or a usurper, or a corrupt judge's order, or anything like that.

[Tmabbbb]

In my opinion, the code is more like guidelines than actual rules.

[kirbsys]

Like the pirate's code?

Wow similarities between pallies and pirates, this is turning out to be an interesting night. :smallbiggrin:

[kirbsys]

Like the pirate's code?

Wow similarities between pallies and pirates, this is turning out to be an interesting night. :smallbiggrin:

[Tokiko Mima]

Given the recent speculation about Hinjo joining OotS and such, I went back over the Pal's CoC to see if it'd be feasible, when I noticed a couple of things.

Also, do realize that while I'm writing my thoughts, they are no where near opinions, let alone firmly-held beliefs. I'm looking for intelligent ideas and debates, not classism flaming or arrogant dismissal.

1) "A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act."
Fine, I understand no evil, but why is Chaotic allowed? The Paladin is restricted to Lawful good, not just Good. Some would argue, correctly I feel, that this would limit the character incredibly. However the whole point of a Paladin, from a role-playing standpoint, is to force you to new heights of creativity by placing you in such a tight role. I enjoyed my paladin(I'm chaotic good/neutral, depending on who you ask) because I did my best to resist the STick Up Bunghole(STUB for short :smalltongue: ) class feature.

This is important to remember as Hinjo can commit Chaotic acts, such as ignoring his own rulings, and alter Belkar's sentence if for the greater good.

Paladins are strongly focused on the fighting evil end of the spectrum, and while they are required to be lawful they are not expected to act that way at all times. In fact, if a tradition, law, or honor is aiding or sheltering evil, then a Paladin is compelled to break it. I look at the CoC as placing special weight on the good alignment axis, rather than freeing up a Paladin to act chaotically.

In D&D, 'lawful' doesn't mean obeying laws or respecting property, or Paladin adventurers, monks, Knights, and other lawful types simply could not exist. Realistically, adventuring and smiting evil on your own authority is illegal in almost all areas where authority is be at all respected. If you were a Baron of a fiefdom, would you want powerful and skilled folk running around attacking people they percieved as bad? That leads to chaos, and at the very least open revolt when the eople realize you aren't protecting them at all.

Incidently, and I'm only saying this because you brought this up in the very same quote, but if your Paladin is chaotic or neutral in alignment, then you've broken the same line of the CoC that you quoted. A paladin must respect honor and tradition, even if they do not always follow them. You must be Lawful good.

Being lawful is why paladins even have a Code; because if they were Chaotic, then they couldn't be expected to follow rules like that. Chaotic folks don't follow... rules...



2) "a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, ... help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."

So what happens in the case of a Lawful Evil tyrant? It harms innocents in pursuit of its own greed and such, and the paladin must help those in need, i.e. the peasants, but the Tyrant doesn't use any unlawful means, and just to make it a clincher, never made a new rule to benefit its own greed, just used all the old rules and loopholes therein. Most would say Good triumphs Lawful, but then would not the help be towards chaotic ends?

I ask this because what if Daimyo Kubota becomes the legitimate ruler of AC? (We don't know the laws of AC, it could happen). Will Hinjo have to respect his rule?

It doesn't matter how Lawful you are. The moment you perform an Evil act you become illegitimate. A Paladin who allowed innocents to come to harm commits an Evil act, even if the reigning authority declared it to be ok. No legitimate authority should require the involuntary sacrifice of innocent lives, and no Paladin should allow it either.

Whether Law or Chaos wins the day is less important than Good destroying Evil. Choosing Law, Chaos or Neutrality is what I think gives D&D characters free will and a Paladin should respect that, but a lot don't. I think losing sight of what is Good and saying that Law (a.k.a. honor) is more important is the very phenomenon that cost Miko her powers.

IMO.

[mohair_ninja]

Like the pirate's code?

Wow similarities between pallies and pirates, this is turning out to be an interesting night. :smallbiggrin:
:miko: You dare compare me to a pirate?
:xykon: You dare compare to pirate what you earlier compared to me?

[Lòkki Gallansbayne]

...but if your Paladin is chaotic or neutral in alignment... I think the threadstarter meant that he, the player, was CG/N, not his character. :smallwink:

I'm another one on the good trumps law for Pallies bandwagon. While a Paladin would seek to uphold legitimate authority wherever possible, if said authority is acting against the interests of the people then a decent Paladin would go out of his or her way to remove that authority in place of a more benevolent ruler, though he or she would probably tend to try and do that within in the law as much as possible (which it may not be at all if the ruler is particularly authoritarian, but whatever).

However, an important caveat that's already been mentionned is that a Lawful character is one that respects laws, rules, etc. in general rather than local laws and ordinances. Unless they're extremely Lawful (alignment is a description of tendencies, not a prescriptive straitjacket), while they will try to operate within the confines of local law as much as possible, a Lawful character might go against those laws if it furthers their other motivations, be they for good or for ill.

[Alfryd]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paladin_%28Dungeons_%26_Dragons%29

Wikipedia, by an astounding defiance of likelihood, has a pretty good general summary of the typical code of conduct:
Typical tenets of the Paladin code are as follows, (though many variants exist, see below.)

* A Paladin must be of Lawful Good alignment.
* A Paladin may never commit an Evil act.
* A Paladin cannot associate with any character that persistently commits acts which would cause the Paladin him/herself to Fall- notably Evil creatures.
* A Paladin must remain truthful and forthright at all times.
* A Paladin must give fair warning and due quarter to their enemies.
* A Paladin holds stealth, subterfuge, attack from the rear, missile weapons and especially poison as weapons of last resort.

Occasional, necessary, minor deviations are permissible, but a single gross violation of his/her code of conduct will strip the Paladin of powers until he/she Atones. Acts of Evil or alignment shift always qualify. (Atonement typically involves a quest or undertaking by way of penance, but forced or accidental violations may waive this requirement.)

Personally, I always favoured robocop's prime directives as a decent first approximation. 'Uphold the Law, Serve the Public Trust, Protect the Innocent.'


The thing to bear in mind is that while the code of conduct can be bent or even broken on occasion, a single gross violation of that code will automatically cost a paladin his/her powers. And being Good is right at the top of the List of Things to do to Fulfill my Code of Conduct. Evil acts are always a gross violation of your code of conduct. Associating with evil characters is automatically an association with someone who consistently offends your code of conduct.

Also, bear in mind that the best first approximation of Lawful alignment is 'consistent,' which is an intrinsic and esential aspect to the paladin mentality. They don't get to just make things up as they go along (which, IMHO- hah! I don't have humble opinions- was Miko's great weakness.) 'Legality' is only tenuously related to this concept.


The tricky question is whether a paladin is allowed to take actions that are strictly neccesary in order to serve the greater good, but nevertheless count as gross and wilfull violations of their code of conduct. Cases, say, where the maniacal demon-worshipping cultist puts a dagger to the throat of a captive child and tells the paladin that if he advances a step closer, he'll slit her jugular. In the meantime, an army of Balor throng to venture through the portal that will soon provide a yawning passage to this world unless the ritual is stopped, etc. etc. Our paladin is on the clock, so to speak.

These are the real grey areas. There's no simple formula here.


I ask this because what if Daimyo Kubota becomes the legitimate ruler of AC? (We don't know the laws of AC, it could happen). Will Hinjo have to respect his rule?
If Kubota becomes leader legitimately and refrains from the serious abuse of power then, yes, I imagine he will. Of course, since HINJO is the legitimate ruler of Azure City in accordance with their current laws of succession, and is reasonably competent and comparatively benign, I would be stretched to imagine the circumstances under which Kubota could somehow be considered a more legitimate contender.