PDA

View Full Version : Roleplaying Ways to think about Rage, Paladins, and 'Good Guys Getting Violent'



Genth
2016-06-24, 05:21 AM
So the Barbarian Ability, Rage, has always interested me, and at least three of my characters (two of which are some of my favorite characters) have been Barbarians or possess a rage ability.

One of these, Khosh Dulgat, is usually a Paladin/Barbarian (Pathfinder's Variant Multiclassing does not restrict alignment for Barbarians). Which throws up a problem in a roleplay sense - if going into rage is a violent, hatefull act, then how can a paragon of Goodness do such a thing? For me, however, rage isn't about negative emotions, or about being the Hulk. Anger is perhaps one of the best ways to find your rage, the easiest and often the strongest, but for Khosh, at least, rage is about embracing life. To live in the moment, throwing all your body and spirit into the fight. The violence in it is enjoyable, affirming and strengthening because it is proof that you live, despite what the enemy throws at you.

A Paladin is violent, after all. They may be predicated on the idea of controlling, on using violence only in dire circumstances (And Khosh makes liberal use of the 'Blade of Mercy' trait from Pathfinder, to deal nonlethal damage) but they are, in the end, a martial class. Khosh knows that violence, and the love of violence can lead one down a dark path - but it is a part of living nonetheless. So he uses his rage as he uses any of his weapons - only when needed. But like his weapons, he does not pretend or hide the fact he loves and cares for them, and just as he cleans his axes after a conflict, he cares for his rage by throwing himself into it heart and soul, battling evil with a grin, and joy in his raging heart.

Am I, to whatever extent, 'doing it wrong' (not that I care what you think, you understand, I'm curious but not going to change my character)? How do you feel about Heroes who enjoy fighting? How should the Rage ability be seen in it's various forms?

Just a couple of idle thoughts I found interesting :)

Esprit15
2016-06-24, 05:53 AM
Barbarians aren't barred from being Good. After all, there's even Champion of Gwynharwyf, a PrC that's pretty much all about raging to protect others. Rage isn't just anger, it's going at fights with everything you have, pushing yourself to go on quite possibly to a point where you would die under other conditions.

Regitnui
2016-06-24, 06:51 AM
Legend System even offers alternate fluff of going into a trance as opposed to a rage.

erikun
2016-06-24, 06:54 AM
Which throws up a problem in a roleplay sense - if going into rage is a violent, hatefull act, then how can a paragon of Goodness do such a thing?
And what's wrong with that?

There is nothing Evil about being violent, at least not until combat is considered a non-Good act. There is nothing Evil about hating something; quite a number of Good-aligned clerics hate undead or demons or even just orcs without losing their Goodness. There isn't even anything Evil about being angry. For the most part, Evil is about going around and (intentionally) hurting innocent or somewhat-innocent people, for enjoyment or personal gain.

As long as the character has control over what they Rage against - as long as they aren't hacking apart the wrong peope, intentional or accidental - then using Rage or getting violent wouldn't be any different from using a crossbow or using mounted feats.

goto124
2016-06-24, 07:33 AM
Something about the Jedi code and the Sith code.

IntelectPaladin
2016-06-24, 08:31 AM
Well,, as erikun has already said, rage isn't in and of itself evil.
I mean, haven't you ever heard about someone doing something terrible,
to someone close, even, and gotten angry because of it?

That is why rage isn't itself hateful. Rage can be caused by what we see is wrong.
Sure, wrong people get enraged for the wrong reasons,
but that doesn't mean that good people can't be enraged for good reasons.

I mean, there is a plethora of reasons for a Paladin to be rightfully enraged in DnD,
But this isn't about that. Rage in a paladin? I agree with Erik, It's perfectly acceptable.
Besides, haven't you ever heard of the oath of vengeance?

Thank you for reading this, and I hope you have a nice day!
You know, I really am depressed at the zeitgeist going against religion these days, and in turn going against paladins. I mean, they added a demonic player race and removed paladin's detect evil, for pity's sake.

Joe the Rat
2016-06-24, 09:09 AM
Classic barbarian rage isn't evil, it's chaotic - giving in to emotions, letting yourself follow your emotions, generally acting like a viking with horned helmets: A counterfactual stereotype. If you go emotion = chaotic, reason = lawful, then yeah, there are issues. But Paladins don't strike me as methodical thinkers. Zealotry requires emotional involvement.

Also consider that Rage does not mean you're out of control. You're just hopped of on emotion and adrenaline and violent primal mojo.


Legend System even offers alternate fluff of going into a trance as opposed to a rage. I've seen this kicked around quite a bit.

The newest player in my group is using a Barbarian that uses his rage as a centering and battle focus. He's a samurai.

Combining the barbarian and paladin, you can do cold focus. But something more interesting is to read your Rage as Righteous Anger - the same thing that drives you to do good and smite evil brings you to a state of ecstatic fury - divine wrath made manifest.

mikeejimbo
2016-06-24, 09:17 AM
Just echoing what has been said - anger is not an Evil trait by any means. A Paladin getting angry at injustice is completely in character. I'd play him as slow to anger, but when he does... what's that quote? Demons shudder when good men go to war?

Geddy2112
2016-06-24, 09:23 AM
Good people are needed to kill the monsters and evil forces in the world. If good people were too good to fight, then evil would have won long ago.

Also, good people will break if they see enough evil. Good people are moved and angered when they see evil in the world. I don't care how lawful good you are, most humans are going to be upset by puppy kicking evil, some people utterly lose it and seek to remove it from the earth.

A perfect example of the good guy getting violent(and a good Paladin/Barbarian) is Pvt. Daniel Jackson, the sniper from Saving Private Ryan. He routinely quoted the bible, and said that god made him "a fine instrument of warfare". He would kill, but also gave the enemy chances to surrender. At several points he would get really angry with his unit and even threatened to kill a POW, but also found peace and fell asleep easily during war, what his squad mates attributed to a clear conscience

Honest Tiefling
2016-06-24, 01:08 PM
I would also say that Rage can defined by more neutral positions. For instance, the paladin/barbarian might fly into a rage by thinking 'I will never let you hurt anyone again.' if they are dive tackling someone with a knife above a baby on a demonic altar, yeah, I think that's a pretty decent position to take at that current moment.

Also, I would be curious to see if such a character might restrain from rage in certain situations, such as being accosted by what appear to be hungry thugs more interested in getting money for food then actually stabbing anyone.

There is also the argument that such a concept works well in Pathfinder, DnD, and other similar games, but not in others. I mean, evil in many RPGs is pretty dang evil and often requires pretty extreme responses. In other games, where the enemy is more uncertain, perhaps the Holy Rager concept wouldn't work as well.

Lvl 2 Expert
2016-06-24, 01:15 PM
The only thing stopping a bad guy in a fit of rage is a good guy in a fit of rage.

GrayDeath
2016-06-24, 01:20 PM
All Wise Men fear ...the Anger of a Gentle Man, after all. ;)


Rage as something OFTEN used does not fit the Good abve good mood of Paladins and their Ilk, but rare fits of honest, liberating and Rrighteous Rage?
Very much so.

Frozen_Feet
2016-06-24, 01:54 PM
IIRC in d20, the conflict between Paladins and raging is not that rage is evil, it's because raging is chaotic - letting yourself be overwhelmed by emotion/passion like that is not compatible with the disciplined, chivalrous image.

Winter_Wolf
2016-06-24, 04:37 PM
This is probably why Paladins and barbarians were initially given incompatible alignments. Rage isn't hateful, but it's raw unchecked emotion that can take you to any number of places when in its grip. Paladins are supposedly masters of their impulses and use their virtue to rise above pettiness.

Personally I'd rather party with raging barbarians than paladins, but I'm not interested in the level of self control that I suspect paladins need to do their thing.

Lord Raziere
2016-06-24, 05:40 PM
Every shonen-focused anime protagonist would disagree that using rage is in any way evil. Often, its bad things being done to innocents which fuels their rage and empowers them to fight for what is right and good. the only reason why any Good people would prefer to avoid it, is because rage is dangerous, which is different from being Evil. Some Good people like err on the side of not potentially endangering people, others see any weapon that isn't inherently evil itself as a means to win against Evil, and for some well, Rage might be one of the few tools they do have to fight it.

one should keep in mind that there is a difference between mere safety/danger and Good/Evil. Good isn't necessarily inherently safe, while you can have reasons to do something Evil for safety's sake whether it be to avoid a danger for yourself or your community. Paladins of course err towards safety, because they're paladins. Its kind of their job.

I agree with one who says they'd rather adventure with raging barbarians, though. Adventuring is a risk taking profession and I'm in it to take risks and see awesome exciting things happen, and thats more likely when all the players are having fun doing over the top rage acting and killing things with passion than some stale paladin, good though they may be.

Slipperychicken
2016-06-24, 09:42 PM
IIRC in d20, the conflict between Paladins and raging is not that rage is evil, it's because raging is chaotic - letting yourself be overwhelmed by emotion/passion like that is not compatible with the disciplined, chivalrous image.

I would say that the flaws of a chivalrous person are what make their stories interesting and lend them depth as characters. In Arthurian myth, upon which the image for paladins is based, these same guys constantly did stupid things out of fury and passion, to the extent that it was the norm rather than the exception. Those flaws are often defining character traits for them. I'll list a few prominent examples, as many many more exist.


You've got Lancelot's adulterous hots for Guinevere, and that nearly killing him multiple times, and actually resulting in the destruction of Camelot and the death of Arthur (as Mordred discovering them together was the catalyst for that).

Sir Gaheris, upon finishing a jail sentence for another violent act, beheaded his mother's killer in the middle of Arthur's court, prompting the king to banish him forever. This guy proceeded to get into similar fights until he died.

Sir Lamorak charged headfirst into 30 knights or men-at-arms on multiple occasions without backup. It was probably avoidable, but it kind of seemed like he did it out of pride. He did a bunch of other stupid things too that currently escape me.

King Arthur got so pissed off during his conquest of Gaul that he went into single combat with a giant king, after witnessing the latter eating a human's limb. He also ordered his own wife burned at the stake (albeit with encouragement) after finding out her relationship with Lancelot, as was the law of the land.

Ywain had sworn an oath to return to his beloved within a year, but had so much fun adventuring that he literally forgot about it and had to come home late. That resulted in him being rejected, his main magic item getting destroyed (I don't remember what it did, but it was tied to the promise), and in response to this he stripped naked and ran around the forest for at least a few months or years. IIRC lancelot did something similar when he thought Guinevere had dumped him.

Gawain helped accelerate the demise of Camelot by refusing to hear out Lancelot and actually pressuring the king into war against him. Gawain was probably one of the nicest of King Arthur's knights.

Knights constantly became "passing wroth" (madder than mad) before they fight people. Often when they don't need to, or without even confirming the identity of the other knight. This has on at least one occasion resulted in knights fighting or killing family members.

Sir Kay/Cai/Cay/Key (however you want to spell it) constantly ran around pissing people off with insults and slander, as well as being a bully. Those were his main character traits, despite being King Arthur's brother and seneschal.




So while I think that's not the ideal for a character based off those myths to aspire to, it certainly comes with the territory.

The Fury
2016-06-24, 11:15 PM
After I read The Old Kingdom Series by Garth Nix I thought it might be interesting to have a character with abilities that the OP described. Essentially the character would be a decent person, but they have the Rage ability that they're not really in full control of, sort of like the "Berserks" in the Old Kingdom Books. The more I thought of it, I thought it might be interesting to treat the Rage as more akin to a mental illness that the character's trying to manage-- in fact it would make sense that such a person would feel the constant need to impose control on their life. Because of that they might tend towards being very straightlaced-- like a Paladin.

GrayDeath
2016-06-25, 01:50 PM
In a sense Gawain, in Gillian Bradshaws mayhawk Book and the Series in general, is a perfect example of this.
The latter 2 books switch the PoV however and imo are not as good, still give it a try, its quite good.

Darth Ultron
2016-06-25, 02:10 PM
Which throws up a problem in a roleplay sense - if going into rage is a violent, hatefull act, then how can a paragon of Goodness do such a thing? For me, however, rage isn't about negative emotions, or about being the Hulk.

Rage is violent sure, but it is in no way hateful, and it's sure not evil. The 'zeal' of a good person is another way of saying 'rage'. So maybe say zeal instead.

The barbarian rage is not exactly a berzerker rage where they kill everything in sight.

The Hulk is not an all that bad of an example. The classic savage green Hulk is not evil. And he gets mad and rages all the time, but it's not like he slaughter innocents or anything. Thor might be an even better example.

goto124
2016-06-25, 09:16 PM
such a person would feel the constant need to impose control on their life. Because of that they might tend towards being very straightlaced-- like a Paladin.

In my RL experience, that leads to only more raging out of sheer frustration at every little thing in life.

"You didn't remove the mattress tag? RAGE!" :smalleek:

Also, you're called The Fury :smalltongue:

The Fury
2016-06-26, 09:48 AM
In my RL experience, that leads to only more raging out of sheer frustration at every little thing in life.

"You didn't remove the mattress tag? RAGE!" :smalleek:

Also, you're called The Fury :smalltongue:

I guess you got me there, and I did used to have anger management issues.

Frozen_Feet
2016-06-28, 01:07 PM
The barbarian rage is not exactly a berzerker rage where they kill everything in sight.

The barbarian rage is pretty clearly meant to invoke the berserker's rage. Also, berserkers didn't really kill everything in sight. Usually, just their enemies. :smalltongue:

Hulk etc. is not a good example of a Paladin, in fact, Hulk is not even a good example of a good guy. Originally, he was a misunderstood monster, but still a monster, causing lot of pointless destruction and not really being motivated by will to do good. Classic Hulk should be classified as true neutral, similarly to animals, in D&D.

Sam Vimes and Captain Carrot Ironfoundersson, both from Discworld and members of the Night Watch, are pretty good examples of Paladin-like characters in a setting which is often very cynical, and the former's character arc explicitly deals with the rage ("the Beast") locked inside him.

IntelectPaladin
2016-06-28, 04:13 PM
Sam Vimes and Captain Carrot Ironfoundersson, both from Discworld and members of the Night Watch, are pretty good examples of Paladin-like characters in a setting which is often very cynical, and the former's character arc explicitly deals with the rage ("the Beast") locked inside him.

I have never seen so correct a reference, thank you for making it.

To make this post thread-related, let me ask you to think on this.
Wouldn't it be much worse if a paladin didn't become enraged at some truly horrible tragedy?
Especially one that happened in front of them, no less. No, I don't mean a calm, measured reaction.
I mean cold indifference.

Thank you for reading this, and I hope you have a better day!