Can a Paladin get PTSD?

[8BitNinja]

DISCLAIMER: Yes, I know that PTSD is a very serious condition and this subject is sensitive to some. I personally have an uncle that suffers from PTSD, so I know what affect it can have on a family. I am not trying to make light of it or trivialize it. The purpose for use is to not make it seem less horrible, it is merely for speculative purposes.


So now that this is out of the way, on to the question

So in the FFRP section of the forum, I have a character who is a paladin. As a part of his backstory, he has acute PTSD due to having witnessed gruesome events throughout his time fighting the forces of evil. However, he is pretty much a standard D&D paladin, and immune to fear. Would it be possible for him to have PTSD?

I know that there is the story of Don Quixote, but Don Quixote didn't have immunity to fear.

[JNAProductions]

I don't have PTSD, nor do I know anyone terribly well who suffers from it. (And for that, I am thankful.)

For those of us not as much in the know about, would you ind explaining further what exactly PTSD does? I know it's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, but I don't know what that MEANS.

[Koo Rehtorb]

I think you can interpret immunity to fear in a number of different ways.

You can call it magical protection from magical fear effects. You can say that it's immunity to being forced to make a decision you normally wouldn't make out of fear, though you can still feel afraid.

[Darth Ultron]

Immunity to fear would not have any effect on getting something like PTSD.

[arch-fiend]

hey so i'm not sure which version of D&D your playing, or if your even playing D&D (though paladins being immune to fear is post 3rd edition D&D from what i can tell) but the 3.5 supplementary book called "heroes of horror" which introduces multiple varieties of fear makes a distinction between magical and natural fear for paladins and suggests that paladins should retain an immunity to fear but only against spells, spell like abilities, and supernatural abilities which create fear. the book goes on to develop different kinds of fear which work against the paladin. i think the book still recommends that the paladin still possess a +4 bonus to natural fear as well. additionally there is the variant sanity rules in the d20srd for 3.5 which add a completely different system to sanity that paladin's immunity to fear does not directly affect.

note: i could be remember this all wrong

[Keltest]

I think a paladin would be resistant to it, in as much as the kind of people who are equipped to become paladins are also the kind of people who would be able to push through and deal with those difficult emotions and come out the better for it, but I wouldn't say its impossible. Fighting evil means encountering evil and seeing all of its depravity, and even the strongest man might eventually break when exposed to enough.

[Stealth Marmot]

Disclaimer: I am not an expert, I do not know people with PTSD and I have no formal training in what it is.

From my understanding of PTSD, fear is not all it is. PTSD causes feelings of depression, sadness, anxiety, and most of all guilt, and paladins are not immune to any of those. I would expect a paladin would be susceptible to mental afflictions like PTSD, though they may be more resistant than others because they are immune to feeling fear at the time. That said, logic would indicate that they would be more likely to experience PTSD when they are witnesses to horrible things happening to other people. The horrors of an undead army charging down on a paladin's position will likely have far less effect than watching a 7 year old child getting impaled by an ogre's spear.

I can expect Survivor's Guilt to be the main way paladins would experience PTSD.

[tyckspoon]

I can expect Survivor's Guilt to be the main way paladins would experience PTSD.

Gonna throw in with this. Fear isn't something Paladins have to deal with. So you're not going to get, say, the form of PTSD where you develop phobias and triggers based around situations where you almost died, because Paladins don't have fear of death. But you can still have issues regarding those you couldn't save, and those you might not be able to save in the future. You can still be depressed, enraged, or disgusted by the evil you have seen. You can still very, very deeply want to leave it all behind you, try to forget about it, and spend the rest of your life running a small farm or an inn in some backwater village where the most heroic and exciting thing you ever have to do is talk down Old Farmer Johnson from trying to dance around without his trousers on when he's had too much beer.

(This, incidentally, leads to my favorite setup for what makes heroes and especially Paladin-types into what they are - you have all those issues. You *could* leave it all behind. But you don't, because there is still evil out there. There are still people who need your assistance. And the obdurium core of Paladin-ness is that no matter how bad it is, you can't stop. You have to help, you have to oppose evil wherever it shows. Because to do otherwise would be to not be, to never have been a Paladin. That is as incomprehensible to the Paladin as being afraid.)

[Kol Korran]

Though one of the criteria to develop PTSD is to experience a life threatening event, and though in the DSM V it does sort of fall under disorders of Anxiety (If I remember correctly), I'd like to point out a few things:
1. The definition of fear, real world or game wise, is something some people and philosophers still debate.
2. We... don't understand PTSD as well as we think. We know some of the symptoms, and we hypothesize as to the connections, etiology and more. People who suffer from this usually develop a few characteristic behaviors- avoidance, agitation, some times flashbacks, relieving the experience, and more. Yet... We are not fully certain what it is exactly in the experience, that causes the great distress and disability... We assume it is due to the constant apprehension of one's frailty and fragility, that we could easily die on a whim, and have very little actual control, even of the fact that we currently live. Others theorize it might be due to other factors, such as enhancing senses to an intolerable degree (Which some people say happen in such situations), or more. Others speak of an altered world view, and more. So does PTSD means "fear"? Unknown yet...
3. While there are some truly good, benevolent and inspiring examples of humankind, I don't think there are any humans who have been utterly immune to fear. They would become very detached from one of the core human experiences, and our ability for empathy relies on our ability to understand, acknowledge and recognize such an emotion in others. A person who have no fear at all? Not human...
4. The paladin is immune to fear of all kinds? Does he not at times fear his quest might fail? That his friends might die? That evil may yet triumph? And so on? Fear is a motivator as well as a hindrance, and we fear for what is important to us, that we value, that we care for... If there is no fear, then there is no real value...

So, yeah, I think a paladin may well experience PTSD. Could he actually function with it? With REAL PTSD? I'd doubt it. It's probably the hardest psychiatric situation to treat, (And that's saying something!) and it's immensely debilitating. There are examples (I'm an ex soldier, I've got friends), but they are just partly functional, and... not always in a good way...

Good luck though! :smallwink:

[Red Fel]

Rather than looking at PTSD, which is a big messy issue I don't intend to address, I'm going to pick out one part of it, the core part: Can a Paladin experience trauma? If he can't, the entire thing is moot, because PTSD, as its name would suggest, results from trauma; if he can, then it stands to reason that he can suffer any of the effects of trauma (that are not explicitly mechanical fear effects), which would include PTSD.

So, can a Paladin experience trauma? I think that would be a great big glowing yes. A lot of things can be traumatic. Seeing your friends and compatriots die. Taking a life with your own two hands. Having to do things you may question, because you are compelled to do so. Suffering on behalf of others. Being forced to confront the very real consequences of your actions. Paladins engage in any number of behaviors, and are exposed to any number of stimuli, which could be traumatic. And being protected from mechanical fear effects does nothing to change that.

Being immune to fear means that when your sword carves into the chest cavity of your enemy, and you look into his shocked, dead eyes, you aren't frightened. It doesn't mean you don't realize the gravity of your actions. And that realization can weigh down on you.

Now, as others have said, we don't fully understand PTSD. I'm not addressing it or its causes or symptoms. But I am saying that a Paladin can experience trauma, and can be traumatized; it stands to reason, then, that a Paladin could develop post-traumatic stress disorder.

[tomandtish]

I think you can interpret immunity to fear in a number of different ways.

You can call it magical protection from magical fear effects. You can say that it's immunity to being forced to make a decision you normally wouldn't make out of fear, though you can still feel afraid.

We've always played it like this. Paladins can feel fear, and can feel a variety of types of fear. But what never happens is them HAVING to take a specific action or suffering any penalties as a DIRECT result of that fear. So no dice penalties, no mandatory running away, etc.


I don't have PTSD, nor do I know anyone terribly well who suffers from it. (And for that, I am thankful.)

For those of us not as much in the know about, would you ind explaining further what exactly PTSD does? I know it's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, but I don't know what that MEANS.

A VERY simplistic definition:

It's a trauma/stress related disorder caused by a traumatic event where the symptoms are persistent for a substantial length of time and have a significant impact on the person.

It's more likely to occur in people in life threatening situations, those in serious abuse situations, etc. Basically where one is at extreme risk of serious harm or death. Sexual abuse survivors often are diagnosed (I believe it is as high as 50% for rape victims).

But for the Paladin, it doesn't automatically have to be fear that causes it. The key component is stress. Admittedly, fear and stress can go hand in hand, but a Paladin who was trying to save a village and failed completely could easily develop it.

It can manifest itself in a fair number of ways. Honestly, just doing some reading can give you numerous ways it can manifest itself, even without having a "fear" effect as such.

[JNAProductions]

Okay, after getting some info from the lovely people in this thread, I'll throw my voice into the chorus and say yes-Paladins can get PTSD. They are likely resistant to it (no fear makes it harder to experience trauma) but certainly not immune.

[Talyn]

I had made a thread like this a while back, but I was focusing on a Paladin's disease immunity, and whether that made him immune to mental illness.

Can a Paladin become an alcoholic? (Presuming his god or his oath doesn't forbid intoxication, of course). Can a Paladin get depressed? Can an elderly paladin get Alzheimer's? If you answer to these questions is "Yes," then I see no reason why a Paladin can't have PTSD. He is probably better at dealing with the PTSD than most, because he will not suffer from panic attacks (because he never loses control due to fear) and he will be able to face his trauma in a therapeutic setting without suffering flashbacks (same reason), but he would still have it.

On the other hand, if you answer "No" to those questions, then a Paladin is probably immune to PTSD.

[Icewraith]

I don't have PTSD, nor do I know anyone terribly well who suffers from it. (And for that, I am thankful.)

For those of us not as much in the know about, would you ind explaining further what exactly PTSD does? I know it's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, but I don't know what that MEANS.

PTSD is considered an anxiety disorder. Events that cause the subject to feel sufficiently threatened (whether or not they are actually in any danger) and/or powerless are considered the cause. When people with PTSD experience events related in some way to a traumatic event (triggers), their brains automatically recall traumatic events (flashbacks). Flashbacks can be anything from a brief but powerful experience of the emotions related to a traumatic event (not necessarily the event responsible for the PTSD- it's possible to have completely forgotten about "the" event and still suffer from PTSD) to essentially being forced to re-live a bad memory in detail.

Examples: The term "shell shock" comes from what we understand to be PTSD experienced by soldiers subject to extended artillery bombardments during World War I. Men were trapped in foxholes for hours, sometimes days, with shells exploding above their heads (threat of death) and with no ability to make the shells stop (powerlessness).

A sexual assault victim may experience flashbacks when part of their anatomy related to the assault is unexpectedly touched or grabbed. Could be some anonymous pervert or complete accident in public, could be done in their own home by a lover who either doesn't know or has briefly forgotten.

Veterans with PTSD are sometimes triggered by car backfires or unexpected fireworks.

Part of why PTSD does what it does is it puts the emergency fight-or-flight response on a hair trigger. I think it's unlikely you'll have a character with (mild to moderate) PTSD respond inappropriately to most genuine threats in a D&D game. The problem with PTSD is responding inappropriately to non-threats.

If you want to roleplay this well, you'll need to

0: Find out what kind of game this is going to be and if anyone will have issues with this character. People who have PTSD don't necessarily talk about it. Also there may just be structural problems with bringing a character that's a walking cloud of doom into a sillier, lighter-themed campaign. If there will be problems, tone down the character or save it for a different group. You also don't need to write "MY CHARACTER HAS PTSD" in marker on your character sheet either, or bring up exactly what it is at the table.

1: Decide what the triggering event was, in a certain amount of detail. Not "I've... seen things...". For example, maybe the Paladin led an attack on a orc war party but discovered upon their victorious return that a second force had pillaged and slaughtered the town. Perhaps the Paladin was mind-controlled into killing their squire, or hit by Hold Person while an ally was killed in front of them.

2: Decide what things will cause issues for the Paladin. For the pillaging backstory, maybe the sight of smoke recalls approaching the town and realizing something's wrong, or the Paladin avoids children because seeing them play reminds him of slaughtered bodies of children he couldn't save.

3: Decide what effects those things will have. Maybe the Paladin never grants quarter to Orcs, or if they must spend time in towns ends up drunk to try and suppress the memories. Maybe they'll never take another squire. Just make sure you keep your responses consistent. The Paladin with the killed ally backstory might deck a friendly spellcaster if they try to buff him without warning (it's just Guidance, man!), but not the Paladin with the slaughtered town backstory. If someone asks the Paladin what's wrong, an appropriate response might be "I've... seen things...". (Here's where you can use that line.)

4: Your character should not be useless in most dangerous situations. You can freeze up or have a fit if your character finds a town that has been burned to the ground by a dragon (there's nothing you can do to help, you're helpless again, you've failed again etc.- even here you should probably shake it off and look for survivors until you've found some or there aren't any, then go back to freaking out or getting drunk or whatever), but if the dragon's still attacking the town- that's a dragon and you're a Paladin and your sword is right here, so what are you waiting for? You can do something about it this time!

[Max_Killjoy]

PTSD can also arise from events that have nothing to do with combat or physical confrontation/assault. PTSD-like symptoms can arise from any emotionally traumatic event. Breakups, loss of a loved one, childhood emotional abuse, etc.

[Zombimode]

I think you can interpret immunity to fear in a number of different ways.

You can call it magical protection from magical fear effects. You can say that it's immunity to being forced to make a decision you normally wouldn't make out of fear, though you can still feel afraid.

Small correction here: Paladins are immune to ALL Fear affects, not just magical ones. The Demoralize skill use of Intimidation for instance is of no use against a Paladin:


Beginning at 3rd level, a paladin is immune to fear (magical or otherwise)

Emphasis mine.


To the topic at hand, I think RedFel covered it pretty much :smallsmile:

[Stealth Marmot]

I want to chime in again and say that honestly, having full on PTSD is probably a bad idea for your character to have overall. I would be careful with how extreme it is, and have it be limited in where it manifests. Given the nature of a paladin, it would probably be best if your character had a tendency to have nightmares and wake up screaming, rather than have flashbacks in the middle of battle.

[GungHo]

This response may be more autobiographical that I care to delve into, but I don't think it's a fear effect. I can be hyper-vigilant without being paranoid. I can be dissasociative without being avoidant. My memories can be intrusive without me being immobilized. I'm not suggesting that all paladins should have a thousand yard stare, but if I came along to one who was a grim SOB who literally went to Hell and back and lived to report in, I wouldn't assume that he'd Fallen along the way.

[8BitNinja]

hey so i'm not sure which version of D&D your playing, or if your even playing D&D (though paladins being immune to fear is post 3rd edition D&D from what i can tell) but the 3.5 supplementary book called "heroes of horror" which introduces multiple varieties of fear makes a distinction between magical and natural fear for paladins and suggests that paladins should retain an immunity to fear but only against spells, spell like abilities, and supernatural abilities which create fear. the book goes on to develop different kinds of fear which work against the paladin. i think the book still recommends that the paladin still possess a +4 bonus to natural fear as well. additionally there is the variant sanity rules in the d20srd for 3.5 which add a completely different system to sanity that paladin's immunity to fear does not directly affect.

note: i could be remember this all wrong

It's a freeform game, but my paladin is based on the 3.5e paladin. Paladins are completely immune to the effects of fear.



4: Your character should not be useless in most dangerous situations. You can freeze up or have a fit if your character finds a town that has been burned to the ground by a dragon (there's nothing you can do to help, you're helpless again, you've failed again etc.- even here you should probably shake it off and look for survivors until you've found some or there aren't any, then go back to freaking out or getting drunk or whatever), but if the dragon's still attacking the town- that's a dragon and you're a Paladin and your sword is right here, so what are you waiting for? You can do something about it this time!

Like I said, he has acute PTSD (I don't know if I'm using that term right). He doesn't get the 1000 yard stare, but he does have occasional flashbacks, nightmares, and will sometimes perceive things as threats when they are not. He can still function like most people without PTSD in combat, but sometimes will do things such as go into suicidal charges while perceiving a battle as another one that he was in that went south.

[HandofShadows]

Discalimer: I am not an expert on the subject but I have done research on it.

I would say yes, a Paladin can get PTSD. Really *anyone* can get it. Some types of people are more or less likely to suffer from it and age can be an important factor as well. Being immune from fear would not keep you from getting PTSD though it could reduce the avenues which can cause it. Paladins given the type of people they are likely the type of person that would have less of a chance to suffer from it, but less chance would not be immunity.

[ArgentumRegio]

Immune to fear.

Immune to disease.

I'd say, the pally is safe from PTSD.

[JNAProductions]

Immune to fear.

Immune to disease.

I'd say, the pally is safe from PTSD.

Generally by "Immune to disease" it means physical diseases. The common cold, the flu, ebola... Immune. But mental maladies? Generally not covered by "disease".

Also, I feel like calling PTSD a disease might be offensive to some. I don't know enough to say for sure, but this is one of those topics where caution is probably advised.

[Stryyke]

I would like to comment on this. First of all, as someone who is 100% disabled with PTSD (with myriad physical problems too), I don't take any offense to this question. Don't worry, it is a perfectly valid question.

A lot of PTSD isn't necessarily about fear in the sense that you are talking about. One common way that PTSD presents is by hyper-alertness. You aren't afraid, you are just proactively ensuring security.

The other thing that is hallmark PTSD is intrusive thoughts. The 1000 yard stare. It's more about fixation than fear. PTSD happens when an event won't let you go. It always pops into your head. You dream about it every night.

Of course you could argue that this is all rooted in fear, but you could say the same about anything really. I don't feel afraid, so much as cautious. And the events of my past won't let me go. I could be playing poker, or a video game, or reading a book, and the memories pop in there. Unbidden as far as I can tell.

So yes a paladin can develop PTSD. In game, I would present it as him "spacing out" at odd moments; being hyper sensitive about stranger's proximity to himself and his party; and bad insomnia. You don't have to have him wake up screaming, you could just have him lie in his sleeping bag for hours and hours before drifting off for an hour or two.

I would even say that there are benefits and problems that may be able to be quantified in the game. Perhaps the party cannot be surprised as long as the paladin is with the party, but the paladin has to roll a fortitude check each night to get 8 hours of sleep. And if he fails, he has to deal with the fatigue that results. Just some thoughts.

[Kane0]

Of all the classes one would think paladins are one of, if not the, most vulnerable to the kinds of stress that triggers PTSD what with the code and the tenets and the falling. Druids must have a hard to time too come to think of it.

But yeah, not any more immune than the next guy.

[Martin Greywolf]

Of all the classes one would think paladins are one of, if not the, most vulnerable to the kinds of stress that triggers PTSD what with the code and the tenets and the falling. Druids must have a hard to time too come to think of it.


This is a lot more relevant than you realize - historical research of PTSD, uncertain as it is, seems to suggest that in pre-modern times, PTSD wasn't all that commonly a result of combat. Romans specifically were noted to have what look like PTSD symptoms not because they were in battle, but because they dishonored themselves (more often than not by NOT being in a battle).

In the end, the right answer to this question is "Do you want your paladin to have PTSD?" If yes, go for it, if not, don't go for it, the area is sufficiently gray for both cases.

[Stealth Marmot]

Like I said, he has acute PTSD (I don't know if I'm using that term right). He doesn't get the 1000 yard stare, but he does have occasional flashbacks, nightmares, and will sometimes perceive things as threats when they are not. He can still function like most people without PTSD in combat, but sometimes will do things such as go into suicidal charges while perceiving a battle as another one that he was in that went south.

Actually that could work really well, the paladin is actually at "home" in battle, but the problem is he can't really turn it "off". He won't attack friends, or shrink up in battle, but he may treat unknown people walking in with hostility, drawing a sword on a kid who enters his room unexpectedly, almost ready to slice him down, having to use force of will to sheathe the weapon.

If you want a movie that actually gives a good example of this, and actually is a really surprising glimpse into the effects of PTSD, the move First Blood (The first Rambo movie) is a good thing to watch. The subsequent movies are gorefests of macho shoot-em ups, but the first move, First Blood, is really a movie about a Vietnam War veteran struggling to be treated with decency, come to grips with his PTSD, and find a way to make a living after he came home.


Trautman: You did everything to make this private war happen. You've done enough damage. This mission is over, Rambo. Do you understand me? This mission is over! Look at them out there! Look at them! If you won't end this now, they will kill you. Is that what you want? It's over Johnny. It's over!
John Rambo: Nothing is over! Nothing! You just don't turn it off! It wasn't my war! You asked me, I didn't ask you! And I did what I had to do to win! But somebody wouldn't let us win! And I come back to the world and I see all those maggots at the airport, protesting me, spitting. Calling me baby killer and all kinds of vile crap! Who are they to protest me? Who are they? Unless they've been me and been there and know what the hell they're yelling about!
Trautman: It was a bad time for everyone, Rambo. It's all in the past now.
John Rambo: For *you*! For me civilian life is nothing! In the field we had a code of honor, you watch my back, I watch yours. Back here there's nothing!
Trautman: You're the last of an elite group, don't end it like this.
John Rambo: Back there I could fly a gunship, I could drive a tank, I was in charge of million dollar equipment, back here I can't even hold a job *parking cars*!

(Bolded for emphasis)

Good movie, worth seeing. People think "Rambo" they think huge bloody body count, but the first "Rambo" movie only had a death toll of 1 on screen which was an ACCIDENT, maybe 4 total depending on 1 car crash (In a strikingly out of place scene).

[Pronounceable]

Paladins don't get PTSD. Nobody else gets it either, except possibly major NPCs due to DM fiat to get some story going. DnD isn't the game for that sort of psychological stuff, you slap some cure spells on your PC and they're right as rain even after taking literally millions of total damage. And even if combat does, somehow, leave aftereffects, you throw a Heal at it and everything's peachy again. Because DnD is a fun game of kicking ass and taking names by default and losing your PC at about 6th level due to the unreal amount of stress and tension they've experienced is no fun.

You're going to need to add new subsystems at regular DnD if you want anything even remotely resembling psychological effects of violence. If your DM hasn't done that, don't do it (at least not in any way that has gameplay effects).

[JNAProductions]

It's not something you inflict on your players. But if it's something the player wants to have for their character (and the rest of the table is okay with dealing with this sort of seriousness in their games) then yes, D&D is a perfectly appropriate place for it.

[Strigon]

In my eyes, no. At least, not in a "mundane" way; that is to say, not in any way that people on this planet would get it.
They have divine protection, that alone should prevent mundane forms of it. Of course, that isn't to imply that trauma rolls off them like water off a duck's back; they can still be affected by things, but PTSD is far more than that. It's a long-term, often lifelong, psychological condition that can be completely debilitating. A Paladin should be immune to these effects from having a friend or loved one die, or physical/psychological trauma from a mundane source.

On the other hand, in a fantasy land with demons, devils, evil gods, and things from the far realms, there is plenty of room for other beings to cause this sort of thing in a Paladin.

So, if you want to have a jaded, cynical, or even emotionally unstable or apathetic Paladin, anything should do. If you want to have a Paladin with a serious illness, make sure there's a good reason for it.

[Stealth Marmot]

So, if you want to have a jaded, cynical, or even emotionally unstable or apathetic Paladin, anything should do. If you want to have a Paladin with a serious illness, make sure there's a good reason for it.

Given that even modern medicine can barely define it, I would say that PTSD is probably not even recognized as an illness in a D&D world. It's just "recurring nightmares" or "Baggage" or "flashbacks", not recognized as an actual mental affliction.

[Strigon]

Given that even modern medicine can barely define it, I would say that PTSD is probably not even recognized as an illness in a D&D world. It's just "recurring nightmares" or "Baggage" or "flashbacks", not recognized as an actual mental affliction.

Yes, but surely there's a significant difference between someone who is troubled by their past, and someone who has trouble functioning because of it.

[Stealth Marmot]

Yes, but surely there's a significant difference between someone who is troubled by their past, and someone who has trouble functioning because of it.

Indeed, but the D&D world wouldn't be able to recognize the difference. I mean, it wouldn't be the first fantasy story with a character whose past flashbacks caused them to wake up in the middle of the night screaming.

[Icewraith]

PTSD is considered an anxiety disorder. Events that cause the subject to feel sufficiently threatened (whether or not they are actually in any danger) and/or powerless are considered the cause. When people with PTSD experience events related in some way to a traumatic event (triggers), their brains automatically recall traumatic events (flashbacks). Flashbacks can be anything from a brief but powerful experience of the emotions related to a traumatic event (not necessarily the event responsible for the PTSD- it's possible to have completely forgotten about "the" event and still suffer from PTSD) to essentially being forced to re-live a bad memory in detail.

Examples: The term "shell shock" comes from what we understand to be PTSD experienced by soldiers subject to extended artillery bombardments during World War I. Men were trapped in foxholes for hours, sometimes days, with shells exploding above their heads (threat of death) and with no ability to make the shells stop (powerlessness).

A sexual assault victim may experience flashbacks when part of their anatomy related to the assault is unexpectedly touched or grabbed. Could be some anonymous pervert or complete accident in public, could be done in their own home by a lover who either doesn't know or has briefly forgotten.

Veterans with PTSD are sometimes triggered by car backfires or unexpected fireworks.

Part of why PTSD does what it does is it puts the emergency fight-or-flight response on a hair trigger. I think it's unlikely you'll have a character with (mild to moderate) PTSD respond inappropriately to most genuine threats in a D&D game. The problem with PTSD is responding inappropriately to non-threats.

If you want to roleplay this well, you'll need to

0: Find out what kind of game this is going to be and if anyone will have issues with this character. People who have PTSD don't necessarily talk about it. Also there may just be structural problems with bringing a character that's a walking cloud of doom into a sillier, lighter-themed campaign. If there will be problems, tone down the character or save it for a different group. You also don't need to write "MY CHARACTER HAS PTSD" in marker on your character sheet either, or bring up exactly what it is at the table.

1: Decide what the triggering event was, in a certain amount of detail. Not "I've... seen things...". For example, maybe the Paladin led an attack on a orc war party but discovered upon their victorious return that a second force had pillaged and slaughtered the town. Perhaps the Paladin was mind-controlled into killing their squire, or hit by Hold Person while an ally was killed in front of them.

2: Decide what things will cause issues for the Paladin. For the pillaging backstory, maybe the sight of smoke recalls approaching the town and realizing something's wrong, or the Paladin avoids children because seeing them play reminds him of slaughtered bodies of children he couldn't save.

3: Decide what effects those things will have. Maybe the Paladin never grants quarter to Orcs, or if they must spend time in towns ends up drunk to try and suppress the memories. Maybe they'll never take another squire. Just make sure you keep your responses consistent. The Paladin with the killed ally backstory might deck a friendly spellcaster if they try to buff him without warning (it's just Guidance, man!), but not the Paladin with the slaughtered town backstory. If someone asks the Paladin what's wrong, an appropriate response might be "I've... seen things...". (Here's where you can use that line.)

4: Your character should not be useless in most dangerous situations. You can freeze up or have a fit if your character finds a town that has been burned to the ground by a dragon (there's nothing you can do to help, you're helpless again, you've failed again etc.- even here you should probably shake it off and look for survivors until you've found some or there aren't any, then go back to freaking out or getting drunk or whatever), but if the dragon's still attacking the town- that's a dragon and you're a Paladin and your sword is right here, so what are you waiting for? You can do something about it this time!


This response may be more autobiographical that I care to delve into, but I don't think it's a fear effect. I can be hyper-vigilant without being paranoid. I can be dissasociative without being avoidant. My memories can be intrusive without me being immobilized. I'm not suggesting that all paladins should have a thousand yard stare, but if I came along to one who was a grim SOB who literally went to Hell and back and lived to report in, I wouldn't assume that he'd Fallen along the way.


I would like to comment on this. First of all, as someone who is 100% disabled with PTSD (with myriad physical problems too), I don't take any offense to this question. Don't worry, it is a perfectly valid question.

A lot of PTSD isn't necessarily about fear in the sense that you are talking about. One common way that PTSD presents is by hyper-alertness. You aren't afraid, you are just proactively ensuring security.

The other thing that is hallmark PTSD is intrusive thoughts. The 1000 yard stare. It's more about fixation than fear. PTSD happens when an event won't let you go. It always pops into your head. You dream about it every night.

Of course you could argue that this is all rooted in fear, but you could say the same about anything really. I don't feel afraid, so much as cautious. And the events of my past won't let me go. I could be playing poker, or a video game, or reading a book, and the memories pop in there. Unbidden as far as I can tell.

So yes a paladin can develop PTSD. In game, I would present it as him "spacing out" at odd moments; being hyper sensitive about stranger's proximity to himself and his party; and bad insomnia. You don't have to have him wake up screaming, you could just have him lie in his sleeping bag for hours and hours before drifting off for an hour or two.

I would even say that there are benefits and problems that may be able to be quantified in the game. Perhaps the party cannot be surprised as long as the paladin is with the party, but the paladin has to roll a fortitude check each night to get 8 hours of sleep. And if he fails, he has to deal with the fatigue that results. Just some thoughts.


I didn't explicitly disclose my condition earlier, but I also have PTSD. I have compiled the responses from declared PTSD-havers in the spoiler and bolded key points of agreement.

[The Vanishing Hitchhiker]

Also weighing in with my personal anecdata of having PTSD and reiterating that developing/having PTSD has nothing to do with fear. A kid can be affected by trauma without fully realizing they're in danger, for example; and PTSD itself can cause a certain "numbing" effect (dissociating) that sometimes keeps fear from fully registering—but it can also cause hypervigilence to things one might not fear otherwise. Personally, I wouldn't count mental illnesses as a disease effect, either, since curing disease is specifically separate from spells that cure mental effects like charmed or frightened to begin with.

I don't regard the fact that most D&D settings won't have the appropriate terminology by default an argument against PTSD being present. I had it before I found out I had it, after all, even though I didn't have the words for it. So I don't think it makes much of a difference whether the paladin calls it shell shock, spell shock, or the DM's like sure, they call it PTSD here.

[Calthropstu]

I am ex military and know some people who saw some things. You might be immune to fear, but traumatic experiences isn't so much fear as it is revulsion and a mental rejection of what you have seen.
However, it is classified as a mental disease, which paladins are also immune to.

[8BitNinja]

Paladins don't get PTSD. Nobody else gets it either, except possibly major NPCs due to DM fiat to get some story going. DnD isn't the game for that sort of psychological stuff, you slap some cure spells on your PC and they're right as rain even after taking literally millions of total damage. And even if combat does, somehow, leave aftereffects, you throw a Heal at it and everything's peachy again. Because DnD is a fun game of kicking ass and taking names by default and losing your PC at about 6th level due to the unreal amount of stress and tension they've experienced is no fun.

You're going to need to add new subsystems at regular DnD if you want anything even remotely resembling psychological effects of violence. If your DM hasn't done that, don't do it (at least not in any way that has gameplay effects).

But the game is free form. It's a character on this forum's FFRP. I'm just using D&D for an idea for character abilities (immunities, skills, spells, etc.)

[Calthropstu]

But the game is free form. It's a character on this forum's FFRP. I'm just using D&D for an idea for character abilities (immunities, skills, spells, etc.)

D&D paladins are immune to disease. PTSD is a mental disease.
Ergo...


But free form, I suppose you can fluff it however you like.

[Thaneus]

In my opinion on this matter.
Paladins have a very strong conviction to be righteous and follow a strict code of conduct. But they are still people (I would have said human but their aren't just humans in a lot of cases).
The conviction and laws can be a burden (since they are restrictive) but also be a strong pillar of stability.

Did people in Dark Age also suffered from PTSD? Where they mentally different in regards of modern age human society? How was it handled there, if?
Thats the stuff which needed to be clear on the table.

But since its 3.5/pf setting your paladin is one Heal away to be freed from it entirely anyway.

Also from GM point of view (getting into the crunch) PTSD condition would be a -4/-6 on will save since you mind is in a exhausted state.
Can be healed with a Heal spell.

[Castilonium]

Here is the Tortured Crusader (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/paladin/archetypes/paizo-paladin-archetypes/tortured-crusader-paladin-archetype/) paladin archetype, a paladin whose traumatic experiences have affected her so strongly that she doesn't get any class benefits from charisma anymore. She can't use Lay on Hands on other people, loses Detect Evil and Divine Grace, doesn't get a divine mount, loses diplomacy and handle animal as class skills, and gains things like perception, stealth, and survival as class skills.

She's still a paladin. Still has to be LG, still has a code, still is immune to fear and disease.

[Stealth Marmot]

D&D paladins are immune to disease. PTSD is a mental disease.
Ergo...


But free form, I suppose you can fluff it however you like.

Not too long ago I had a thread where I asked about spells like "Cure Disease" and what it could cure, and there was a lot of debate on what constituted a "disease". I think the same problem applies here.

[Pronounceable]

But the game is free form. It's a character on this forum's FFRP. I'm just using D&D for an idea for character abilities (immunities, skills, spells, etc.)
It'll just not be a very DnDly atmosphere with any focus on mental issues. Anything can happen with freeform and it's not like the concept is bad. If you were playing DnD, the pally's ptsd would disappear with the first Heal/Restoration.

[Kane0]

Actually that could work really well, the paladin is actually at "home" in battle, but the problem is he can't really turn it "off". He won't attack friends, or shrink up in battle, but he may treat unknown people walking in with hostility, drawing a sword on a kid who enters his room unexpectedly, almost ready to slice him down, having to use force of will to sheathe the weapon.

If you want a movie that actually gives a good example of this, and actually is a really surprising glimpse into the effects of PTSD, the move First Blood (The first Rambo movie) is a good thing to watch. The subsequent movies are gorefests of macho shoot-em ups, but the first move, First Blood, is really a movie about a Vietnam War veteran struggling to be treated with decency, come to grips with his PTSD, and find a way to make a living after he came home.


Trautman: You did everything to make this private war happen. You've done enough damage. This mission is over, Rambo. Do you understand me? This mission is over! Look at them out there! Look at them! If you won't end this now, they will kill you. Is that what you want? It's over Johnny. It's over!
John Rambo: Nothing is over! Nothing! You just don't turn it off! It wasn't my war! You asked me, I didn't ask you! And I did what I had to do to win! But somebody wouldn't let us win! And I come back to the world and I see all those maggots at the airport, protesting me, spitting. Calling me baby killer and all kinds of vile crap! Who are they to protest me? Who are they? Unless they've been me and been there and know what the hell they're yelling about!
Trautman: It was a bad time for everyone, Rambo. It's all in the past now.
John Rambo: For *you*! For me civilian life is nothing! In the field we had a code of honor, you watch my back, I watch yours. Back here there's nothing!
Trautman: You're the last of an elite group, don't end it like this.
John Rambo: Back there I could fly a gunship, I could drive a tank, I was in charge of million dollar equipment, back here I can't even hold a job *parking cars*!

(Bolded for emphasis)

Good movie, worth seeing. People think "Rambo" they think huge bloody body count, but the first "Rambo" movie only had a death toll of 1 on screen which was an ACCIDENT, maybe 4 total depending on 1 car crash (In a strikingly out of place scene).

...Huh. Things I didn't know.

[Telonius]

From my very limited understanding of it (and a couple of conversations with people actually suffering from it) PTSD makes you get stuck in that "fight or flight" mode at all times. Assuming a Paladin could experience it after 3rd level (when they get Divine Health), the "flight" option would be removed, thanks to immunity to fear.

And suddenly those "smite first ask questions later" Paladins seem a lot more complicated.

EDIT: I do think D&D could support a character with PTSD in some way or another. It would probably work most smoothly in a Cthulhu-style horror campaign (or anything using sanity points). And - just looked it up - they actually do have a listing for PTSD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/sanity.htm#postTraumaticStressDisorder) in the sanity rules.

[dps]

Generally by "Immune to disease" it means physical diseases. The common cold, the flu, ebola... Immune. But mental maladies? Generally not covered by "disease".

To me, this is the crux of the debate: Does the Paladin's immunity to disease include mental diseases or not? If "yes", then they can't get PTSD (though a fallen Paladin certainly could, and in fact falling might very likely be the cause of it); if "no", then they can get PTSD.


Also, I feel like calling PTSD a disease might be offensive to some. I don't know enough to say for sure, but this is one of those topics where caution is probably advised.

You're more likely to offend people by saying that mental disorders aren't diseases.

And then there's some room for debate about what exactly is a mental disease and what is a more mundane disease. For example, someone mentioned Alzheimer's as a mental disease, but I'd question that--as I understand it, Alzheimer's is caused by physiological changes to the brain, and isn't any more of a mental disorder than a brain tumor or blow to the head is.

[wumpus]

Actually that could work really well, the paladin is actually at "home" in battle, but the problem is he can't really turn it "off". He won't attack friends, or shrink up in battle, but he may treat unknown people walking in with hostility, drawing a sword on a kid who enters his room unexpectedly, almost ready to slice him down, having to use force of will to sheathe the weapon.


The descriptions of King Harold's actions at Hastings sound like PTSD to me, and it immediately followed from a bitter battle at Stamford Bridge. I suspect that the real difference between life since 1900 (and effecting WWI veterans and later) was the extreme difference between the violence of war and daily life. Your typical Roman legionare likely saw similar levels of violence (not including the circuses) outside of formal battle. This type of thing is completely different from the cannon fodder ducking artillery day in and day out at Verdun (almost no rifle casualties, mostly artillery) or dealing with driving through Iraq and wondering where the IEDs are. Presumably King Harold may have had a more sheltered life than his housecarls (but not by all that much).

[dps]

The descriptions of King Harold's actions at Hastings sound like PTSD to me, and it immediately followed from a bitter battle at Stamford Bridge. I suspect that the real difference between life since 1900 (and effecting WWI veterans and later) was the extreme difference between the violence of war and daily life. Your typical Roman legionare likely saw similar levels of violence (not including the circuses) outside of formal battle. This type of thing is completely different from the cannon fodder ducking artillery day in and day out at Verdun (almost no rifle casualties, mostly artillery) or dealing with driving through Iraq and wondering where the IEDs are. Presumably King Harold may have had a more sheltered life than his housecarls (but not by all that much).

I've seen Harold's actions at Hastings explained as simple fatigue. I don't know; I'm not a mental health professional, and even if I were, I wasn't there to examine Harold. (I might be old by the standards of this forum, but I ain't that old.

[wumpus]

I've seen Harold's actions at Hastings explained as simple fatigue. I don't know; I'm not a mental health professional, and even if I were, I wasn't there to examine Harold. (I might be old by the standards of this forum, but I ain't that old.

Could be. Of course remember that between "shell shock" and "PTSD" the same diagnoses was called "combat fatigue" (WWII/Korean police action).

My point was that it was unlikely that psychological effects would change significantly between modern and earlier people. And that Harold's actions weren't exactly logical for immediate stimulus, but might have made sense considering the entire year's stimulus.

[Dappershire]

There have been a lot of good answers here, and as someone with a lot of experience in this, I honestly feel you can go either way with whether or not a Paladin can contract PTSD.
However, no matter what your world's decision on the issue, I think its moot for your character. Your character is a Paladin. A Holy Warrior for his God. Do you really think any Paladin, suffering from the scenes that cause this issue wouldn't pray for deliverance? And do you think any God wouldn't fix their tool?
Paladins are the one class I can think of, who could, and would, be healed of the mental and spiritual damage PTSD would bring. Maybe Paladins can get PTSD. But I don't think any paladin could keep it.

That's not to say, if you want the personality traits for roleplay reasons, you can't make your Paladin depressive, or particularly stoic. Experiences -will- form a characters personality after all. But the triggers, the explosions of anger, the paranoia, I strongly feel that Paladins would be cured of this at the first symptom.
If you want someone who runs suicidally into danger, I suggest you fluff him to be more then averagely fervent in his vows.

[Jay R]

The simple answer is Yes, a paladin could get PTSD, if a DM thought that would make the game more fun.

I don't think that would make the game more fun, so in my world, no paladin will get PTSD.

No PC in my world will ever get any chronic mental condition that will prevent him or her from having full participation in the adventures.

[Satinavian]

No PC in my world will ever get any chronic mental condition that will prevent him or her from having full participation in the adventures.adventures.Not even in a nice game of Cthulhu ?

[Firechanter]

Just chiming in with my opinion: I feel that between their immunities to Fear and Disease, Paladins should not suffer from PTSD.
However, if you declare PTSD a _curse_…

[Milo v3]

PF has mental illness as afflictions but not technically diseases, so they can still get PTSD. (They are immune to addiction though, which is treated as a disease).

[dps]

The simple answer is Yes, a paladin could get PTSD, if a DM thought that would make the game more fun.

I don't think that would make the game more fun, so in my world, no paladin will get PTSD.



Yeah, ultimately, as with any other rule question, it's up to each DM as to what he wants in his game.

[ShaneMRoth]

If I'm the GM? No.

A paladin's immunity to disease is unqualified. All diseases, including supernatural diseases. Not all infectious diseases. All diseases.

The ruleset doesn't explicitly model for mental illness in the way that Call of Cthulhu does, but for the Powers That Be to forget to protect their champion from PTSD seems like a peculiar oversight.

If I allowed paladins to cross over into Call of Cthulhu, I'd rule that paladins are immune to SAN checks as well, immunity to fear effects plus immunity to disease equals no SAN checks.

If a GM did rule that a paladin was subject to PTSD, I wouldn't play a paladin in that setting.

Immunity to diseases, including mental diseases, doesn't seem excessive.

The paladin class has never seemed game-breaking to me. Why all the effort to nerf this class?

[Max_Killjoy]

I'd worry less about the particulars and peculiarities of how a game system classifies (or misclassifies) PTSD, or "sticking to the rules", and more about the spirit of the thing, and if/how all the players (GM and otherwise) want to deal with something like PTSD in the campaign.

[Milo v3]

A paladin's immunity to disease is unqualified. All diseases, including supernatural diseases. Not all infectious diseases. All diseases.
Except disease is a rules term, it only means what "disease" means in the game. Which doesn't include mental illness.


Why all the effort to nerf this class?
I can't really see how it'd be a nerf to paladin, since it'd be affecting all classes equally (paladins still better at resisting PTSD than other martials because of their good will saves + cha to will saves).

[Kane0]

Somehow i'm not convinced the D&D definition of disease matches up with the medical use.

[Prince Zahn]

I RPed PTSD in my Paladin a few years back. I can't say whether or not I was as accurate as I'd like to have been, or whether I did it justice by the standards of real people who have it. But it certainly made my paladin, and, by extension, our game that much more interesting and fun to play.

In the privacy of your standard gaming table, I don't see a reason why it should be forbidden to address mental illnesses in your campaign (such as PTSD), unless someone you know (directly or indirectly) is actually suffering from it, or has a problem with you doing that with your character. Paladin character are not an exception to this rule. with that said, I've learned a lot about it just reading through this thread. So if/when you address a mental illness in your campaign, the very least you should do is research it thoroughly prior to playing (I've learned that since then), because most of the time people want to address mental health problems in their campaigns for benign reasons, rather than outright being offensive, so if you must do it, do it justice. it's what the paladin would have wanted.

[Stealth Marmot]

Somehow i'm not convinced the D&D definition of disease matches up with the medical use.

I'm convinced that the D&D definition of disease is "Whatever the hell the game designer/DM decides it is".

[8BitNinja]

I'm convinced that the D&D definition of disease is "Whatever the hell the game designer/DM decides it is".

Apparently diseases are evil. However, many diseases are bacteria which are living creatures. They have animal intelligence, so therefore they should be neutral. I'm pretty sure D&D isn't the most accurate source for disease.

D&D is less accurate than WebMD, and that's saying something.

[Arbane]

Of course, if the guy who's immune to fear can get PTSD, it raises the obvious question of why all the OTHER characters aren't gibbering wrecks by level 5....

[Stealth Marmot]

The other classes have the benefit of not choosing the class that paints a giant "Torment me DM!" target on the character's back.

I mean if you are playing a paladin of COURSE the DM will decide that means you want your character to be tormented, driven towards evil, and constantly having to make impossible choices. The paladin's primary purpose is not smiting, or healing, it's acting as DM's chew toy so the other player characters don't have to.

What, did you play the paladin to have FUN? Ha! You play a paladin so the DM torches your character's family in front of you instead of some other player's family.

Edit: Forgot the blue.

[wumpus]

Of course, if the guy who's immune to fear can get PTSD, it raises the obvious question of why all the OTHER characters aren't gibbering wrecks by level 5....

Great saves against SAN rolls are a class feature of PCs (for anybody not playing Call of Cthulhu).

[Admiral Squish]

I haven't read all the way through the thread, but I will say if paladins experienced NO fear whatsoever, they would probably die almost immediately. If you felt no fear, you wouldn't feel an instinctual urge to avoid threats, to step out of the way of a sword or step away from the edge of a cliff of flee from the holwing banshee. I agree with the general sentiment express thus far that immunity to fear doesn't eliminate fear entirely, it merely prevents fear from actually affecting your actions. You still experience fear, on some level, but you can always overcome it.


The other classes have the benefit of not choosing the class that paints a giant "Torment me DM!" target on the character's back.

I mean if you are playing a paladin of COURSE the DM will decide that means you want your character to be tormented, driven towards evil, and constantly having to make impossible choices. The paladin's primary purpose is not smiting, or healing, it's acting as DM's chew toy so the other player characters don't have to.

What, did you play the paladin to have FUN? Ha! You play a paladin so the DM torches your character's family in front of you instead of some other player's family.

I do kinda agree with this sentiment, but in a less mean way. While all characters in a D&D game have their skills and strength tested, paladins have their morality and convictions tested as well. In choosing to play a paladin, you accept the limitations of the unbending moral code, just like a wizard accepts their need for eight hours of rest to prepare their spells, or a fighter accepts that their equipment is vulnerable and may be taken from them in certain situations. And you must ALSO accept that that moral code will be challenged by the DM. Some DMs are bad. Some DMs will lock a rogue/illusionist in an arena with an iron golem, or have rust monsters attack the fighter just before a boss fight, just like some DMs will put a paladin in a Trolley Dilemma and declare they fall no matter what they decide. A good DM, however, will challenge the paladin's morality, force them to make difficult decisions with real consequences, and, if they remain faithful in the face of temptation and act in accordance with their own sense of justice and morality, have them emerge stronger for it. The story of a pillar of virtue, surrounded by evil and temptation, persevering in the face of overwhelming odds... It has a certain appeal to it. And without some level of challenge, the story is no more satisfying than finding out the final boss of a level 20 dungeon is a level 1 goblin.

[8BitNinja]

The other classes have the benefit of not choosing the class that paints a giant "Torment me DM!" target on the character's back.

I mean if you are playing a paladin of COURSE the DM will decide that means you want your character to be tormented, driven towards evil, and constantly having to make impossible choices. The paladin's primary purpose is not smiting, or healing, it's acting as DM's chew toy so the other player characters don't have to.

What, did you play the paladin to have FUN? Ha! You play a paladin so the DM torches your character's family in front of you instead of some other player's family.

Edit: Forgot the blue.

You don't need the blue, with a lot of people, it isn't sarcastic

[Max_Killjoy]

All the more reason to make it blue...

[Stealth Marmot]

you don't need the blue, with a lot of people, it isn't sarcastic

It bloody well should be!

[wumpus]

It bloody well should be!

A lot depends on the setting. If you try to bring a RAW paladin into a "gritty" world, you are going to be the world's chew-toy. If you bring one into a high fantasy setting, the world can be expected to re-arrange itself to avoid giving the paladin hard choices. The Giant has gone to great lengths to show that paladins make great fictional heroes, but can be tricky to play and integrate into a party. I'd expect any "I make the decisions around here to adhere to the code" paladin to get the target painted on (by the rest of the party) pretty quick.

[Jay R]

A lot depends on the setting. If you try to bring a RAW paladin into a "gritty" world, you are going to be the world's chew-toy. If you bring one into a high fantasy setting, the world can be expected to re-arrange itself to avoid giving the paladin hard choices. The Giant has gone to great lengths to show that paladins make great fictional heroes, but can be tricky to play and integrate into a party. I'd expect any "I make the decisions around here to adhere to the code" paladin to get the target painted on (by the rest of the party) pretty quick.

Three of the last four games I've played, and one of the last two I've DMed, have had paladins. And you know what?

Neither the DM nor the other players are required to be jerks.

I know it sounds impossible, but technically, the rules do not require you to make the game unfun for other players.

[Max_Killjoy]

Three of the last four games I've played, and one of the last two I've DMed, have had paladins. And you know what?

Neither the DM nor the other players are required to be jerks.

I know it sounds impossible, but technically, the rules do not require you to make the game unfun for other players.

It's a two way street.

I've seen GMs who gleefully set out to crush the mind and soul of paladins.

I've seen paladin-players who think the setting and NPCs and everything should distort itself to avoid ANY difficult choices or moral questions for the paladin, and regard anything the paladin does as good because he's the paladin and the hero and good.

[Kalmageddon]

Yes, a Paladin can get PTSD. However, if you really have to do it, please do it right.
I've seen the term used far too often by people that experience mere distress.
PTSD is not distress, it's being locked in your own mind screaming, while you feel like you are living the same **** over again.
That's not something I would give to a character you intend to actually roleplay.
Just my 2 cents.

[robnar]

In my view, there's three things that kinda get lumped together in PTSD. Some have taken to calling it 'combat stress' as well. I am familiar with two of these.

1. Traumatic recall. Strykke, on the first page, described this well.


The other thing that is hallmark PTSD is intrusive thoughts. The 1000 yard stare. It's more about fixation than fear. PTSD happens when an event won't let you go. It always pops into your head. You dream about it every night.

2. 'Battle-mind'. This is the hyper-alertness and overreaction phenomenon that several posters, including Strykke, have described. For me, it was very much a habit gained from months on end of hyper-vigilance and extreme danger coming from out of nowhere.

3. Survivor's guilt. This is guilty or regretful feelings of whether or not you could've done something differently - saved a friend, avoided shooting somebody, etc. For me, this involved constantly replaying the situations.

None of these are mutually exclusive - you can have any, or all. I had 2 and 3, others I know had 1 and 3, others had the full monty. I know one rape victim who had a bad case of 1 and 2.

Personally, I think Paladins would be least-vulnerable to the first - the moral clarity and courage that I think the immunity to fear comes from reflects this. I think paladins would be most vulnerable to the third. I think it would be interesting to roleplay a paladin with a bad case of the second, as some decisions would be really hard.

One other note, the trauma in PTSD doesn't have to have happened to you. It can be something you witnessed, or did to another.

On a final note, the first Rambo movie is REALLY, REALLY good.

[Wardog]

Apparently diseases are evil. However, many diseases are bacteria which are living creatures. They have animal intelligence, so therefore they should be neutral. I'm pretty sure D&D isn't the most accurate source for disease.

D&D is less accurate than WebMD, and that's saying something.

By D&D rules, wouldn't bacteria be "mindless" "vermin" rather than "animals"? Although that would still make them neutral...

But do bacteria even exist (or cause disease) in D&D? I'm inclined to think that that would be one of the things where trying to apply real-world science would break the setting, because too many things are based on mythical or fantastical ideas about how they work. It would probably work better to assume diseases were caused by imbalanced humors, curses, evil spirits, wounded souls, etc.

[Max_Killjoy]

By D&D rules, wouldn't bacteria be "mindless" "vermin" rather than "animals"? Although that would still make them neutral...

But do bacteria even exist (or cause disease) in D&D? I'm inclined to think that that would be one of the things where trying to apply real-world science would break the setting, because too many things are based on mythical or fantastical ideas about how they work. It would probably work better to assume diseases were caused by imbalanced humors, curses, evil spirits, wounded souls, etc.

I recall a book where a healer working magic on a diseased patient comments on the "countless tiny demons" that are afflicting the person.

Not sure about D&D, but I think a fantasy setting can work without throwing modern science in the bin.

[8BitNinja]

In my view, there's three things that kinda get lumped together in PTSD. Some have taken to calling it 'combat stress' as well. I am familiar with two of these.

1. Traumatic recall. Strykke, on the first page, described this well.



2. 'Battle-mind'. This is the hyper-alertness and overreaction phenomenon that several posters, including Strykke, have described. For me, it was very much a habit gained from months on end of hyper-vigilance and extreme danger coming from out of nowhere.

3. Survivor's guilt. This is guilty or regretful feelings of whether or not you could've done something differently - saved a friend, avoided shooting somebody, etc. For me, this involved constantly replaying the situations.

None of these are mutually exclusive - you can have any, or all. I had 2 and 3, others I know had 1 and 3, others had the full monty. I know one rape victim who had a bad case of 1 and 2.

Personally, I think Paladins would be least-vulnerable to the first - the moral clarity and courage that I think the immunity to fear comes from reflects this. I think paladins would be most vulnerable to the third. I think it would be interesting to roleplay a paladin with a bad case of the second, as some decisions would be really hard.

One other note, the trauma in PTSD doesn't have to have happened to you. It can be something you witnessed, or did to another.

On a final note, the first Rambo movie is REALLY, REALLY good.

This list is convenient, now I can properly say the effects.

Turns out, the character I made only has number three. However, number 2 kicks in sometimes, but doesn't affect him as much.

[Jay R]

It's a two way street.

Agreed 100%.

I have never understood why people think the word "paladin" is the verbal component for a magic spell to compel all people - paladin player, other players, DM - to try to hurt the game for others.

[GungHo]

Agreed 100%.

I have never understood why people think the word "paladin" is the verbal component for a magic spell to compel all people - paladin player, other players, DM - to try to hurt the game for others.

Another reason why I like the paladin as a PrC. Everyone gets to decide if they really want to be a part of it or not. If people are going to be miserable about it, then just stay a fighter or a cleric or a warpriest or anything but the troll compelling device.

[Max_Killjoy]

Another reason why I like the paladin as a PrC. Everyone gets to decide if they really want to be a part of it or not. If people are going to be miserable about it, then just stay a fighter or a cleric or a warpriest or anything but the troll compelling device.

And it fits into the idea that being a Paladin is something earned, not something presumed.

[Milo v3]

And it fits into the idea that being a Paladin is something earned, not something presumed.

I still think Chosen One fits the paladin better than "I have years of my life working towards this thing I want". Earning it from having the right mindset/personality/heart fits better IMO than earning it from training.

[Max_Killjoy]

I still think Chosen One fits the paladin better than "I have years of my life working towards this thing I want". Earning it from having the right mindset/personality/heart fits better IMO than earning it from training.


I meant earning it by proving your character and judgement through action, rather than being handed the honor on a silver spoon platter.

But then, I've never cared for the notions of fate or destiny.

[Milo v3]

I meant earning it by proving your character and judgement through action, rather than being handed the honor on a silver spoon platter.
I don't really see how that has anything to do with it being a base class or prestige class. Only classes which get their abilities like that are sorcerers (who can't control their power at first and create disasters by accident) and warlocks (where getting powers without earning them properly is the whole point).

[Metahuman1]

Just glanced at the title and my first thought was "I dunno, but I'm quite certain a Paladin of Freedom doesn't.".

[Max_Killjoy]

I don't really see how that has anything to do with it being a base class or prestige class. Only classes which get their abilities like that are sorcerers (who can't control their power at first and create disasters by accident) and warlocks (where getting powers without earning them properly is the whole point).

The "base class" Paladin starts out raw, but immediately gets his powers by some sort of lucky accident of fate or destiny or whatever, or unearned favor from some god or the ambiguous and convenient "conceptual force of good".

The "prestige class" Paladin has a good deal of experience and (I would hope) has proven his character, judgement, and moral fiber repeatedly.

[Milo v3]

The "base class" Paladin starts out raw, but immediately gets his powers by some sort of lucky accident of fate or destiny or whatever, or unearned favor from some god or the ambiguous and convenient "conceptual force of good".
Umm... what makes you think the character hasn't earned it? Good only gives them the power of a paladin because of their moral compass and heart being pure enough. There's no reason to assume Good just chooses people arbitrarily.


The "prestige class" Paladin has a good deal of experience and (I would hope) has proven his character, judgement, and moral fiber repeatedly.
Except that such a prestige class would just have the prerequisite of "Be a loyal person with a good heart and a desire to help people"... which is less of a prerequisite than base classes like Druid or Wizard have. Characters have lives before they gain their first class level.

[Max_Killjoy]

Umm... what makes you think the character hasn't earned it? Good only gives them the power of a paladin because of their moral compass and heart being pure enough. There's no reason to assume Good just chooses people arbitrarily.


A person who has done nothing, who has faced no challenges and dealt with no hard choices, has not demonstrated a moral compass or a "pure heart".

I suppose you could have a setting in which "Good" just knows who is "inherently good" or something, and chooses them from birth?




Except that such a prestige class would just have the prerequisite of "Be a loyal person with a good heart and a desire to help people"...


Why would that be the case?

[Milo v3]

A person who has done nothing, who has faced no challenges and dealt with no hard choices, has not demonstrated a moral compass or a "pure heart".

Um... you don't have to be a experienced soldier in a war zone to have done something/been challenged/had to make moral choices. Nothing about that requires already having levels in a base class. Even then, you could easily have converted their Warrior levels.

Do you think most level 1 fighters have never seen combat? Did you think wizards got their levels from touching a spellbook rather than spend many years studying magic? Did you think druids just spontaneously knew druidic and the druid code of conduct? Did you think sorcerers have all their spells 100% under their control out of nowhere?

Characters have lives before you play them.


Why would that be the case?
Because being a paladin wouldn't really require any skills aside from that, no feats really are necessary, and putting a base attack bonus requirement just means "I don't want players to start as paladins because I want them to have done things" despite the fact the class system doesn't work that way and that characters generally have done things before play even regardless of their level.

[Max_Killjoy]

Um... you don't have to be a experienced soldier in a war zone to have done something/been challenged/had to make moral choices. Nothing about that requires already having levels in a base class. Even then, you could easily have converted their Warrior levels.

Do you think most level 1 fighters have never seen combat? Did you think wizards got their levels from touching a spellbook rather than spend many years studying magic? Did you think druids just spontaneously knew druidic and the druid code of conduct? Did you think sorcerers have all their spells 100% under their control out of nowhere?

Characters have lives before you play them.


Because being a paladin wouldn't really require any skills aside from that, no feats really are necessary, and putting a base attack bonus requirement just means "I don't want players to start as paladins because I want them to have done things" despite the fact the class system doesn't work that way and that characters generally have done things before play even regardless of their level.

No one said anything about warzones.

But obviously we have different ideas about what a starting character is in a zero-to-demigod system like D&D, and what level a character who'd already proven themselves worthy would have reached by having gone through enough of whatever it is in life that they had to go through to do so.

I can think of plenty of things to require of a character before they were Paladin-ready, but now that I think about it, most of those things are considered a sideshow at best by D&D, so maybe not.

[Milo v3]

No one said anything about warzones.
You're acting as if you already need to be a level six player character to be worthy of becoming a paladin. That's a lot of combat and disaster they have to live through.


But obviously we have different ideas about what a starting character is in a zero-to-demigod system like D&D, and what level a character who'd already proven themselves worthy would have reached by having gone through enough of whatever it is in life that they had to go through to do so.
Evidently so.


I can think of plenty of things to require of a character before they were Paladin-ready, but now that I think about it, most of those things are considered a sideshow at best by D&D, so maybe not.
That more just says "I keep using the word paladin to mean something completely different to everyone else" than "this is a problem with how D&D handles paladins".

I have issues with how paladins are handled in D&D, but them being an option at character creation is not one of them.

[Max_Killjoy]

You're acting as if you already need to be a level six player character to be worthy of becoming a paladin. That's a lot of combat and disaster they have to live through.


Not "acting as if" -- that's part of my position.




That more just says "I keep using the word paladin to mean something completely different to everyone else" than "this is a problem with how D&D handles paladins".


Not really.

A character could be required to have a minimum BAB, certain Skills (knowledge of their religion, some sort of healing skills, etc) and Feats, access to minimal Divine spellcasting (hey, a cleric level to go with those fighter levels), etc, before taking a level in a Paladin prestige class.


Or does Paladin really just mean that someone has the blessing and empowerment of some appropriate deity or convenient "Good" because said power "had a good feeling about this one"?

[Milo v3]

Not "acting as if" -- that's part of my position.
It's a position that has nothing to do with paladins in fiction though. With what you're suggesting, they may as well become paladins after their life of adventuring. There is no reason at all the character couldn't have already overcome challenges in their life which before you play them.


Not really.

A character could be required to have a minimum BAB
Why would they only empower people with heavy military experience?

certain Skills (knowledge of their religion, some sort of healing skills, etc)
Why would they only take the religious and medics?


access to minimal Divine spellcasting (hey, a cleric level to go with those fighter levels)
That would be pretty redundant.... Why would they need to invest paladin power into someone who is already a divine warrior who has had power invested within them? Why not invest that power into a place it would actually help?


Or does Paladin really just mean that someone has the blessing and empowerment of some appropriate deity or convenient "Good" because said power "had a good feeling about this one"?
The "good feeling" wouldn't be enough, they still have to do good and prove they have a good heart. None of that requires having already lived a life of adventuring though. It's called backstory.

[Max_Killjoy]

It's a position that has nothing to do with paladins in fiction though. With what you're suggesting, they may as well become paladins after their life of adventuring. There is no reason at all the character couldn't have already overcome challenges in their life which before you play them.


Why would they only empower people with heavy military experience?

Why would they only take the religious and medics?


That would be pretty redundant.... Why would they need to invest paladin power into someone who is already a divine warrior who has had power invested within them? Why not invest that power into a place it would actually help?


The "good feeling" wouldn't be enough, they still have to do good and prove they have a good heart. None of that requires having already lived a life of adventuring though. It's called backstory.


Again, why does this keep coming back to military experience? That's not a claim I made.

And just how much applicable backstory can someone have at level 1? What does level 1 represent? Published characters in various products over the years would seem to indicate that any sort of applicable backstory = more levels.


(BTW, my tone here is intended to be inquisitive, not confrontational... not sure how I'm coming across.)

[Milo v3]

Again, why does this keep coming back to military experience? That's not a claim I made.
Because that's basically what you're asking for if you require a character to have high bab for something. Lots of experience in combat and combat training.


And just how much applicable backstory can someone have at level 1? What does level 1 represent? Published characters in various products over the years would seem to indicate that any sort of applicable backstory = more levels.
Level 1 can represent anything from "farm-boy who awoken to his power in his first fight" to "construct who just woke up", "was raised into knighthood and has just returned from war" to "prince who has exiled himself after his family forced him to make unfair moral decisions as tests and is now living as a thieving nomad to survive", to "warrior who survived many wars, but only now is adventuring", to "spent 150 years training in a monastery learning martial arts", "hero who has accomplished many great deeds, but has grown rusty after years of retirement", to "priest who had gone on many pilgrimages through dangerous lands, but now they have been sent on a crusade for their god", etc. etc.

[Max_Killjoy]

Because that's basically what you're asking for if you require a character to have high bab for something. Lots of experience in combat and combat training.


OK, that's not what I think of as specifically "military", but I get what you mean here.




Level 1 can represent anything from "farm-boy who awoken to his power in his first fight" to "construct who just woke up", "was raised into knighthood and has just returned from war" to "prince who has exiled himself after his family forced him to make unfair moral decisions as tests and is now living as a thieving nomad to survive", to "warrior who survived many wars, but only now is adventuring", to "spent 150 years training in a monastery learning martial arts", "hero who has accomplished many great deeds, but has grown rusty after years of retirement", to "priest who had gone on many pilgrimages through dangerous lands, but now they have been sent on a crusade for their god", etc. etc.


Huh. Looking at that, I see a lot of different characters of different capabilities that don't all fit in the same box as modeled/mapped by "level 1", but I understand that D&D doesn't really work that way.

[Stealth Marmot]

Or does Paladin really just mean that someone has the blessing and empowerment of some appropriate deity or convenient "Good" because said power "had a good feeling about this one"?

According to the 3.5 text, it's pretty much exactly that.

[GungHo]

Umm... what makes you think the character hasn't earned it? Good only gives them the power of a paladin because of their moral compass and heart being pure enough. There's no reason to assume Good just chooses people arbitrarily.

Except that such a prestige class would just have the prerequisite of "Be a loyal person with a good heart and a desire to help people"... which is less of a prerequisite than base classes like Druid or Wizard have. Characters have lives before they gain their first class level.
At one time, Druids were a PrC. So were bards. I know that's a bit of a tangent, but just an observation that things move around.



Except that such a prestige class would just have the prerequisite of "Be a loyal person with a good heart and a desire to help people"... which is less of a prerequisite than base classes like Druid or Wizard have. Characters have lives before they gain their first class level.
Since I brought it up, I'd like a chance to clarify my thoughts before it's reduced like this, even if we ultimately probably won't agree. My initial approach to this is, admittedly, inspired by the Quest for Glory approach. The paladin (who could have been a fighter, a wizard, or a thief [though a lot of things that the thief does would disqualify him]) committed great deeds. He saved a barony from its own complacency and saved two major metropolises from the machinations of a powerful wizard, and did it while keeping to an honorable, charitable path. It's not just a job description or something he studied at paladin school. His honor lights the sword he earned from a paladin who noted his great deeds and deemed him worthy.

What it does for me, ultimately, is that it makes the paladin's path the hero's path where paladin-hood is awarded in the middle of an adventuring career. If I can get the DM and the party in on the journey, they can be part of the solution rather than finding ways to be diametrically opposed from the opening roll.


According to the 3.5 text, it's pretty much exactly that.
Yeah, we're just talking about the preferences at our own tables here. The rules pretty much say "you're chosen and you go to paladin school, which is likely an annex of the cleric church." Those snotty brats end up like Arthas.

[Milo v3]

At one time, Druids were a PrC. So were bards. I know that's a bit of a tangent, but just an observation that things move around.
Which didn't really make much sense as far as I've been told about it, since they apparently required things that aren't very related to druids or bards to become.


Since I brought it up, I'd like a chance to clarify my thoughts before it's reduced like this, even if we ultimately probably won't agree. My initial approach to this is, admittedly, inspired by the Quest for Glory approach. The paladin (who could have been a fighter, a wizard, or a thief [though a lot of things that the thief does would disqualify him]) committed great deeds. He saved a barony from its own complacency and saved two major metropolises from the machinations of a powerful wizard, and did it while keeping to an honorable, charitable path. It's not just a job description or something he studied at paladin school. His honor lights the sword he earned from a paladin who noted his great deeds and deemed him worthy.

What it does for me, ultimately, is that it makes the paladin's path the hero's path where paladin-hood is awarded in the middle of an adventuring career. If I can get the DM and the party in on the journey, they can be part of the solution rather than finding ways to be diametrically opposed from the opening roll.
Thing is, that can still happen with it as a base class. It just means it can happen to characters outside of the narrow window of "Skilled warrior with religious education".


Yeah, we're just talking about the preferences at our own tables here. The rules pretty much say "you're chosen and you go to paladin school, which is likely an annex of the cleric church." Those snotty brats end up like Arthas.
Note: What you're calling paladin school is "spending your youth being the squire and errandboy of a paladin so you understand what they have to deal with on a day by day basis and that you know humility". It's being chosen for your good heart by Good itself, and then having to spend your teen years under a heroic mentor as he survives horrific ordeals.

[Frosty]

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but in Pathfinder, there is a paladin archetype that supports a mentally-battered mindset.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/paladin/archetypes/paizo-paladin-archetypes/tortured-crusader-paladin-archetype/