Does Giant hate EVERY paladin?

[paladinofshojo]

I'm just wondering what's with Rich's totally negative perception of paladins, I mean I know his comic is about counter-stereotype but Rich only gave his paladins gave a DnD paladin's charisma or fighting ability, but not both:

examples: :miko:-over-bearing, samurai, monk-paladin who ALWAYS has to get her way, who's estimated level is 16, and STILL dies, assumably zero charisma

Hinjo-typical nice-guy, but apparently Giant hates him more than Miko, he is handed humiliated defeats by noted and unnoted henchman of superior forces such as:
:xykon: (I know what you may be thinking, but it's just a cheap immitation)
:redcloak: (effortlessly with JUST ONE spell)
and he even couldn't fend attacks from hired ninjas or even some nobody mercenary who was given parole due to martial circumstances. Apparently a member of a royal family, but loses his kingdom SHORTLY after he ascends the throne (can you say "cruel irony").

O'chul-a poor paladin who served as "cannon-fodder" for Xykon, he apparently got stuck paralyzed in a humiliating pose and for all we know is probably placed as Xykon's furniture ornimant in his dark tower.

Thanh- the newest paladin who gets dominated by the rookie of team evil......... People NEVER stop making cracks of it. Coincidently, he also loses his shoes to a Wight ( On the side-note, I was the first to pick that out and post it on the forums:smallbiggrin: )

[Kish]

I'm just wondering what's with Rich's totally negative perception of paladins, I mean I know his comic is about counter-stereotype but Rich only gave his paladins gave a DnD paladin's charisma or fighting ability, but not both:
Yes, you're right. It's worse, though. He apparently thinks bards are idiots!

And wizards are in love with the sounds of their own voices!

And clerics are boring!

And rogues are all greedy thieves!

And rangers are psychopaths!

(Because I just know someone will take me completely seriously if I don't write this: This is all sarcasm.)

[Raging_Pacifist]

I've heard this before and all I have to say, is by that logic you could say that Rich hates every class since all of the Order of the Stick are lop-sided or put in embaressing situations. In fact that happens to almost all characters. It only happens to pallies because the comic has so many. Lastly, Rich has said he personally dislikes paladins.

Edit: Slightly ninja'd

[Silver2195]

Don't underrate Hinjo. His "nobody attacks my dog!" scene was pretty cool. He certainly showed more competance in combat than non-paladins (and main characters) Elan and argueably Roy.

And don't forget Soon Kim.

[Vercingex]

Meh. Paladins get no love anyways. IMHO, they are the most misunderstood class in DnD. Almost every paladin is portrayed as some combination of hypocritical, stuck-up, judgmental, whiny, overbearing, intolerant, elitist, or any number of different negative personality traits.

I would like to point out that
A) Paladins have high charisma, and should be good at interacting with people
B) The Paladin code of conduct does not prohibit them from being nice, having fun, acting like ordinary people, etc.
C) I imagine that most Paladins become paladins to do good in the world, not to look down their noses at people
D) Paladins are GOOD people. I imagine some may be overzealous, but certainly not all

Rant aside, I think the paladins in OOTS are portrayed better than they are by lots of people. True, Miko is everyone's worst nightmare of what paladins are like, but most of the paladins are portrayed as decent- if somewhat strict people, rather than automated Judging Machines.

[Heritage]

Meh. Paladins get no love anyways. IMHO, they are the most misunderstood class in DnD. Almost every paladin is portrayed as some combination of hypocritical, stuck-up, judgmental, whiny, overbearing, intolerant, elitist, or any number of different negative personality traits.

I would like to point out that
A) Paladins have high charisma, and should be good at interacting with people
B) The Paladin code of conduct does not prohibit them from being nice, having fun, acting like ordinary people, etc.
C) I imagine that most Paladins become paladins to do good in the world, not to look down their noses at people
D) Paladins are GOOD people. I imagine some may be overzealous, but certainly not all

Rant aside, I think the paladins in OOTS are portrayed better than they are by lots of people. True, Miko is everyone's worst nightmare of what paladins are like, but most of the paladins are portrayed as decent- if somewhat strict people, rather than automated Judging Machines.

All of what you say is true, and one of these days I would love to play such a paladin, but many of the paladins I've played with in games have been very Miko-like. I think many players, but by no means all, don't know how to play them any better, and actually like all the negative stereotypes described :smallconfused:

As far as the characters the original poster listed, to me Miko is meant to represent palidins at they're worst, Hinjo at their best; he has suffered the same defeats the entire OotS has suffered, and still comes off as a good leader. Thanh and O'chul have had temporary setbacks, but I think they will eventually have their day.

[EvilElitest]

Paladins are my favorite class, but i see the Giant's point.
from
EE

[Quorothorn]

Isn't this brought up every couple months or so? Just wonderin'.

Anyway, considering how every single character in OotS has at least one somewhat glaring flaw and their fair share of humiliation-moments (it's that kind of thing that helps make a character a person, after all), I don't see how you can take, say Hinjo's defeat at the hands of Redcloak (one of the most powerful people in the entire 'verse, firing off his second-most powerful spell, one of the deadliest overall) as a sign that Rich is harbouring a grudge against Paladins. And Hinjo did not lose to the hecueva alone: he got jumped by two ninjas, caught between them and the hecueva (getting flanked is bad news, remember)...and that was after an extended bout against the hobgoblin horde. All in all, I'd say he accounted for himself pretty well simply by surviving (and distracting the Little Boy Blue and hecueva for the Giant Dwarf With Hammer). The Grand Larceny guy never even had a chance to shoot at Hinjo (thanks to the Sexy Shoeless God of War), so we have no idea what might have happened there.

Now, I don't know the exact quote of Rich on Paladins as a class, but my impression was that he merely dislikes the negative impact the class has had due to so many people playing it badly (not to mention the oft-debated wording in PHB on the class).

[Helanna]

As Hinjo says: http:[//www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0265.html] You didn't think all paladins were like her, did you? :smallbiggrin:

[Demented]

Lien.

She kicks ass, and is the only character in the entire OOTS, so far as I can recall, who hasn't been beaten.

[Dorizzit]

Paladins are my favorite class, but i see the Giant's point.
from
EE

The irony here is overwhelming.

[Turcano]

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/6616/worfnotagaintk3.gif

[Jimblee]

@Paladins being portrayed badly:

Its because they suppose a standard we cannot assume. They're divinely graced goodies to the point where they almost aren't human, and almost no one here can even begin to get into the mind of someone like that. Not to mention their complete lack of "bad-boy"-ness, which apparently is cool now

I personally think the class is a way for someone to chop out on good RP as they fill up a basically-to-be cookie-cutter with way too many restrictions and bonuses anyway. I say give them cleric spells, remove alignment, and let them do as they please, but I'm sure to get complaints without going into excruciating detail.

@The Giant hating paladins

No way. They get a hard wrap, but thats more plot. They, by far, get the coolest seats in the house. The OotS is comedic; the Sapphire Guard is badass. I mean, Hinjo alone.. And Miko - such a beautifully orchestrated fall he planned for her! Oh, theres nothing quite like knocking them Pallies down a notch, and a regicide t'boot!

[Dorizzit]

1. Its because they suppose a standard we cannot assume. They're divinely graced goodies to the point where they almost aren't human, and almost no one here can even begin to get into the mind of someone like that.
2. Not to mention their complete lack of "bad-boy"-ness, which apparently is cool now

3. I personally think the class is a way for someone to chop out on good RP as they fill up a basically-to-be cookie-cutter with
4. way too many restrictions and bonuses anyway.
-snipped and irrelevant-


I would like to state here and now that Paladin's are my favorite class, just to make sure there is no possible room for misinterpretation. I have divided the quoted post up for convenience.

1. :smallconfused: So what you're saying is that no one could possibly have an imagination? Just because they don't act that way in real life doesn't mean they can't analyze the thoughts or know what one would do in a circumstance. It's called Roleplaying.
2. Yeah well, a. That's stupid b. Do you know many people who play D&D that care about being cool?
3. So what you seem to be saying here is that there can only ever be nine personalities in D&D (one for each alignment combination). Every Chaotic Neutral or Neutral Evil character have the exact same personality as every other one, just like every Paladin is exactly the same as every other Paladin.
4. :smallconfused: wouldn't the fact they have so many restrictions mean it doesn't matter so much about the bonuses?

[Courier]

I think that paladins provide for very intriguing villains or at least character studies, much more so than the traditional antagonists.

[Icewalker]

I've heard this before and all I have to say, is by that logic you could say that Rich hates every class since all of the Order of the Stick are lop-sided or put in embaressing situations. In fact that happens to almost all characters. It only happens to pallies because the comic has so many. Lastly, Rich has said he personally dislikes paladins.

Edit: Slightly ninja'd

I thought he specifically said he didn't not like paladins. I could be completely wrong on that though.

I disagree to the overall idea of this thread, ie, if The Giant hated paladins, then why did he make a paladin-based culture in the first place? And why are all of them really awesome? Except for...one. Who you appear to be basing half your arguments on.


Also, I thought these threads died with Miko. Ah well.

[Raging_Pacifist]

I said in my post that he disliked paladins.

[EvilElitest]

The irony here is overwhelming.

eh? Tengu just traumatized me so i'm a little out of it

from
EE

[Icewalker]

I said in my post that he disliked paladins.

...I quoted your post, saying I thought he had said otherwise, ie "Really? I thought this."

[Jayngfet]

what about lien?

also I'm fairly sure in one article he said he played a paladin, of course he played it as a guy who didn't care about charging straight into a swinging scythe trap at 1st level for no reason other than it was the fastest way so get from point a to point b.

[Dorizzit]

eh? Tengu just traumatized me so i'm a little out of it

from
EE

User Name...Favorite Class...etc.

Edit: I believe Rich has stated in the past a dislike of paladins, although it may only be badly played ones.

[Lizard Lord]

I like Big Ears, from Goblins interpretation of paladins. He actually focuses more on the self sacrifice thing that paladins are meant for then anything else. When Chief asks why anyone would want to be a paladin Ears reply is simple enough.
"So others don't have to."

Big Ears proves that not all paladins are self righteous zealots with sticks up their but.

[The Extinguisher]

Two Words: Bandana Paladin.

Anyone who where's a bandana like that HAS to be really cool, and powerful.

[Bayar]

the bandana gives a +10 to awesome !

Also, a paladin that is not overzealous: Elven paladins. Elves tend to have a broader perspective due to their long lifespan.

[Shatteredtower]

"Personally, while there's always a place for the shining knight in fantasy roleplaying, I believe that the class as written actually encourages a type of dysfunction within roleplaying groups." -- Rich Burlew on paladins (No Cure for the Paladin Blues, first paragraph of "The Paladin Herself", found at the start of Chapter Five)

I don't see this as dislike for paladins. I see it as a dislike for a feature that has caused so many players feel entitled -- even required -- to boss all the other players around. It also hasn't helped that many DMs have felt obligated to force paladins to fall for not doing this -- to say nothing of those DMs who've acted as though it's their duty to bring paladins down by any means available to them, including the most arbitrary rulings.

("You fell because you gave the beggar a coin without checking his alignment first. No, you'd have fallen if you attacked him too. What?")

[kpenguin]

I don't think that Rich hates paladins, or at least the concept of paladins. Rather, I think he believes that paladins are a poorly written class that encourages (or even forces) players to act in a way that creates dysfunctional party dynamics.

[toysailor]

It is funny when you poke fun at overly-serious folk.

[the_tick_rules]

of course, we all know the giant has severe rage issues. i hear OJ is afraid of him. (Internet sarcasm, it's hard to do.)

[Bayar]

of course, we all know the giant has severe rage issues. i hear OJ is afraid of him. (Internet sarcasm, it's hard to do.)

what ?:smallconfused:

[Avilan the Grey]

(Yay, first post ever on these forums!)

...Paladins are just so incredible easy to make fun of because it is so easy to play them as sticks-up-yours walking around telling people what to do and slaughter everyone that pings evil for no reason... (as stated a lot in these forums). Everybody likes to see the local Better-than-you-snobby-******* cut down to size. Repeatedly, if necessary.

1) Paladins are not perfect.
2) Not all Paladins are the same.
3) Even Paladins played as I think they should be are prone to experience trouble due to their God(s) given need to sacrifice themselves for others.

Hinjo is a good Paladin, but being a Pally does not mean he is invincible. If the "unnoted henchman" is of high enough level, why would he be a pushover for a Paladin? And do you know for sure what level those ninjas were?

...Sidenote: in actual play, how many times have you seen the blundering noble hero being overcome by three kobolds with a good plan? If the answer is "never", then I pity you. :smallbiggrin:

[Icewalker]

Welcome to the forums Avilan.

Yeah, I think that Rich's view on this is that it is a badly constructed class, but not a bad idea. Just badly put together. I run paladins with far less strict guidelines as their rules so as to not put in arbitrary conflict/falling.

[Avilan the Grey]

Welcome to the forums Avilan.

Yeah, I think that Rich's view on this is that it is a badly constructed class, but not a bad idea. Just badly put together. I run paladins with far less strict guidelines as their rules so as to not put in arbitrary conflict/falling.

Thanks.

You don't even have to soften the guidelines that much to make it playable in a very realistic way. Besides, people tend to assume the actual restrictions are even stronger than they actually are (although I admit it is up to DM to decide):
Many assume that celibacy is somehow mandatory for all Paladins, for example, or that casual relations between uncommitted adults is an "act of chaos", or even "act of evil"...
Depending on the setting, and specifically the God(s) the Paladin serves, it might be, or it might not. A setting where the Goddess of love both has Paladins in her service and for example her temples serves as bordellos, for example, definitely puts the Paladin in a new light :smalltongue:.
A Paladin of Tor (if there is such a thing in the OotS universe) would probably both be allowed to drink alcohol and have a roll in the hey as long as it doesn't interfere with his duty.

[Mordokai]

Welcome to the forum from my side as well.

As so many have said before, I think paladins are just portrayed poorly and played wrongly. I haven't played paladin in pnp yet(I have intent on doing so soon) but everytime I choose to play paladin in computer games I try to make him more like Hinjo and less like Miko. I think that paladins are misunderstood because of the way they are played and not every single one of them has to be self righteous jerk and zealot.

[Avilan the Grey]

Welcome to the forum from my side as well.

As so many have said before, I think paladins are just portrayed poorly and played wrongly. I haven't played paladin in pnp yet(I have intent on doing so soon) but everytime I choose to play paladin in computer games I try to make him more like Hinjo and less like Miko. I think that paladins are misunderstood because of the way they are played and not every single one of them has to be self righteous jerk and zealot.

I do not often play them, and my best memory is actually from Baldur's Gate II: I played a paladin in one of my runs through and I ended up in the romance option with Viconia (mmmmmmmmm... I miss her... :tongue: ). It is a bigger victory for Good to convert than to destroy, isn't it?

[Spiryt]

:miko: assumably zero charisma

You are sure we're reading the same comic ?

[King of Nowhere]

The Giant stated, both in No cure and in some gaming article in this site, that many paladins suffers from the "police syndrome", ie they feel entitled to control the party, and that caused hard feelings between players in many groups. But he don't dislikes the class. I see no evidence for this.
In that article he suggested some alternatives rules to improve paladins, because he thinks that the class is badly written.
OOTS is full of paladins, and they are equally divided among bad ones (Miko, paladins in Start of Darkness, paladin in Origin) and good (Hinjo, Lien, O-Chul and other minor characters).
I think it's also a realistic feature: a paldin is supposed to be good and pure and right and better than other people, so a paladin may be tempted to suppose the same of himself. Once you think you are better than other people, you can treat them badly because they're worse than you. It would be a common temptation for every paladin, and some of them would inevitably fall to it. Thus, we have both good and bad paladins.
Also, remember that we've only see members of the sapphire guard until now; the Sapphire Guard is organized as a military-feudal corp, and many of his members are nobles in a society where nobles rules other people. They are used to order everybody. Other paladins may behave differently.

P.S. Trying to write down my toughts on that argument made me wish I knew english better.

[Yoritomo Himeko]

If Rich hates paladins so much, then why did they dominate the last story arc? Why were the OOTS pushed into the background while he focused on the Sapphire Guard?

Personally, I am sick of these paladins. They don't add anything to the story. I really hope we see the last of them once Azure City is liberated.

Then maybe the OOTS can be the stars of the comic again.

[FujinAkari]

Why were the OOTS pushed into the background while he focused on the Sapphire Guard?

Are you reading the same comic I am?

[Vercingex]

(from the SRD)
Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

I admit, that can be tough, depending on your playgroup (If you have Belkar in your party, for instance).

Still think that, especially if your DM is a bit liberal about the whole Code of Conduct/Associates thing, it's possible to play a likeable paladin.

[Runa]

Thanks.

You don't even have to soften the guidelines that much to make it playable in a very realistic way. Besides, people tend to assume the actual restrictions are even stronger than they actually are (although I admit it is up to DM to decide):
Many assume that celibacy is somehow mandatory for all Paladins, for example, or that casual relations between uncommitted adults is an "act of chaos", or even "act of evil"...
Depending on the setting, and specifically the God(s) the Paladin serves, it might be, or it might not. A setting where the Goddess of love both has Paladins in her service and for example her temples serves as bordellos, for example, definitely puts the Paladin in a new light :smalltongue:.
A Paladin of Tor (if there is such a thing in the OotS universe) would probably both be allowed to drink alcohol and have a roll in the hey as long as it doesn't interfere with his duty.

I SO TOTALLY want to play a Lawful Good Paladin serving a Goddess of Love now. :smallbiggrin: "Come on guys, Make Love, Not War! What? This? I only carry this to help defenseless villagers against cruel and vicious tyrants, and mercenaries and the occasional rapist, who would of course be or have been committing the worst kind of sacrilige in the eyes of my Go-... um, no. No really. Seriously. I do."

She could even be from a culture that has things like this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inara_Serra)! 'Cept without having to be d20 Future.

Preserving the Safety and Defending the Civil Rights of Temple Prostitutes Everywhere... :smalltongue:

(Temple prostitutes and/or church-sanctioned prostitutes were actually fairly if not extremely common before the late Christian era, especially in places like Mesopotamia, where sex was indeed viewed as a perfectly legitimate way to experience the Divine by proxy of a very, very special kind of priestess. A temple prostitute of this kind is even credited with civilizing Enkidu in the Epic of Gilgamesh. By bedding him for an entire week straight. Best. Epic poem. EVER.)

Next time I get to create my own PC character, I am so. Totally. Doing that concept. :smallbiggrin:

-Runa

[Yoritomo Himeko]

Are you reading the same comic I am?


Well, not recently, but for a while, it seemed like the comic was more about Azure City then it was about the OOTS and the gates. This is the reason why I never liked the Azure City arc. And I hated the fact that it was Miko who destroyed the gate, changing the course of the plot.

Anyway, I know Thanh has been the only paladin around for the last couple of months, I was just saying that the paladins got a lot of story time for supporting characters. That's all.

I do like how it looks like the OOTS is finally getting back together.

[Eran of Arcadia]

My $.02:

Bear in mind that I have never actually played DnD as such. However, whenever I play a d20 or similar RPG (in computer games, which does limit my actions), I will play the paladin or nearest equivalent, and in fact it is the class that I see myself most like in real life. (Hence my avatar and all that.)

Part of the problem may be that a lot of people associate paladins with what they think of stereotypical religious people in real life; that may include being hypocritical, judgmental, overbearing, etc. This is probably not entirely fair to religious people in general (although certainly to some it is accurate) and it has less bearing on fictitious people.

And there are myriad ways to be Lawful Good. Being Lawful Stupid like Miko was is certainly a legitimate way; I try to do it differently.

[strayth]

bards are idiots!


(Because I just know someone will take me completely seriously if I don't write this: This is all sarcasm.)

Whew! :smallsmile:

[Pie Guy]

I tend towards spellcasters, so this may have no point.

In my group we are usually all chaotic evil and thus any paladin would immeadiattly and painfully be killed.(much like most other people)

In conclusion, in my group, Paladin = ('') = death
The X is supposed to be here--------><

[ZeroNumerous]

To the OP: I dunno about Rich, but I certainly do! :smalltongue:

Seriously though, Rich either hates all D&D or is just a very good writer of parody. :smallbiggrin:

[PaladinFreak]

Does that mean you hate me too? :smallfrown:

IMHO, the Paladin class is an awsome idea, but it is badly implemented. I personally love the idea of a having a class that personifies the Knight-in-Shining-Armor thing, but still, Paladin as it stands is pretty messed up.

[The Extinguisher]

I have a tip for all this Paladin hate.
Don't play them in evil parties or neutral parties who are likely to toe the line. Duh. They're designed for Good parties! *sigh*

It's like playing an assassin in a party full of good aligned characters. It doesn't make sense.

[Morgan Wick]

Lien.

She kicks ass, and is the only character in the entire OOTS, so far as I can recall, who hasn't been beaten.

Um, has she even had a chance to be beaten? Have we seen her in combat much at all?

I think part of the bad rap about paladins comes from the fact that they seem like a) a Mary Sue class and b) just plain boring in a story. The latter is especially pertinent where OOTS is concerned.


4. :smallconfused: wouldn't the fact they have so many restrictions mean it doesn't matter so much about the bonuses?

I think Jimblee was making a case as to why paladins are unpopular in D&D, and both restrictions and bonuses complicate things for a DM and for players.



:miko:assumedly zero charismaYou are sure we're reading the same comic ?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm#charismaCha


Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. This ability represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting.
"Force of personality"? Maybe. The rest doesn't seem to describe Miko that well. I especially have trouble with "ability to lead".


I think it's also a realistic feature: a paldin is supposed to be good and pure and right and better than other people, so a paladin may be tempted to suppose the same of himself. Once you think you are better than other people, you can treat them badly because they're worse than you. It would be a common temptation for every paladin, and some of them would inevitably fall to it. Thus, we have both good and bad paladins.

And there would be no need for "fallen" paladins if there weren't bad ones.

[Demented]

Um, has she even had a chance to be beaten? Have we seen her in combat much at all?

The closest to being beaten as she ever gets, and that requires a fumble. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0473.html) She still manages to kill two more hobgoblins, on top of 4 already seen dead, while fighting solo. (Not to mention "about six disembowelment threats", only one accounted for.)

Here she serves up some sushi! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0479.html)

Not technically seen in combat, but there's no reason she wouldn't be. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0507.html)

[Morgan Wick]

The closest to being beaten as she ever gets, and that requires a fumble. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0473.html) She still manages to kill two more hobgoblins, on top of 4 already seen dead, while fighting solo. (Not to mention "about six disembowelment threats", only one accounted for.)

Here she serves up some sushi! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0479.html)

Not technically seen in combat, but there's no reason she wouldn't be. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0507.html)

Never mind, I had her mixed up with Niu.

[KBF]

"Force of personality"? Maybe. The rest doesn't seem to describe Miko that well. I especially have trouble with "ability to lead".


"This ability represents actual strength of personality,"

Miko gets VERY emotional, forcing her personality on EVERYBODY.


"...not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting."

'Nuff said?

[Avilan the Grey]

I admit, that can be tough, depending on your playgroup (If you have Belkar in your party, for instance).

Still think that, especially if your DM is a bit liberal about the whole Code of Conduct/Associates thing, it's possible to play a likeable paladin.

Yes, the last bit from the SRD is the only thing that MUST be softened a bit I think, but then it depends on how your DM and players handle the aligment issue.
I have not played much (A)D&D, mostly only in CRPGs (I started with EoB, so it was a while ago). (Sidenote, I guess it shows how much D&D-based CRPGs I have played that I feel totally at home with concepts like TAC0, Algiments, etc :smallbiggrin: ).
Anyway, back to the algiment issue: The few games I have played has turned them upside down: Our group has always played the aligments to be the sum of your actions, not the tool to restrict your actions. We did take the cue from Baldur's gate and other CRPGs: You play your character as you see fit, and the DM keeps track of what it does to your aligment.
A paladin has to behave, or his algiment shifts and he will fall, but it is just as "easy" for a Chaotic Evil character to suddenly find herself Chaotic Neutral. Aligment for Mortals are never purely Genetic, it is to at least 50% enviroment when we play. (See Viconia in Baldur's Gate II, for example).

Anyway, back to the associates: A paladin would not actively choose to pick up helpers, "buddies" etc that are evil, but if you have a quest, and you end up in a group that contains an evil character or two, that is a completely different thing the way we play it. Of course he or she would keep an eye on these characters, and sometimes more than that, but to reach the common goal they would try to work together.

[Roderick_BR]

I don't think Hinjo was given humiliating defeats as a paladin.
When he fought Miko, it was clear that she was stronger. It took both Hinjo and Roy to put her down.
When he was attacked by the ninjas, he was taken by surprise in the middle of a battle by TWO of them, and one of the ninjas took on the huekuva by himself, needing Durkon's help to take him out, meaning that the ninjas where that powerful.

Other than that, most of his defeats were as a city leader, not as a paladin. Ye, comanding an army in a mostly hopeless fight, long enough to rescue as many citizens as possible. That would happen to any leader. And he was successful enough.

If anything, I'd say that Hinjo, thus far, has been Rich's concept of how a paladin should be, coupled with the need for a leading figure for the local NPC's army.

Miko was unlucky to be picked to represent the typical paladin we see in many gaming tables.

Edit:

Anyway, back to the associates: A paladin would not actively choose to pick up helpers, "buddies" etc that are evil, but if you have a quest, and you end up in a group that contains an evil character or two, that is a completely different thing the way we play it. Of course he or she would keep an eye on these characters, and sometimes more than that, but to reach the common goal they would try to work together.
Remember the keyword is "willing". Thanh, for example, complains often that he needs to work with Belkar.

[The Hop Goblin]

Rich has said in the past he does not like Paladins because the way they are typically played - and that the wording of the overall class setup nudges players to play them in that way.

It's not a conspiracy - there have been fantastic examples of Paladins in his series (Not S.O.D. and Not Miko).

I agree that the class rules on Paladin-hood should be somewhat less restrictive (less alignment restrictions, for example) and have the strict Paladin rule-set should be applied for a speciality Paladin Prestige class.

[Jimblee]

Wow, late response on my part


1. :smallconfused: So what you're saying is that no one could possibly have an imagination? Just because they don't act that way in real life doesn't mean they can't analyze the thoughts or know what one would do in a circumstance. It's called Roleplaying.

Name and describe a color which you have never seen before. Describe in detail what it feels like to give birth. Anyway, I've never seen anyone fit up to their standards, be it in novels, OotS, or tabletop. I suppose not meeting their standards adds to roleplay, but it does, none the less, detract form their portrayal as, well, bad. Which was what I was commenting on.

Though I'm sure you can do it if you can really get into it


Yeah well, a. That's stupid b. Do you know many people who play D&D that care about being cool?

Many, many people do. Maybe not cool as in the traditional cheerleader/football captain cool, but very few make complete idiots of themselves. And even less want to roleplay as someone they don't think is cool. I mean, can you tell me that you thought your most recent character was a stupid concept from the start?


3. So what you seem to be saying here is that there can only ever be nine personalities in D&D (one for each alignment combination). Every Chaotic Neutral or Neutral Evil character have the exact same personality as every other one, just like every Paladin is exactly the same as every other Paladin.

Not that I said "Basically-to-be", as well as never mentioned alignment. Between a Paladin code, lawful good, and direct orders from a good deity, theres little wriggle room for anything creative, in my opinion. Sure, you can hate onions or think elves are inferior, but in the end, you're still just "A good guy who upholds ideals, and fights evil".

You can add raisins to a cookie, but it still fits in the cutter


]4. :smallconfused: wouldn't the fact they have so many restrictions mean it doesn't matter so much about the bonuses?

Yeah, thats true. I did mean that they have too many restrictions RP-wise, however. Note the "I personally": I don't like playing them because of this fact

[Dorizzit]

Name and describe a color which you have never seen before. Describe in detail what it feels like to give birth. Anyway, I've never seen anyone fit up to their standards, be it in novels, OotS, or tabletop. I suppose not meeting their standards adds to roleplay, but it does, none the less, detract form their portrayal as, well, bad. Which was what I was commenting on.

Though I'm sure you can do it if you can really get into it


The defense rests.



Many, many people do. Maybe not cool as in the traditional cheerleader/football captain cool, but very few make complete idiots of themselves. And even less want to roleplay as someone they don't think is cool. I mean, can you tell me that you thought your most recent character was a stupid concept from the start?


Fair enough, but there's a big difference between someone who doesn't care about being cool and someone who makes a complete fool of them self.



Not that I said "Basically-to-be", as well as never mentioned alignment. Between a Paladin code, lawful good, and direct orders from a good deity, theres little wriggle room for anything creative, in my opinion. Sure, you can hate onions or think elves are inferior, but in the end, you're still just "A good guy who upholds ideals, and fights evil".

You can add raisins to a cookie, but it still fits in the cutter


Yeah, there can be no difference between backstory, philosophy, methods, personality, and personal variations of a pretty broad belief system. No wriggle room at all, certainly.

[Callista]

I'll admit that Paladins have RP drawbacks, but I take it as a challenge. Every time I play one, I want it to be the sort of character that's known by his name instead of his class. Somebody with personality rather than just a bland, annoying, walking code of honor.

Tip: Don't play a guy whose personality precludes paladinhood. Kind of snaps the suspension of disbelief... worse than Robin Hood signing up to be a tax collector.

[Jimblee]

The defense rests.

Well, excuse me for trying to end a pointless argument




Fair enough, but there's a big difference between someone who doesn't care about being cool and someone who makes a complete fool of them self.

Then you agree that you actively avoid making characters you find to be foolish and uncool? I'm going to go ahead and argue that avoiding bad characters is just the same as seeking good characters. Although it sounds to me like you strive to be mediocre?




Yeah, there can be no difference between backstory, philosophy, methods, personality, and personal variations of a pretty broad belief system. No wriggle room at all, certainly.

So, again, you agree that they are simply cookie cutters, giving you only the liberty of a few additives to the mix?

But I hate this process. Some people like complicated characters, some people like elaborate shows. Some like the basics, some can't stay content with that. Think what you will

[EvilElitest]

User Name...Favorite Class...etc.



Ah, yes, yes it is
from
EE

[VanBuren]

So, again, you agree that they are simply cookie cutters, giving you only the liberty of a few additives to the mix?

But I hate this process. Some people like complicated characters, some people like elaborate shows. Some like the basics, some can't stay content with that. Think what you will

I don't think that was him agreeing, actually. My tastebuds may be off-kilter, but I think a tasted a fairly liberal seasoning of sarcasm.

[The gF]

So, again, you agree that they are simply cookie cutters, giving you only the liberty of a few additives to the mix?

But I hate this process. Some people like complicated characters, some people like elaborate shows. Some like the basics, some can't stay content with that. Think what you will

Now, unless you, too, were being sarcastic, which seems unlikely considering the seriousness of your post, I have to say it's painfully clear that you missed his sarcasm entirely.

[Dorizzit]

Then you agree that you actively avoid making characters you find to be foolish and uncool? I'm going to go ahead and argue that avoiding bad characters is just the same as seeking good characters. Although it sounds to me like you strive to be mediocre?

All I'm saying is that not everyone likes the current trends. I, for one, almost never play evil characters. You seem to be assuming that paladins are just automatically bad characters.
Thanks, that was kind and necessary.


So, again, you agree that they are simply cookie cutters, giving you only the liberty of a few additives to the mix?

*Facepalm* No. I was being sarcastic. Those are all big areas to fill in. One paladin could be a brutal warrior seeking nothing less than the utter annihilation of evil. One could be a dashing swordsman with great personal magnetism, who outwits his opponents as much as he outfights them. Yet another could be a knight in shining armor, leading the good fight with his god-given might. You saying all paladins are alike is like saying that everyone in any given organization is a clone, just because they have the same goals.

[Avilan the Grey]

Then you agree that you actively avoid making characters you find to be foolish and uncool? I'm going to go ahead and argue that avoiding bad characters is just the same as seeking good characters. Although it sounds to me like you strive to be mediocre?

It depends on game and setting. In D&D I tend to play functional characters, more than cool. Because just like the totally uncool ones the überly cool ones tend to be very ineffective in the survival-department. Now please note that I would never play a character I found boring, I am just saying that characters built to be cool as their primary characteristic tend to be really ineffective when they meet the DM-controlled world.

Now I remember fondly my totally and deliberately uncool character in D6 Star Wars. But in that Universe (more so than in the game, maybe but anyway) Uncool fits.

[SPoD]

Yes, Rich hates paladins. That's why we've seen more named characters with the paladin class than any other, with a wide variety of personalities and story roles. Because he hates them and wishes they would go away, and the best way to make them go away is to include as many of them in your story as possible.

Rich's favorite class is, obviously, the monk, which you can see from his steadfast refusal to have even one single-classed monk appear in the comic.

[Niknokitueu]

I'm sorry, but I feel my sarcasm detector may be malfunctioning... :smallbiggrin:

Have Fun!
Niknokitueu

[Quorothorn]

Yes, Rich hates paladins. That's why we've seen more named characters with the paladin class than any other, with a wide variety of personalities and story roles. Because he hates them and wishes they would go away, and the best way to make them go away is to include as many of them in your story as possible.

Rich's favorite class is, obviously, the monk, which you can see from his steadfast refusal to have even one single-classed monk appear in the comic.

Well, a monk showed up in OtOoPCs...and got neatly demoralized by the Belkster. :smallbiggrin:

[Callista]

"demolished", not "demoralized"...

</picky editing>

[Quorothorn]

"demolished", not "demoralized"...

</picky editing>

Demolished, demoralized, destroyed, devastated...you can apply a whole lot of "de"s to that event, that's for sure. :smallsmile:

[The Hop Goblin]

I've never seen anyone fit up to their standards, be it in novels, OotS, or tabletop. I suppose not meeting their standards adds to roleplay, but it does, none the less, detract form their portrayal as, well, bad. Which was what I was commenting on.

Though I'm sure you can do it if you can really get into it

I suggest you read The Deed of Paksenarrion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deed_of_Paksenarrion) then. It is perhaps the only account of being a Paladin that I have seen to portray paladins as something other than an Televangelist-with-a-sword.

Moreover, I suggest everyone read it - as it is a tremendously good fantasy book.