Help for the Goodest of the Good Guys!

[Armoury99]

Hi all, some quick help needed here!

I'm putting together a game based on historical and legendary archtypes. The sort of mish-mash world where Sinbad can fight the armies of Julius Ceasar, assisted by Merlin and Loki. I'm trying to come up with legendary and historical examples (not straight fiction) for each of the classes, and I've hit a snag: Paladins.

In most games, the image of paladins are inextricably tied to knights. Its easy to point players in the direction of Joan of Arc or Roland, or Saladin, but once I get to "lawful good fighting hero but not a king or knight" I'm totally stumped.

Any ideas?

[Emperor Tippy]

There just aren't that many. Lawful Good is the rarest of real life alignments, and its even rarer in the context of what makes it into recorded history. Paladins are also holy warriors. Which immediately limits you too the warrior class, the knights if you are talking the middle ages.

[Armoury99]

There just aren't that many. Lawful Good is the rarest of real life alignments, and its even rarer in the context of what makes it into recorded history.

I know, but there must be somebody nice out there!

[Riffington]

Judah Maccabee
Hector
George Washington

[Thane of Fife]

Cincinnatus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnatus) probably qualifies as a Paladin.

[Emperor Tippy]

I know, but there must be somebody nice out there!

The problem isn't that there isn't nice people out there, there are. It's that they don't tend to reach positions that would get them mentioned in histories. And those that do are rarely warriors.

Historians (excluding the last hundred years or so) mostly write about wars and conflicts and those in positions of power. This immediately means that we have no record of 99.9% of the population (prolly higher than that actually). Out of our small sample size a disproportionately large number are the powerful in society, who are rarely lawful good for lots of reasons that I won't go into here. Those that aren't tend to be martial figures who have distinguished themselves in battle sufficiently to gain a place in the history books. These tend to be the "knights" of the society.

If you just wanted lawful good historical figures, they can be provided. But rarely do you get the combination of historical figure, lawful good, and holy warrior. Remember, a lawful good warrior who isn't fighting for his god isn't a paladin, holy is as important as warrior.

Judah Maccabee is prolly good enough for your purposes but he is close to being a "king".

[Satyr]

Trying to fit real world personalities into the framework of the DnD alignment system will either be ridiculous, frustrating, or both. The system is too narrow-minded and monochrome to deal with the real world and its mostly quite complex moral patterns.

There is also the historical Paladine / Palatinus terminology, which has only very little to do with a "lawful good fighting hero but not a king or knight". Historically, Paladines were courtiers or clerks with adinistrative and judical fuctions. Not very glamorous.

And no, there weren't many nice people. You could argue, that truly nice people are still hard to find.

[Tengu_temp]

Trying to fit real world personalities into the framework of the DnD alignment system will either be ridiculous, frustrating, or both. The system is too narrow-minded and monochrome to deal with the real world and its mostly quite complex moral patterns.

There is also the historical Paladine / Palatinus terminology, which has only very little to do with a "lawful good fighting hero but not a king or knight". Historically, Paladines were courtiers or clerks with adinistrative and judical fuctions. Not very glamorous.

And no, there weren't many nice people. You could argue, that truly nice people are still hard to find.

The OP asks for archetypes, not 100% historical accuracy. Thank you, come again.

I'd second George Washington.

[Emperor Tippy]

I'd second George Washington.

He said no king's. Assuming the OP was using King to heads of state in general the Washington is excluded.

[Piedmon_Sama]

I know he wasn't in most ways a pillar of moral uprightness and whatnot, but Richard the Lionheart might be a good example of what a "Paladin King" presiding over a feudal system would be like. He basically

1) Almost never actually was in England, during his lifetime

2) Left his Barons free to do pretty much whatever they wanted, provided they regularly payed their feudal dues in order to finance his wars.

3) Was extravagantly popular with both the nobility and common-folk of England, since in the Medieval imagination a king's chief responsibility was to protect the realm rather than, say, actually manage it. Richard was, therefore, thought to be a most holy and worthy king since he never actually came home to do the job of ruling.

[Draken]

Not being a king I can understand, but why not being a knight? Paladins are by definition, holy knights aren't they?

That said, how about Percival (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival)? He seens fairly fitting for the archetipe of paladin.

[snoopy13a]

Athos of the Three Musketeers? He's the closest of the four (including D'Artagnan) to being LG (I'd put him as either LG or LN, Aramis and D'Artagnan as NG or N, and Porthos as CG or CN).

But the Musketeers are similar to knights in many ways. They are the king's bodyguard company and considered elite soldiers.

Zorro could be close but he may fall in CG or NG range. The Scarlet Pimperal is a possiblity but he may not be Lawful Good either.

Friar Tuck could be considered Lawful Good but he isn't really a hero and if we count him we might as well count Maid Marian :smalltongue:

[jamroar]

I know, but there must be somebody nice out there!

Solomon Kane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Kane), Gabriel Van Helsing, and other righteous monster smiting hunter types.

Non-fictional, I can't think of offhand.

[Tengu_temp]

Nelson Mandela, maybe? Not much of a warrior, though.

[Starbuck_II]

Noah from the Bible. He built an ark. He was lawful and Good (saved as many as would go; no one in town wanted to go; they did'nt believe him).

He was never a King I thought (he was a Captain of the boat I guess).

Joseph Smith: Was either either Lawful Good or Chatic good. I think more likely CG, but you could argue LG.

[busterswd]

Mother Theresa?

[Emperor Tippy]

Mother Theresa?

As a paladin?

[Nerd-o-rama]

As a paladin?Now at the history museum:

Nuns and Nunchucks: Mother Teresa's secret arsenal.

And Paladins are meant to be knights (specifically, Knights Templar or similar martial religious orders) in the basic fluff. Heavy armor, horses, etc. Why not just go with one?

[streakster]

Thirding George Washington. It just fits perfectly.

[CountD]

Discounting the fact that George Washington owned over 300 slaves by the end of his life, of course.

[Draken]

Discounting the fact that George Washington owned over 300 slaves by the end of his life, of course.

Well, now you know why he never got to yell "SMITE EVIL!" on any Brits.

[snoopy13a]

And Paladins are meant to be knights (specifically, Knights Templar or similar martial religious orders) in the basic fluff. Heavy armor, horses, etc. Why not just go with one?

Yeah, paladins are the Knights Templar type but normal knights are better represented by the fighter class. A romantic version of King Arthur would a LG Fighter not a LG Paladin.

Oh, and Adam West's potrayl of Batman is LG.

[Lemur]

Not being a king I can understand, but why not being a knight? Paladins are by definition, holy knights aren't they?

That said, how about Percival (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival)? He seens fairly fitting for the archetipe of paladin.

I think the OP acknowledges knights as candidates, but is looking for potential paladins outside of knighthood so that a single mythology doesn't hold a monopoly on any given class.

Anyway, samurai seem like a good candidate. Our resident cartoonist doesn't mind making the connection, at least.

[Tengu_temp]

Discounting the fact that George Washington owned over 300 slaves by the end of his life, of course.

Whom he treated with respect. Slavery is not evil in itself when it's an established cultural element - the way you treat your slaves might be, though.

[ClericofPhwarrr]

Well, if we're counting George Washington, we ought to count Theodore Roosevelt.

[Piedmon_Sama]

I should third Washington. It's worth pointing out he deliberately modeled himself on Cincinnatus, who someone else pointed out is a worthy candidate for 'RL Paladinhood.' He saw his role as defending the Republic, first as its General, then as its President. He was popular enough at the end of the war that he could have had a serious chance of seizing permanent power, but like Cincinnatus power wasn't what he wanted--just a quiet retirement back on the farm, assured his country was safe.

Also, Lt. Colonel Franke Bourne, OBE DCM. One of the survivors of the Battle of Rourke's Drift, this man is the definition of a Soldier's Soldier. After Rourke's Drift (where he earned his Distinguished Conduct Medal), a battle where about 100 British Soldiers held off 4,000 Zulu Impis, I don't think anyone would have expected more of him. He re-inlisted for service in China. And in the 20th Century he re-inlisted for World War I. o_o

Also, now that I'm thinking of Englishmen, there was General Charles Gordon. His extraordinary successes and humanitarian methods would make him a good example, too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_George_Gordon#China

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Thomas Jefferson was probably a Paladin of Freedom.
And what else could Ben Franklin be but a Bard/PoF?

[SurlySeraph]

Well, if we're counting George Washington, we ought to count Theodore Roosevelt.

TR is definitely Chaotic Good. (http://www.cracked.com/article_15895_p5.html)

Other Lawful Good types, let's see... Saladin, most saints but especially Ignatius Loyola, and Alp Arslan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Manzikert#Captivity_of_Romanos_Diogenes) .

[chiasaur11]

Jimmy Stewart might work, if not for the tech level.

Really nice guy, pretty darn good pilot in WW2.

And he was humble about it.

[snoopy13a]

TR is definitely Chaotic Good. (http://www.cracked.com/article_15895_p5.html)

Other Lawful Good types, let's see... Saladin, most saints but especially Ignatius Loyola, and Alp Arslan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Manzikert#Captivity_of_Romanos_Diogenes) .

Ironically, TR also won the Nobel Peace Prize...

[KKL]

Discounting the fact that George Washington owned over 300 slaves by the end of his life, of course.

Well how did he treat them?

[Lemur]

Ironically, TR also won the Nobel Peace Prize...

Perhaps Kate Beaton can give us some historical perspective on this.

http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff28/beatonna/roosevelt.png

...Or not.


Well how did he treat them?

I'm sure this topic would be quite intriguing, but its only real function here would be to derail the thread.

[Devils_Advocate]

Well, there are samurai, who are like knights IN JAPAN (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitlekt6mtovm4vne?from=Main.RecycledINSPACE)!

On the other hand, neither all knights nor all samurai were like paladins.

I'm no historian, but it seems likely to me that there have been many noble soldiers who fought against genuine evil.

I dunno, search history for examples of famous warriors who protected people from cruelty and injustice. I'm sure you can find a few if you look hard enough.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Rommel?words

[Starbuck_II]

Perhaps Kate Beaton can give us some historical perspective on this.

http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff28/beatonna/roosevelt.png

...Or not.


The comic needs him saying "Bully" more often it was his catch phrase-word: he saide all the time.
Like:
"Bully, that was a goof Safari."
"I got the noble Peace prize, Bully!"
"I stated my own Political group, bully!"

[chiasaur11]

The comic needs him saying "Bully" more often it was his catch phrase-word: he saide all the time.
Like:
"Bully, that was a goof Safari."
"I got the noble Peace prize, Bully!"
"I stated my own Political group, bully!"

Bully, I just teamed up with Lincoln to fight Hitler!

[String]

Kenshin Uesugi, the Daimyo of Echigo during the Sengoku? He was known for his reverence of the god of war, Bishomonten, and was even thought to be the god's avatar. Holy Warrior..eh. Holy Warlord, morelike it, but easily romanticized to a Warrior.

[Ravens_cry]

Rommel?words
An excellent general who opposed and tried to remove an evil he saw, and died because of it. I could see it working. Perhaps more lawful then good, but close.
Fictional example: Jean Luc Picard.
Real life example: Winston Churchill, mayhap?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

An excellent general who opposed and tried to remove an evil he saw, and died because of it. I could see it working. Perhaps more lawful then good, but close.That was my thought, too. Much more Lawful with Good tendencies than LG, perhaps, but there aren't that many true LG people anyways.

[snoopy13a]

That was my thought, too. Much more Lawful with Good tendencies than LG, perhaps, but there aren't that many true LG people anyways.

I think there are lots of LG people. However, most of them simply aren't noteworthy. People like Ned Flanders usually don't run things.

[chiasaur11]

An excellent general who opposed and tried to remove an evil he saw, and died because of it. I could see it working. Perhaps more lawful then good, but close.
Fictional example: Jean Luc Picard.
Real life example: Winston Churchill, mayhap?

Maybe too snarky.

I mean, a drunken wiseass may not be the ideal for Paladin is what I'm saying.

[Kris Strife]

Maybe too snarky.

I mean, a drunken wiseass may not be the ideal for Paladin is what I'm saying.

Are you kidding? That would be an awesome paladin! I've got my next character concept!

[Thane of Fife]

Perhaps Kate Beaton can give us some historical perspective on this.

http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff28/beatonna/roosevelt.png

...Or not.


Theodore Roosevelt. Paladin. The End. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvZP93XqyTw)

[Doomsy]

The 47 Ronin. Any of them. Arguably more lawful than good, but they addressed the wrong they saw done without flinching and completed their duty to their lord. Few can claim such.

A great number of personalities from the Three Kingdoms period, though again the emphasis is more on loyalty than good. But one of them was later declared a god. Guan Yu was that badass.

Oh God, I'm going to take flack for this one, but I think it really does cover paladin and its aspect.
Che Guevara. You might not like the philosophy but the man was pretty damn selfless about it and he cared a lot about his people and the population, as his small body of literary works attest.

[Ravens_cry]

Maybe too snarky.

I mean, a drunken wiseass may not be the ideal for Paladin is what I'm saying.
At least he isn't 10-foot-pole-up-the-ol'-sphincter-type Miko stereotype paladin. But he was dedicated to his people in a time of great evil and suffering.
'If the British Empire, and its commonwealth should last for a thousand years, men will still say, "this was their finest hour."'
'Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few'
'We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.'

Damn straight he was a paladin.

[DrizztFan24]

Fixtional Example:The Hashshasin from Assassin's Creed. I dont know enough about the RL Hashshashin to judge but the game ones follow a code and fight only to free the land from war. They take as few lives as possible in the process. They were religious too and everything was deemed of God and with God's blessing.

[theMycon]

Gustavus Adolphus, from the 30 years war.

Fought to protect protestant lives against overwhelming odds, united nations through sheer force of charisma, created the first "true" Coalition army, the Swedish order of battle (later called "common sense"), and made first effective use of mobile artillery (a dutch invention). A general who, despite facing the perfect example of Evil in history*, never went down to his level, and still managed to mostly win the war before dying on the battlefield.

While my European History prof told me he "ended" the war by inspiring genuine religious sentiment in the enemy general, who then refused to put his troops against Adolphus, and it was all love & peace (then someone attacked France just because)... the book clarified that the enemy general refused to pay his troops until his commander gave him another castle; so 1,500 soldiers independently and spontaneously broke into his room at night trying to assassinate him. Since his PO'd officers got there first, and the other 1000+ soldiers didn't know what he looked like, they ended up killing most of the command structure in their haste.


*Albrecht de Wallenstein- the name's got about a half-dozen accepted transliterations, so excuse my spelling, but... Mercenary king, who funded a private army at the start by rounding up and looting homeless, and later when the king he was working for threatened to promote his Lt over him, he sent said Lt into the mountains chasing a phantom army and then besieged them, so the Lt and all 15-25K of his soldiers starved or froze to death.

[Riffington]

Well how did he treat them?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_and_slavery

[Heliomance]

Don Quixote.

[UnChosenOne]

Don Quijote from "El ingenioso hidalgo Don Quijote de la Mancha" is nearest thing to pure LG.

Edit:
Also the Spartacus would be most likely LG.

[Riffington]

At least he isn't 10-foot-pole-up-the-ol'-sphincter-type Miko stereotype paladin. But he was dedicated to his people in a time of great evil and suffering.
'If the British Empire, and its commonwealth should last for a thousand years, men will still say, "this was their finest hour."'
'Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few'
'We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.'

Damn straight he was a paladin.

See, this is actually my argument for why CG men like Churchill sometimes make better leaders in times of crisis than their LG counterparts. In school he was always a rebel, always in trouble, but always succeeding at the things he thought mattered. He kept that attitude in politics, and it worked out well for him and for the world.

[UnChosenOne]

See, this is actually my argument for why CG men like Churchill sometimes make better leaders in times of crisis than their LG counterparts.

Winston Churchill was easily the greatest leader of the 20th centry.

[jamroar]

Don Quijote from "El ingenioso hidalgo Don Quijote de la Mancha" is nearest thing to pure LG.


Well, he was a crazed LARPer who actually thought he was a paladin for real, so that's a given.

[J-H]

Samson... he fell, though.
King David in his younger years.
Some of the other Judges probably work, too.

[Suzuro]

Well, I'd have to say Winston Churchill was more of a NG kinda guy.

"Mr. Churchill, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea"
"Ma'am, if you were my wife, I'd drink it"

It was an utter ass....


And, I see Don Quixote de la Mancha as being more Lawful Stupid...


-Suzuro

[Satyr]

Rommel? A Paladin? He was a very charismatic officer, and hold up most of the older Prussian code of honor, but if he wouldn't have forced to commit suicide, he would probably be convicted as a war criminal like Dönitz or Mannstein not for the war in North Africa, but quite likely for his involvement in Italy. His enforced siucide was probably the salvation of his image as a honorable man, even though he was never really involved in the resistance.

Likewise Gustav Adolf,- the man was massively romanticised after his death,especially, because he appeared as a saviour and a martyr for the protestant movement, which was mostly beaten in 1629 but this romanticised picture had only very little to do with the actual person. Gustav was a power hungry politician who used the religious strive as an excuse to expand his - or the Swedish- area of influence. And it should be mentioned that no army in in the 30 years war had a reputation as bas as the Swedish soldiers.
Seriously, there is no indication that Gustav Adolf was any better than Tilly or Wallenstein - he tried to establish a hegemonial rule in the Baltic region, and died trying.
Wallenstein on the other hgand was not much worse than any other general of his time.

And Spartacus? He was probably a better leader than Crixus (the other general of the third servile war), Eunos or Tryphon (the two self-proclaimed 'kings' of the first and secod servile wars), but he was still mostly a brigant, who wandered through the country and plundered it. According to Appian, he also killed all his prisoners, some of them in gladiator pit fights. He was mostly romanticised, especially in the former USSR and other Communist movements, but with little to no historical content, because that wouldn't have fit well to the propagandistc intent.

I don't know as much about English or American history, but I would be quite surprised if Churchill, Washington or Roosevelt were unblemished. Power and moral superiority rarely come along simultaniously.
There are some Saints nd similar cleriical figures who qualify though like Franciscus of Assisi, while other church representatives were just power hungry and corrupt.

[Saint Nil]

Plenty of RL LGs. Unforunatly, I can't think of many warriors.

MLK JR
Ab Lincoln
JFK
FDR
George Washington

Older examples would be
King David and King Solomon
Moses
Elijah

The last 2 are more cleric than paladin though.
EDIT-Samson was CG to the core.

[Armoury99]

Just want to add that I am finding out about so many cool people via this thread! :smallsmile:

[J-H]

MLK JR
JFK
Too much adultery to qualify as LG.

[Ravens_cry]

I don't know as much about English or American history, but I would be quite surprised if Churchill, Washington or Roosevelt were unblemished. Power and moral superiority rarely come along simultaniously.
There are some Saints nd similar cleriical figures who qualify though like Franciscus of Assisi, while other church representatives were just power hungry and corrupt.
That is certainly true. However, we are going here for the closest possible. Paladins are trying to build a character out of an ideal, but ideals aren't real. But we are going for those we consider close. Otherwise we will have to stick to fictional examples.

[streakster]

Rommel? A Paladin? He was a very charismatic officer, and hold up most of the older Prussian code of honor, but if he wouldn't have forced to commit suicide, he would probably be convicted as a war criminal like Dönitz or Mannstein not for the war in North Africa, but quite likely for his involvement in Italy. His enforced siucide was probably the salvation of his image as a honorable man, even though he was never really involved in the resistance.

Likewise Gustav Adolf,- the man was massively romanticised after his death,especially, because he appeared as a saviour and a martyr for the protestant movement, which was mostly beaten in 1629 but this romanticised picture had only very little to do with the actual person. Gustav was a power hungry politician who used the religious strive as an excuse to expand his - or the Swedish- area of influence. And it should be mentioned that no army in in the 30 years war had a reputation as bas as the Swedish soldiers.
Seriously, there is no indication that Gustav Adolf was any better than Tilly or Wallenstein - he tried to establish a hegemonial rule in the Baltic region, and died trying.
Wallenstein on the other hgand was not much worse than any other general of his time.

And Spartacus? He was probably a better leader than Crixus (the other general of the third servile war), Eunos or Tryphon (the two self-proclaimed 'kings' of the first and secod servile wars), but he was still mostly a brigant, who wandered through the country and plundered it. According to Appian, he also killed all his prisoners, some of them in gladiator pit fights. He was mostly romanticised, especially in the former USSR and other Communist movements, but with little to no historical content, because that wouldn't have fit well to the propagandistc intent.

I don't know as much about English or American history, but I would be quite surprised if Churchill, Washington or Roosevelt were unblemished. Power and moral superiority rarely come along simultaniously.
There are some Saints nd similar cleriical figures who qualify though like Franciscus of Assisi, while other church representatives were just power hungry and corrupt.

Granted, but if we try to find a perfectly LG person from real history we'll be looking until the end of time. 'Cause they're aren't any.

Very much agreed on Rommel, though. Don't know the others that well.

[Starbuck_II]

Too much adultery to qualify as LG.

That is a moral sin not an aligned sin. It just means they can't be exalted.

[Draco Dracul]

I would like to MLK as a paladin just because the idea is so awsome.

[chiasaur11]

I'm still saying Jimmy Stewart.

Man served in World War 2 in the air force, joining before Pearl Harbor, bulking up with a weight gain trainer so as to serve actively rather than honorably work at making propaganda films and such, and asked his missions not be recorded as a matter of humility.

Plus, guy went all the way from private to general, on merit. If he ain't paladinny...

[Saint Nil]

Granted, but if we try to find a perfectly LG person from real history we'll be looking until the end of time. 'Cause they're aren't any.

Very much agreed on Rommel, though. Don't know the others that well.

Well, there's one, but we can't really say His name without starting a flame war/being baned. If He really counts as a human for that matter.


That is a moral sin not an aligned sin. It just means they can't be exalted.
Pretty sure they attoned, and it just means they can't take the saint template. You can take exalted feats if you attone for your evil actions.

And Armoury99, glad we could help.:smallsmile:

[Draco Dracul]

Well, there's one, but we can't really say His name without starting a flame war/being baned. If He really counts as a human for that matter.



I don't know if He would be LG, one of His primary goals was to remove many of the rituals and abitrary ristrictions that bogged down the Church, He strikes me as more NG than LG.

[Saint Nil]

I see your point, but I won't argue much to avoid flame wars.

X=son
y=Father
y=LG
x=y(in the flesh)
x=LG

[Draco Dracul]

I see your point, but I won't argue much to avoid flame wars.

X=son
y=Father
y=LG
x=y(in the flesh)
x=LG

I see your point, it could be said that while He stood against arbitrary earthly order, He ultimately stood for a better spiritual order.

[Saint Nil]

I completly agree, most paladins in my opinion can rebel agaisnt tyrannies even if the king is legit, due to the laws of higher powers.. Now, back on topic. Sorry for derailing the thread.

[snoopy13a]

There are some Saints nd similar cleriical figures who qualify though like Franciscus of Assisi, while other church representatives were just power hungry and corrupt.

Francis of Assisi was a little too chaotic to be lawful. I'd put him as neutral or chaotic.

It is important to remember that Lawful Good is not more good than Neutral Good or Chaotic Good. Just because a person is good doesn't mean that they are lawful good.

[chiasaur11]

Give to Caesar what is Caesar's...

Sounds lawful.

Stopping now.

[Starbuck_II]

Well, there's one, but we can't really say His name without starting a flame war/being baned. If He really counts as a human for that matter.



Wait, Quezacoatl? Why would we have a flamefest about him?
He died (crucified by his own people) for their sins too strangely similar to some hippie in the Jerusalem. But yeah, Quez is totally Lawful Good.

[SurlySeraph]

I would like to MLK as a paladin just because the idea is so awsome.

Personally, I see him as a Neutral Good Cleric/Bard. Massive Perform (oratory), sky-high wisdom and charisma.

[Devils_Advocate]

That is a moral sin not an aligned sin.
Breaking a promise that society really does think you're supposed to uphold is Chaotic.

Sins in general are Chaotic, really.


<questionable analysis>
Judgment without mercy (y=LN*) is sort of fundamentally opposed to mercy without judgment (x=NG). Hence the very different personalities displayed by each, one disdaining the other's laws, and the whole deal with the latter sparing people from the former.

Shared identity doesn't mean identical properties, at least not how identity is conventionally understood. E.g. One would normally say that I'm taller now than I was 20 years ago, instead of that that kid 20 years ago obviously wasn't me, because he was shorter than I am.

Of course, just what identity actually is/means in any given context is a complicated philosophical issue. E.g. Is the 4th Edition of D&D the "same game" as previous editions? I'm of the mind that this is a misleading question; it all depends on what standards you're using. Rather than one set of essential qualities, it's more accurate to think of a thing as having multiple equally valid essences.

Regardless, two different versions of the same thing will never have everything in common. If they did, they wouldn't be two different versions! So they'll never be equal in the mathematical sense that 1 + 2 = 3, with different symbols denoting just one unchanging thing with only one set of properties.

(But do PM me if you'd like to discuss the issue some more.)

*Some would certainly argue LE.

[elliott20]

I think it's a fool's errand to try to find an example of a paladin in history without actually making a holy warrior class somehow. Why? Because while a lot of the people mentioned here are in fact lawful good, the belief structure behind paladinhood often begins with the implicit knighthood, added with a dose of spirituality, and rounded off with impeccable moral ethics. That is, we're talking about portions here of what constitutes a paladin.

For this reason, while the idea of MLK being a paladin would be really cool, it just wouldn't fit, as MLK was much more of a spiritual and political leader than a warrior leader. (thus making him a better bard or cleric than paladin)

The same would be true of GW. I mean, sure, spiritual, and a soldier, but again, contextually speaking there was no chivalric code to be followed. Now, to say that Washington would make an AWESOME paladin is a whole different thing. I mean, as far as candidates for who would be great paladins, he's top of the list for me. But I wouldn't bill him as being one historically speaking. Rather, he would be better represented as a D20 modern character who was LG.

[mikeejimbo]

Well, there's one, but we can't really say His name without starting a flame war/being baned. If He really counts as a human for that matter.

Not a Paladin, though. I forget exactly what, but multiclassed, though Paladin WAS in there.

[Bonecrusher Doc]

William Wallace - good guy, fighter, but was he lawful? Fought against the English, but wanted the nobles of Scotland to come together and form a government that he would swear fealty to, right?

Martin of Tours maybe - don't know much about him
Galahad and Joan of Arc of course

taking into account that violence in the D&D world isn't quite as reprehensible as in the real world, perhaps someone like John Brown of Harpers Ferry fame? Nah, too chaotic. I don't know about MLK and Gandhi, I don't think you can have a pacifist paladin.


Ooh - how about Lord Nelson?

And here's somebody random... http://ameddregiment.amedd.army.mil/bios/irwin.htm (apologies to the Apaches)

[Leewei]

Corporal Alvin Cullum York.


"And those machine guns were spitting fire and cutting down the undergrowth all around me something awful. And the Germans were yelling orders. You never heard such a racket in all of your life. I didn't have time to dodge behind a tree or dive into the brush… As soon as the machine guns opened fire on me, I began to exchange shots with them. There were over thirty of them in continuous action, and all I could do was touch the Germans off just as fast as I could. I was sharp shooting… All the time I kept yelling at them to come down. I didn't want to kill any more than I had to. But it was they or I. And I was giving them the best I had."