Paladins, How to fix/are fixes needed

[kyoryu]

If a Paladin player insists on one mode of action and everyone else follows along because they don't want arguments, does another person deciding to stand up automatically become the bad person?

I suppose this would depend on details such as what sort of actions the Paladin player had been doing, whether the other group members were having fun following the paladin leader, etc.

Again, you're framing behavior that wouldn't work within the paladin code as "normal". The Paladin code is only really strict when it comes to the Paladin. It doesn't demand a lot from his companions apart from "don't be evil".

[Morty]

For my money, the easiest fix for paladins is to make it a class that can only be earned in game a la prestige class. And you can't have paladin levels before the game starts. Why? Because it forces the DM and the player to communicate their expectations of the class and how to make them work.

Making paladins actually elite, as opposed to a class like any other, would indeed probably solve a great deal of the problem.

[Anonymouswizard]

"So you're playing an assassin... which kind of assassin?"

By the way, could this be a fault of the system as well? Depending on the system?

Yeah, my next game (using Fate) bans assassin's as 'out of genre for steampulp/magical police', although I'm not against the idea of an Assassin's Creed style one as such, I just run more subdued games (e.g. I like Legends of the Wulin, but love Qin: the Warring States), a trait shared by my favourite GM. But if I do ever run a Wuxia or Anima game the 'acrobatic warrior' assassin will be encouraged, as it's in-genre (I mean ridiculously, there's just no question about it).

Again, you're framing behavior that wouldn't work within the paladin code as "normal". The Paladin code is only really strict when it comes to the Paladin. It doesn't demand a lot from his companions apart from "don't be evil".

Also, Paladin codes almost certainly have intentionally placed loopholes (see Sir Osric in Dorkness Rising eventually going to 'fight evil' because the party has to do something he should stop). Paladins also probably have a sense of humour derived from this, and I suspect there will be jokes about 'falling' from pushing in line or taking the last slice of cake.

[hifidelity2]

In the game I play in Paladins are Holy Knightly Warriors BUT can be of any Faith - i.e. all faiths have Paladins

The DM (and us as players) agree that all have some form of Code of Honour although they will vary from faith to faith

[kyoryu]

Making paladins actually elite, as opposed to a class like any other, would indeed probably solve a great deal of the problem.

As they were.

I was actually disappointed when 3e came out that Paladins weren't a Prestige Class. They seemed like hte poster child for it.

Also, Paladin codes almost certainly have intentionally placed loopholes (see Sir Osric in Dorkness Rising eventually going to 'fight evil' because the party has to do something he should stop). Paladins also probably have a sense of humour derived from this, and I suspect there will be jokes about 'falling' from pushing in line or taking the last slice of cake.

Dresden Files. Michael Carpenter. He often uses his code as a weapon *against* the bad guys

[wumpus]

One: paladin should not be a base class. It's a prestige class, available by invitation only to people who, in the eyes of some competent authority, have proved themselves worthy to take it. This means that the PC has to go through an extended "audition" before they get the funky powers, immunities and whatnot. It would dramatically improve the chances that the PC and DM are on the same page as to how the paladin is supposed to behave.

As an aside, the decision not to move Paladin to the "prestige classes" is exactly where the whole idea of "prestige class" changed from a great idea to munchkin fodder.

I do find it somewhat interesting that this is never called "The Assassin Problem".

Evil parties (or even just evil characters in non-evil parties) have enough problems of their own. Also even where assassins lose their powers if they ever become non-evil (2e and before?), they could budge with a single good act as a compromise. Of course, if you have somebody playing an assassin because the can typically pull off a "death attack" on other members of the party your problem player isn't going to be fixed by not playing an assassin. Problem paladin players typically can't pull off "the paladin problem" while playing clerics. "The Paladin Problem" is closely tied with the "DMPC Problem" in that it takes agency away from the rest of the players. Once the assassin likewise removes agency (presumably by killing their characters) of other players, you have a similar problem.

As mentioned, the problem with the paladin lies in the code of conduct. It is far too narrow. The problem comes down to giving the [problem] player [or DM] too many chances to twist a certain option [for the entire party] as the only one allowed by the code. Basically, every major (and sometimes minor) choice comes down to an alignment debate. Use the 5e oaths and the ability to manipulate the party/player [for bad players/DMs] is limited to plot-centric railroading.
You can't have one player [or DM] determining the agency of the entire party. On the other hand, the 5e oaths are a pretty good reason to tell the party "you aren't allowed to ignore the adventure hook I spent hours preparing. Now get in the dungeon already."

[KnightOfV]

I feel like everything the Paladin needs is right there- and has been from the beginning. Paladins are their ideals. Clerics are just followers of the gods, but Paladins are living Symbols.

The code is there as a challenge for the player, and it's right there in the class. It's not supposed to be an excuse to try to get the DM or party members to screw 'em over. That's basically the same as trying to kill the character.

Every DM I've ever played with loves Paladins. They respect NPCs and take orders from superiors. They keep the quest on track. They won't run off picking pockets, or burning down taverns for giggles. Why the holy crap would you punish them by trying to make them fall?

Players I've played with over the years love Paladins. You WANT these guys on your side. If there is danger ahead, my Paladin will gladly go first. They won't try to rob you in your sleep. They won't kill NPCs for no reasons or get into fights about loot. They will heal you and put your life above their own. That's all there in the code, in the idea of a Paladin. If you take away the code, (like in 4th ed) and you can play a Paladin that can do violent or greedy acts to 'go along' with the party, then they stop being Paladins. Might as well just call them holy warriors, or avengers or something.

The Paladin has always been about living up to a difficult standard. The fact that so many people games have imploded over it actually just makes me think that it is working as intended. They aren't designed to be easy to play, or to fit into every game.

Just my own thoughts of course, from someone playing Paladins for years and years.

[goto124]

They respect NPCs and take orders from superiors. They keep the quest on track. They won't run off picking pockets, or burning down taverns for giggles.

If there is danger ahead, my Paladin will gladly go first. They won't try to rob you in your sleep. They won't kill NPCs for no reasons or get into fights about loot. They will heal you and put your life above their own.

Implying non-paladin PCs consistently fail to meet these standards? Many of which are basic gaming decency?

[Takewo]

Implying non-paladin PCs consistently fail to meet these standards? Many of which are basic gaming decency?

Well, there's many groups out there that are just slightly better than a bunch of murder-hobos that will burn down a whole tavern because there was a bad-looking dwarf in it. Or, put it in another way, many groups are violent bandits who make use of burglary and robbery to get into pacific monster's dungeons and despoil them from their honestly-earned goods.

[Morty]

As they were.

I was actually disappointed when 3e came out that Paladins weren't a Prestige Class. They seemed like hte poster child for it.

Pretty much, yes. Prestige classes were a bit of a resounding failure of game design, but in general terms, a paladin is a fighter (or some other class) + a code that gives them powers as long as they abide by it. Trying to cram them into a separate class was very much a square peg/round hole situation.

[SirBellias]

Implying non-paladin PCs consistently fail to meet these standards? Many of which are basic gaming decency?

Mine do. Rather annoying, but no one in that group plays paladins. They are still of the mindset of "random = funny." a bit ridiculous in an rpg, bit oh well.

[IntelectPaladin]

Paladins as a prestige class? Are you kidding me?
I think, perhaps, that this thread has become just another pit of zeitgeist.

I'm sorry, but I cannot go on like this.
You want to know what a paladin is?
Here's a hint: It's not just another magical knight class in an rpg game,
and it's not an attempt at power, or a "prestige class", of all things!

Have we forgotten the value of morality?
of ethics, and just how far they can take you?
I mean, look at the stories on google images, for pity's sake.

Thank you for taking the time to read this,
and I apologize for the seemingly random nature of this post.
Have a nice day today!
And if it isn't one, see what you can do to change that!

[Cluedrew]

You want to know what a paladin is?
Here's a hint: It's not just another magical knight class in an rpg game,
and it's not an attempt at power, or a "prestige class", of all things!

Personally, although the handling of prestige classes have made them "attempts at power", that is not why people are suggesting it be made as one.

You can't start at the panicle of something, you have to strive for that.

And to represent that striving you should have to journey in grow, in the way we represent with levels. You must train you body and your mind. You must take every opportunity to better yourself and to better the world. Only then will you be reach the place you must be.

Turning off the poet in me for a movement; it would also give opportunities to create more variants of the paladin theme that have representations in game. Which would be another way of handling the narrow interpretation problem. Personally I think the modified base class would be a better solution (not that I have evidence for that) but I could see this working as well. Maybe we could do both. Of course I'm probably not going to make the 6e design team... so I don't have to decide.

Have a nice day today!
And if it isn't one, see what you can do to change that!

And on this matter, I agree. May this day be better than it would have been without you.

[Morty]

Paladins as a prestige class? Are you kidding me?
I think, perhaps, that this thread has become just another pit of zeitgeist.

I'm sorry, but I cannot go on like this.
You want to know what a paladin is?
Here's a hint: It's not just another magical knight class in an rpg game,
and it's not an attempt at power, or a "prestige class", of all things!

Have we forgotten the value of morality?
of ethics, and just how far they can take you?
I mean, look at the stories on google images, for pity's sake.

Thank you for taking the time to read this,
and I apologize for the seemingly random nature of this post.
Have a nice day today!
And if it isn't one, see what you can do to change that!

The point behind the suggestion of the paladin becoming a prestige class - or some other class-agnostic thing that hopefully isn't as hilariously non-functional as prestige classes are - is to fix its being watered down into a "magical knight" class.

[Anonymouswizard]

Paladins as a prestige class? Are you kidding me?
I think, perhaps, that this thread has become just another pit of zeitgeist.

I'm sorry, but I cannot go on like this.
You want to know what a paladin is?
Here's a hint: It's not just another magical knight class in an rpg game,
and it's not an attempt at power, or a "prestige class", of all things!

First off, the idea of a Paladin as a prestige class comes from the idea of it being something to strive towards. My favourite treatments of the Bard and Paladin to be released are the Unearthed Arcana Prestige Class versions, which actually sacrifice power in comparison to what the character could have by going for almost any other PC, the idea being you have to prove you are worthy of the title of Paladin.

Have we forgotten the value of morality?
of ethics, and just how far they can take you?
I mean, look at the stories on google images, for pity's sake.

Quite the opposite. We think that the Paladin should be a class that demands the character work towards it. Paksenarrion and O-Chul, the two best models I know of for the Paladin, began as fighters.

I actually think the Blackguard works better than the Paladin. It's not overly strong, it's a collection of abilities go add to your warrior with the idea that you lose them if you break your code (which is admittedly looser than the Paladin's). At some point I might expand the idea to 9 'Divine Knight' Prestige classes, with the Paladin and Blackguard as the LG and LE versions.

Thank you for taking the time to read this,
and I apologize for the seemingly random nature of this post.
Have a nice day today!
And if it isn't one, see what you can do to change that!

Kind of hard to make it a nice day, as it's nighttime

[Cluedrew]

Oh yeah, I forgot to say this in my last post:

Cluedrew makes some good points.

Thank-you. It is also reassuring because the time I finished writing that I wasn't sure if I was talking crazy or not. Paladin-ness can be kind of hard to pin down.

[About the paladin problem.]

I was just making a joke that assassins case all sorts of other problems (if handled incorrectly... kind of like the paladin I guess) and so that name was taken.

[digiman619]

I personally have two fixes. a) have the paladin's code be his god's creed; anything that would make a cleric of said deity need atonement makes the paladin fall, and b) point them to classes without loosely defined 'fall' mechanics, but still keep the concept; i.e, Warpriest, or Cavalier. That way, they get all the roleplaying goodness of Paladin-style virtue without effecting what the rest of the party can or can't do (or at least no more than the guy playing a ranger or sorcerer can).

[Broutchev]

I re-read the PHB entry for the paladin in 3.5 and found some odd things that never bothered me before.
Mainly it's just poorly thought.

Requirements to keep the powers;
-LG
-Code of conduct;LG (again), no evil acts willingly (sounds black and white to me), respect legitimate authority, act with honor (no lying, cheating, stealing, not using poison and so forth...), help those in need, punish those who threatens
-Never knowingly associate with someone evil, or continue association with someone that offend it's moral code

LG is fine and all, where the problem starts is the code: No evil acts willingly, if I'm stuck in between 2 evils without a third option, am I to wait it out and stop people from going for the lesser one since, you know, I can,t associate with evil? Maybe striving for Greater Good, or deity's ''what would Jesus do'' would be better. Then we get rid of Oh so clever Dm conundrums.

Legitimate authority is fine if you are good above lawful, a tyrant may be a ruler but he is not legitimate in the sense of good/your deity. (My vision)

act with honor (no lying, cheating, stealing, not using poison and so forth...) I don't think a character who is LG can't be stealing, I.E. Rogue stealing world shattering artifact from BBEG before it is used... But the paladin can't so I guess it goes with the fluff. Also it only says HE can't do it, not the party can't. So again Lying or Cheating for Greater good is possible. Still again clash whit the black and white aspect. The only problem is the ''and so forth''. Given in some DM hands, you're basically hogtied.

For association, people discussed it, I agree, but make sure OOC around the table everyone is on par.

Furthermore, in the background section, it says ''No one, no matter how diligent, can become a paladin through practice. The nature is either within one or not, and it is not possible to gain the paladin's nature by an act of will''

So how exactly as a first character class does it work, if the paladin as no deity? Also it is way more oriented as a PrC in terms of proving your worth and having a Deity or association of paladin notice you. For deity oriented paladin it sound way more like a calling from the deity itself, but does it mean that this class is the only one that you need to ask for the DM to play it since the calling is DMs portfolio?



All this to make me wonder: Would it be better to have a Base Class akin to a paragon with traits defined by each alignment, LG gets something and etc. and PrC paladin of ''deity's name for Good deity'', antipaladin of ''you get the concept''.

Paladin means holy warrior, can you be a holy warrior of Ehlonna like you can be a priest of her?

[Takewo]

I re-read the PHB entry for the paladin in 3.5 and found some odd things that never bothered me before.
Mainly it's just poorly thought.

Requirements to keep the powers;
-LG
-Code of conduct;LG (again), no evil acts willingly (sounds black and white to me), respect legitimate authority, act with honor (no lying, cheating, stealing, not using poison and so forth...), help those in need, punish those who threatens
-Never knowingly associate with someone evil, or continue association with someone that offend it's moral code


act with honor (no lying, cheating, stealing, not using poison and so forth...) I don't think a character who is LG can't be stealing, I.E. Rogue stealing world shattering artifact from BBEG before it is used... But the paladin can't so I guess it goes with the fluff. Also it only says HE can't do it, not the party can't. So again Lying or Cheating for Greater good is possible. Still again clash whit the black and white aspect. The only problem is the ''and so forth''. Given in some DM hands, you're basically hogtied.

Interpretations may differ here, but I understand the sentence "continue association with someone that offend the paladin's moral code" as precluding having a party member in charge of stealing and cheating for the grater good.

[goto124]

for the grater good.

New paladin idea.

[Red Fel]

for the grater good.

Not trying to mess with you, typos happen, but did anyone else suddenly picture an uprising by kitchen utensils against their food product oppressors?

"Rise up alongside me, peelers and knives! For the grater good!"

[Takewo]

Not trying to mess with you, typos happen, but did anyone else suddenly picture an uprising by kitchen utensils against their food product oppressors?

"Rise up alongside me, peelers and knives! For the grater good!"

lol! It took me a while to realise what was wrong with that. It's so funny I'm not even going to correct it.


This, by the way, made me think of:

Spoiler

Show

[BWR]

did anyone else suddenly picture an uprising by kitchen utensils against their food product oppressors?

"Rise up alongside me, peelers and knives! For the grater good!"

Yup. That and wielding cheese-graters on their opponents' faces.

[Vinyadan]

Is Grater Shredder's honourable twin?

[Red Fel]

Yup. That and wielding cheese-graters on their opponents' faces.

Is Grater Shredder's honourable twin?

This is the friendship among vegetables...

[Elderand]

you magnificent bastard. that video almost killed me with laughter.

[AMFV]

Interpretations may differ here, but I understand the sentence "continue association with someone that offend the paladin's moral code" as precluding having a party member in charge of stealing and cheating for the grater good.

Well it probably depends on how the Paladin interprets the code. Which I always have be largely order dependent. Paladins are lawful, so they understand things like precedence and exceptions to the law. Different Paladin orders probably take very different stances on those type of things. As another sidenote stealing isn't evil, only chaotic. So you might not even need to worry about it, the Paladin isn't prohibited from association with thieves when necessary for Good. In fact if the alternative to that is evil, then he must, even if he doesn't like it.

[Takewo]

Well it probably depends on how the Paladin interprets the code. Which I always have be largely order dependent. Paladins are lawful, so they understand things like precedence and exceptions to the law. Different Paladin orders probably take very different stances on those type of things. As another sidenote stealing isn't evil, only chaotic. So you might not even need to worry about it, the Paladin isn't prohibited from association with thieves when necessary for Good. In fact if the alternative to that is evil, then he must, even if he doesn't like it.

Again, this is an issue of interpretation and people may think differently. But in my humble opinion, if the code of honour forbids the paladin from lying and stealing, somebody who is continuously stealing and lying offends the code. It's a completely different matter if a party member steals something once or twice, but I don't think it allows association with people who are specialists on this sort of stuff.

Also, I'm basing it on Broutchev's explanation of the code, I haven't got access to the books right now.

[obryn]

So a common problem in some editions of D&D is that of the paladin.

What I think you meant.

In theory, a paladin is supposed to be a stalwart defender of law and good, and has some degree of responsibility to keep the party's less morally reputable members in check (lest by associating with an evil party the paladin fall and lose all their powers).

In practice, paladins are often the annoying goody two shoes character, and have a tendency towards forcing the rest of the party into very narrow plots and limiting a lot of freedoms for the other players.

Some of the blame for this falls on poor playing
Some of it on poor DMing.

How can this be fixed? Are there alterations that could be made to the class to better encourage players to act like Ochul (who is an example that I'm reasonably certain, for some reason, everyone on this forum is familiar with, and is what I believe a paladin should be.) and discourage the much less fun for everybody Miko-esque (a similarly familiar bad example) behavior?

I have no idea what those examples are, but that's okay. Yes, in short, there are alterations that can be made. (1) You can open up Paladins to all alignments/deities so that a player has some choice if they want the mechanical benefits. D&D 4e and 5e do this, and 3e flirted with it in at least one dragon article. (2) You can make it so that a 'falling' arc isn't hard-coded into the rules, and make sure it's a collaborative venture with a player who wants to tell an interesting story. (3) You can swap around the 'stick' of falling and instead add in a 'carrot' for fulfilling your code.

If a significant number of people are approaching paladins badly, then the design of the class (or the surrounding trappings, like the alignment system) can be at fault.

Come on, though. Like 80% of bad gaming stories involve paladins somehow.

[IntelectPaladin]

Come on, though. Like 80% of bad gaming stories involve paladins somehow.

Why did you smile at that... That's it.
I've had enough.

I'm not angry. I'm just numb.