Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - Paladins and their Retinues
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    Paladins and their Retinues
    Author Message
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 11, 2012 9:30 am  
    Paladins and their Retinues

    Greetings once more,

    Nerdcav's recent "To Protect and Serve" posting has prompted me to (finally) toss out the following query that has vexed me.

    We know, by the black and white "letter of the (proverbial) law" that paladins are allowed only to associate with LG henchmen and hirelings. However, I have noted, on at least one printed case, that this does not always appear to be rigidly held in even sourcebooks, modules, and guides. Now, far be it from me to be a 'letter of the law' kind of player or DM...my numerous questions, speculations, and inquiries should portray me to twist, bend, and contort rules and regulations in favor of what seems most 'logical.' After all, I consider myself a NG person who prefers the 'spirit' of the law instead! Cool

    The main case to which I am referring is none other than Lady Karistyne herself, a female paladin (of Heironeous) who has built for herself and her coterie a stronghold in the Abbor-alz. She is a noted dragon-slayer (I would give her the Wyrmslayer kit if using the Complete Paladin's Handbook) who has allies/friends in her adventuring party who are clearly not of LG alignment! These persons would include a fighter/priest of Labelas Enoreth (couldn't be LG), a priestess of Fharlanghn (ditto), and two elves (most are CG, and I seriously doubt, from the character description that the 'tempestuous' mage is anything but CG!). All other characters noted in her group could very well be LG, and thus pose not a problem for Karistyne's 'ethos.' This includes, of course, her golden dragon associate. :)

    Now, you may argue that these 'adventuring companions' are merely transient, and thus, do NOT violate this paladin rule...but I would dismiss such a notion, as they have constructed a STRONGHOLD together and work extensively as a tight-knit adventuring group. In fact, I would debate that Karistyne's fellows are more akin to her henchmen (and women).

    The accessory reason I am tossing this out there is b/c Nerdcav opened the floodgates for debate (always a good thing) about the strictures, codes, and requirements of paladins. This falls under that category, and so I am curious about the various attitudes, perceptions, and ideas that the Canonfire! community has on this issue.

    Finally, many of us either NPC or PC paladins, whether as player or DM, and the issue of associate/party/hireling alignment is something to consider rather heavily. I find myself in a similiar conundrum, as my current player runs a Heironean paladin with allies, friends, and the like with alignments that are not LG (but, invariably they are Good!), so this opens the door to debate...

    Let us begin! Happy

    -Lanthorn of NG
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 07, 2004
    Posts: 1846
    From: Mt. Smolderac

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:44 am  

    By the rules I don't believe her companions need to be transient. As long as they are good-aligned they're fine to associate with as an adventuring party. The only restriction I could find was on associating with non-evil neutrals for more than one adventure, and then only if it serves the cause of lawful good.

    As to the point of whether or not they are followers, I think the language used to describe them clears that up. In FtA they're referred to as "fellows" and in PGtGH they are called "Her adventuring friends..." The PGtGH doesn't name them like FtA does, but I'm pretty sure that's who is being referred to. I don't see any reference to the people named as being anything other than associates.

    In the first article in Dragon to mention Karistyne, it is pointed out as being a good starting location for PC's, having them in service to Karistyne. It recommends priests of LG/NG alignment, rangers, gnomes, elven mages. This would seem to go against the rules, since potentially non-LG players are mentioned as being in service to Karistyne. You might argue that a hired adventuring party aren't really true henchmen or followers. We have other examples of paladins who have non-LG followers. Belvor is a king who has some notable non-LG followers, but then he also is most likely breaking the rule on keeping only enough wealth to keep a small castle.

    Basically, what I'm saying is in my opinion, these should probably be used as hard and fast rules, to be stretched or broken where they best serve the cause the paladin is sworn to.
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 11, 2012 3:37 pm  

    I don't have time to go into this discussion at length, though it would be fun! Evil Grin

    I'll just jump in and say that along with the truism that Lawful Good isn't Lawful Stupid, a Paladin should reasonably be expected to use whatever honorable means available to accomplish Lawful and Good goals. Thus, if the only realistic way to rescue the kidnap victims is to ditch the plate armor and sneak in with a Thief/Rogue/Scout as a guide, the Paladin will not hesitate to do so. So would the Paladin also join forces with other Goodly beings to accomplish a task that furthers goodness and order in the universe despite having philosophical differences with them on the importance of Law over Chaos.

    SirXaris
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jul 28, 2001
    Posts: 631
    From: on the way to Bellport

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 11, 2012 6:11 pm  

    The less fun answer is simply to interpret the restriction narrowly, i.e., limiting it only to henchmen and hirelings / followers obtained through the 3x Leadership feat, etc.

    A better answer tries to accord with why the restriction exists. What comes to mind is that the paladin "takes responsibility" for henchmen and hirelings, and in order to vouchsafe for them, s/he must ensure they're aligned LG. Of course, there are no guarantees in life, yet if the prospective henchmen / hireling isn't LG, then a paladin would be acting imprudently, unnecessarily risking her/him-self. Hence, the paladin's order / ethics (professional responsibility) demands LG henchmen / hirelings.

    In contrast, mere adventuring companions are not individuals for whom the paladin will vouchsafe. They are their own agents, responsible for their own actions and not in the paladin's charge.

    The example regarding co-ownership of property is very interesting. Likely, following the explanation above, a paladin would not enter into co-ownership with others who are not aligned LG. However, a paladin might not co-own with these others, and should not be restricted in allowing guests who are not aligned LG (or at least an argument could be made for some flexibility as to guests).

    What do you think?
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:17 pm  

    A Paladin's retinue is made up of individuals that serve the Paladin. Fellow adventurers do not serve the Paladin, but are merely companions. A Paladin will be more strict in how the people who serve him act (i.e. lawful good individuals only), as such servants will often act directly in his name.

    Think of it this way: despite political affiliations/leanings, a conservative Republican (Lawful Good Paladin) and a liberal Democrat(Chaotic Good Ranger) could be friends. However, a conservative Republican would no way in hell hire on a bunch of liberal Democrats to deal with the public on his behalf. It could lead to some uncomfortable/embarrassing situations...

    ...like if the conservative Republican (Paladin) helps push through the paperwork to build a new factory (temple) on site X, he would not be very pleased if the local constabulary came and told him that his very own liberal Democrat (Chaotic Good Ranger) employee (servant) has chained himself to a rare tree on the site, and construction can't begin! Get it? Laughing

    So that's why Paladins only have lawful good servants, because they are more likely to act in a way that the Paladin approves of, and not embarrass him or oppose him. Adventuring companions are a whole other story. Wink
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 09, 2003
    Posts: 1358
    From: Tennessee, between Ft. Campbell & APSU

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 13, 2012 11:08 am  
    Re: Paladins and their Retinues

    Lanthorn wrote:
    ...We know, by the black and white "letter of the (proverbial) law" that paladins are allowed only to associate with LG henchmen and hirelings...


    -There are Paladins of Pelor, who is NG. There are Paladins of St. Cuthbert, who is LN (at least in D&D 3.5). One would think that if there is a little give in the alignment of the deity who gives a paladin his power in the first place, that the same deity might cut him a little slack wrt who he associates, particularly if it's in the god's direction (i.e. toward NG for Pelor, LN for St. C).
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:01 pm  

    Cebrion, once again your written arguments are logical and expertly worded (and amusing as well). I can find no flaw in your reasoning. Darn you. Evil I guess I wondered just how 'tolerant' a paladin would be with respect to others in his/her retinue. I also wonder where the division between 'adventuring fellows' and 'henchmen' is determined.

    Additionally, in following your reason about hirelings and those who work for (or with?) the paladin, what does this mean in terms of King Belvor!?! After all, if his circle of advisors truly work for the King, then, by rights, they must be LG. This would include the mages of the Court, would it not? If memory serves, I believe there are some advisors and wizards mentioned (in The Marklands) who are NOT Lawful Good.

    Just playing Evil Grin 's Advocate...

    This debate is good, as it gives me ideas for my player's Heironean paladin whose best, and long-term, friend, a battlemage, is NG and doesn't always follow the Heironean Code. In fact, quite often, he goes against it! Sometimes just to prove a point, but it is now undermining the paladin's standing with the Archpaladin, from the perspective of many ranking clerics within the faith. "Guilt by Association" kind of reasoning (or, if you want to get harsh, "Lie down with dogs, awaken with fleas!")

    -Lanthorn
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sun Jul 15, 2012 2:16 pm  

    In the microcosm of a Paladin's character's world, the terms "Henchmen" and "Followers" are synonymous.

    As to Belvor, you are reaching way beyond how the term "Henchmen/Follower" applies to him. There is no Catch 22 here. Let's look at this Paladin king's Macrocosm a bit more closely.

    Does Belvor have members on his advisory council that are not lawful good? Most assuredly, as he does not fully control who the nobles of the land are, or what positions some of them might be required to hold due to their status. But, does Belvor have a special inner circle of his most trusted people that is even closer to him that his advisory council? Yes, he most assuredly does. This "inner circle" would be Belvor's Paladin Henchmen/Followers, and they would ALL be lawful good. The others are just political associates, whether they are lawful good or not, and regardless of them being bound to him through oaths of fealty. Belvor cannot control who the Lords of the land are, and they will simply be around and need to be worked with (or dealt with). They directly serve him, but also are sworn to serve, and that means sticking to what Belvor wants done, not what they want done. If some Lord steps out of line, which invariably they will, Belvor then gets to put them in their place.

    Not all of the nobles and other servants (broadly speaking) of Belvor may be lawful good, but they are going to be required to be as lawful good as Belvor can force them to be. The court of Furyondy is as turbulent as any other court. There just tends to be less warring/murder (openly or covertly) among the nobles, because a good portion of them are of good alignment (and it doesn't hurt that they are being overseen by a paladin king).
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:21 pm  

    I'm afraid I pretty much agree with Cebrion and have little more to add. I have always expected a paladin player to play Lawful Good to the hilt, but since the law, generally, tolerates other alignments, the paladin is expected to also - as long as the individual doesn't break the law or violate someone else's personal rights.

    Therefore, I allow a paladin to associate with others of good alignment and, when necessary for the accomplishment of Lawful and good goals, with others of neutral alignment with respect to good and evil. However, those choosing to follow the paladin as their leader, must be fully Lawful Good in order for him to accept such oaths from them as he requires of his henchmen/followers. Friends and acquaintances that the paladin accepts as equals, rather than subordinants, are not answerable to the paladin's ethos. He is free to choose to associate with them as he sees fit.

    SirXaris
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:22 am  

    Cebrion, once again I very much appreciate your thoughtful explanation to my question and scenario. Your counterargument with respect to Belvor's Court is logical and 'realistic' in my mind. I am merely trying to wrap my mind around how a LG paladin, who lives and dies by a very clearly defined code of conduct and ethics, can associate with folks, friends, allies, and the like, who clearly do not follow the same rules. I can completely agree with your statement that Belvor's Inner Circle, as you say, MUST be LG in philosophy, and most likely they are all worshippers of Heironeous. His Outer Circle, as you maintain, needn't be LG, but must 'play by the King's rules.' I can agree with that assessment.

    OK, in that vein, would you agree that Lady Karistyne, whom I at least consider to be the "Leader" of that faction, demands that her allies (friends, adventuring companions), who, as you maintain, are NOT her minions/servants (Hirelings or Henchmen), but her equals (at least in theory), MUST 'play' by her rules???

    -Lanthorn
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:29 pm  

    No, but they better play pretty close to her rules or she would disassociate them from her organization.

    Also, Paladins also do not live by a very clearly defined code. If there was a very clearly defined code, this thread wouldn't exist, as you would have no questions about Paladins that would need answering at all. Laughing Paladins live by a code, but it is a list of a few things, not a well defined 50,000 page legal tome.

    "We've killed the orcs, Squire, but what do we do with the young non-combatants? I forget, as this doesn't come up too often. Consult the BIG BOOK OF PALADINS!"

    "Going to the index sir... Let's see... 'Evil, Killing'... Ah! Here we are. It is under 'Evil, Killing', sub-heading 'Non-combatants', section 'Humanoids, sub-section 'Orcs'. That would be on page 26,472. Turn the page, turn the page, turn the page... Here it is. It says, 'See General Paladin Law # 10'."

    "I should have known. Read it anyways, for your own benefit. It is on page 1."

    "Yes, Sir. 'General Paladin Law #10: Go ahead and do it, whatever "it" is, in the most decent way possible (but feel guilty about doing "it", and torture yourself over the acts that the existence of Evil necessarily forces upon you).' That rule seems to apply to a whole lot of Paladin things, Sir."

    "Indeed it does, Squire. Indeed it does. Learn it well."

    Look at it this way. Would a Paladin give up the help of other Good individuals to do even more Good (i.e. serving their own cause) because their brand of Good is not exactly the same as that of the Paladin? Putting the Ultimate Cause before oneself is a very noble thing to do, and aren't Paladins supposed to help others to the point of selflessness anyways? Paladins are not all about "My alignment is right and yours isn't, so up yours buddy!". First and foremost, Paladins are champions of their own faith, but not at the expense of the overall Good. If Evil triumphs because Good is too busy bickering and dickering, then Good might as well be directly serving Evil.

    Paladins are Good and they follow laws, but they do not serve Law- they serve Good, just in a Lawful way(their alignment would best be written as "lawful GOOD", as the "lawful" bit is very definitely secondary to the "GOOD" bit). Paladins expect others to live similarly, and, not too shockingly, others they associate with are Good and follow laws too (because most people follow the Golden Rule and would rather avoid being fined/imprisoned/executed as punishment for criminal behavior), even if they don't have a Lawful aspect to their alignment. Paladins know that they live by a higher standard than others (even if they are usually humble enough to not admit it), but not all whom they associate with will be able to do so. Paladins know that they are a shining beacon in the sea of "humanity". If by their actions they can illuminate others with their light, then they will do so. So it is for all Paladins.

    Life by example. Those who live similarly will very much be tolerated. Those who don't will not, and, if a Paladin is in a position of authority, like Belvor is, they might go to pains to impede or even remove such individuals if they too overtly oppose the Paladin's ethics/morals and commands (that latter which will inherently be bound up by the Paladin's ethics/morals to begin with). Paladins don't have the "Does not work/play well with other Good people who are not also Lawful." label attached to them at all.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:32 am  

    No, but they better play pretty close to her rules or she would disassociate them from her organization.

    OK, I agree to that.

    Also, Paladins also do not live by a very clearly defined code. If there was a very clearly defined code, this thread wouldn't exist, as you would have no questions about Paladins that would need answering at all. Laughing Paladins live by a code, but it is a list of a few things, not a well defined 50,000 page legal tome.

    My poor choice of words about the 'very clearly defined code.' What I meant was they live by a set of rules and regulations (as outlined and listed by the character class...and more in depth by The Complete Guide to Paladins) to which they must adhere, or lose their holy knight status. Let's be honest here. It is quite a challenge to play a paladin; only a cleric (specialty?) comes anywhere close, in my mind. After that, maybe a ranger, who likewise has a set of ethics they follow.

    I imagine we could go a bit further (another thread, perhaps? Happy ) about the different 'philosophies' or code of conduct each of the major Powers (Rao, St Cuthbert, Heironeous, etc.) would lean regarding their own paladins... Shocked


    "We've killed the orcs, Squire, but what do we do with the young non-combatants? I forget, as this doesn't come up too often. Consult the BIG BOOK OF PALADINS!"

    Wink OK, chiding point taken, and duly noted. You got me on this. Happy

    Look at it this way. Would a Paladin give up the help of other Good individuals to do even more Good (i.e. serving their own cause) because their brand of Good is not exactly the same as that of the Paladin? Putting the Ultimate Cause before oneself is a very noble thing to do, and aren't Paladins supposed to help others to the point of selflessness anyways? Paladins are not all about "My alignment is right and yours isn't, so up yours buddy!". First and foremost, Paladins are champions of their own faith, but not at the expense of the overall Good. If Evil triumphs because Good is too busy bickering and dickering, then Good might as well be directly serving Evil.

    Again, very good point. But to what point would a paladin suffer the different "Goodly" philosophies of others? Perhaps that is a personal (character) choice? Or maybe it is based on the Power the paladin serves (Pholtus may be more rigid than, say, a Pelorian knight)?

    ...Paladins don't have the "Does not work/play well with other Good people who are not also Lawful." label attached to them at all.

    Once more, counterpoint accepted, Ceb! Thanks for your input, and looking for your added insights and perspectives on my follow-up questions.

    -Lanthorn
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:06 am  

    Lanthorn wrote:

    Look at it this way. Would a Paladin give up the help of other Good individuals to do even more Good (i.e. serving their own cause) because their brand of Good is not exactly the same as that of the Paladin? Putting the Ultimate Cause before oneself is a very noble thing to do, and aren't Paladins supposed to help others to the point of selflessness anyways? Paladins are not all about "My alignment is right and yours isn't, so up yours buddy!". First and foremost, Paladins are champions of their own faith, but not at the expense of the overall Good. If Evil triumphs because Good is too busy bickering and dickering, then Good might as well be directly serving Evil.

    Again, very good point. But to what point would a paladin suffer the different "Goodly" philosophies of others? Perhaps that is a personal (character) choice? Or maybe it is based on the Power the paladin serves (Pholtus may be more rigid than, say, a Pelorian knight)?

    Yes, it would be more personal/faith oriented. While it isn't really a very Good thing to insult/antagonize a Paladin purposely, there just is some bad blood between folks. That being considered, Paladins are about as saintly as a mortal can be without literally being a living saint, so one can expect that they would rise above all but the most serious of insults or other personal affronts. Even when pushed too far, a Paladin should be merciful to the fool who does so. Not only is that the appropriate thing to do, it also leads to all sorts of role-playing opportunities (the fool reforms and becomes fast friends with the Paladin, or the fool that was spared feels they have been humiliated and becomes an antagonist or even nemesis of the Paladin and friends, etc.).

    As to varying faiths, a Paladin may choose not to work any of the various good faiths, such as a Paladin of St. Cuthbert choosing not to work with followers of Tritherion or Pholtus (they don't get on that well as it is), unless there is no better option but to do so for the greater Good. That doesn't mean they will necessarily enjoy it, but they will cooperate for the betterment of all when necessary.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: May 25, 2012
    Posts: 106
    From: Virginia

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:21 am  

    What if it's more the other way - that the non-LG aligned characters would be forced to leave voluntarily. I personally imagine a Paladin would be constantly instructing and correcting his fellows towards the proper way of life - leading by example and teaching from concern. He would always confront the individual who offended the law of right and goodness, because he cares for their soul more than their comfort. This constant moral education would run the patience of most companions.
    _________________
    No place is safe, only safer.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:39 pm  

    You are thinking of pushy clerics. Laughing

    Setting an example doesn't mean proselytizing. Besides, what would the other good people have to be doing for a Paladin to not tolerate them? Break laws? Lie? Be untrustworthy? Anyone would cut somebody loose who did those things, not just a Paladin. Somebody simply being Neutral Good is not a compelling reason to disassociate from them.

    There is a very different dynamic in Greyhawk than there is in the real world. In Greyhawk there are dozens of gods, with multiple sects to each, so there is tons more tolerance for others because of that. Different faiths are everywhere. Some faiths don't like each other, but it isn't because they might have different follower alignments, such a St. Cuthbert's and Tritherion's followers not getting on well. The reason those faiths don't like each other is not because one is (predominantly) Lawful Good and one is Chaotic Good, but because of the doctrine of their faiths. Even still, followers of those gods could even be friendly(i.e. "You are my friend, but your methods make it difficult to be your friend sometimes." would be a good Paladin way of phrasing things)- it just isn't going to happen all that often.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 05, 2007
    Posts: 290
    From: The Pomarj

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:06 am  



    Last edited by BlueWitch on Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:40 am  

    Seeing as Paladins hang out with Good people, those Good people probably have faiths of their own, seeing as they are open to being friendly with a Paladin in the first place. A Paladin surely will be forthcoming about their faith, but there is a point at which it just become rude and disrespectful to preach to them on and on and on and on about a faith that is not theirs (unless the individual and Paladin are fast friends and it is part of an ongoing joke that they carry on so Laughing).

    Also, alignment is a game mechanism. Paladins don't hope that, by their example, people will join the Lawful Good alignment. They hope that, by their example, people will join their *faith*.

    There is one real problem I see with how some people play Paladins, and that is loading them down with negative character flaws, and I don't mean innocent quirks like shyness or naivete, but caustic character flaws like haughtiness, rudeness, disrespectfulness, and even hate cloaked as intolerance. I often see such such flaws played out in two particular instances- when a Paladin is a noble (and the player has the code of chivalry supersede the Paladin's code) and with (usually) Pholtan Paladins (but others too). As to the noble paladin, they should be the sort of noble that the peasants are not afraid to approach, and that they love, not the sort of noble who holds the peasant rabble (or those of other faiths) in disdain. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have seen that sort of negative behavior from Paladins more than few times.

    Then there are the Pholtans. A Lawful Neutral Pholtan priest might let rip with some of the above character flaws when dealing with the non-faithful, but a Paladin of Pholtus, while still upholding the tenets of his faith, will at the very least be more tactful because he is GOOD, and GOOD people are NOT purposefully jackholes to one another! Laughing

    LN Psycho Cleric of Pholtus: "We do not associate with fools like you who's vision is so clouded that they cannot see the Blinding Truth that is Pholtus!"

    LG Paladin of Pholtus: "I am afraid we are not permitted to associate with those not of our faith."

    Same message, very different tone, yet I see Pholtan (and a few other) Paladins going the route of "Psycho LN Cleric of Pholtus" and worse often enough. It's just bad.

    I think the best example of a Paladin I have ever seen is Talasek Thraydin from the 2E City of Greyhawk ("Blue Box") and the three part Falcon series of modules. Read up on him and people (hopefully) will see what I mean.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:01 am  

    Having read the posts here, I find that the "confusion," if we may call it that, lies around "Lawful."

    This does not affect my game. Why? As I've said before, Paladins are "Good" they are not "Lawful." Why not?

    Paladins serve their GOD, not a mortal king. They serve their "church" -- which is why I have always objected to such a thing as a Paladin "King."

    The "King" says that "this/that" is illegal. The church, however, is "silent" upon the matter. So, if the Paladin "enforces" this "law," then he/she is upholding the king's law. And that is not the Paladin's "job." His/her "job" is to enforce "church" law, not civil (king) law.

    Abortion is a good example. (This will be short and thus leave plenty of room for argument -- do not expect me to join in.)

    (NOT TRYING TO START ANYTHING! SO LET'S NOT GO THERE!)

    Abortion is Caesar's law, the King's law. The Bible -- God's law -- condemns it. So, who's "law" does the Paladin uphold? Caesar's, or God's?

    King Belvor's law, or Pelor's law? Is he/she Belvor's paladin, or Pelor's paladin?

    It is also not a Paladin's "job" to enforce his/her God's laws upon those who are not "believers." (Sticking with the Pelorian example . . . Followers of Pelor do not force their "faith" upon followers of Rao.) So, while the Pelorian would not "stop" the Raoan from having an "abortion," neither would the Pelorian assist the Raoan in having the abortion.

    In other words: King Belvor allows abortions, Pelor does not. The Paladin of Pelor would not interfere with someone having an abortion, but he/she would not violate his/her God's law and assist them in carrying out the abortion.

    Such conflicting "laws" also exist in the World of Greyhawk. Who's laws does your Paladin uphold? Those of the "king," or those of his/her God?

    All Paladins are GOOD. They would limit their associations to people of "good character." "Lawful" does not enter into the equation. "Lawful" -- in this case -- would mean associating only with worshipers of Pelor, for Paladins of Pelor are obedient to Pelor's laws first and foremost, Belvor's laws come in second.

    "But The Book says . . . "

    Sorry. I'm a Dungeon Master. I don't need the "Guidelines." I'm sorry that "you" can't seem to function without them. You're missing out on so much. Sad

    But, that's just my orifice talking. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:06 am  

    Gotta admit, I am very pleased with the amount of responses this post has received, as well as the debate it has generated! Happy

    I guess this thread only proves that there are many different nuances about playing all characters, but perhaps none so philosophically contentious and perhaps difficult as the paladin.

    Furthermore, this discussion has given me much to digest and consider when role-playing a holy knight. Even now I am NPCing an errant paladin (2e kit) of Pelor; ergo, I consider all of this discourse highly enlightening (pun intended!) and helpful.

    Looking forward to reading more,

    -Lanthorn
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:03 am  

    Here's a musing I've been pondering.

    According to our joint conversation/debate here, a paladin can have associates or friends who are not LG, but hirelings and henchmen must be LG, or the paladin is considered 'in violation.'

    Did some reading about hirelings and henchmen. Hirelings serve because they are paid. These are your common (but sometimes, specialized) laborers who help to maintain the lands, property, fiefdom, whatever have you. A paladin must have all of them abide by the LG philosophy.

    Henchmen serve out of friendship instead. Some start off as hirelings, but others arrive for mentorship or to ally with the PC based on that person's reputation. All are of lower level than the PC. Again, the paladin's henchmen(women) must be LG.

    The division between henchmen and 'associates' or friends (ie. fellow PCs, or adventuring colleagues) seems, to me, to be a fine one. Perhaps the only demarcation I see is that henchmen serve as mentees to the character (in this case, the paladin), and who leave if they surpass the level of their mentor.

    I still find it...nearly contradictory...your friends and associates don't have to be LG, but your henchmen must be. I guess the paladin holds a 'higher standard' for some but not others?

    I keep going over Ceb's Democrat vs. Republican example in my head (and not without amusement, mind you) to find the parallels.

    -Lanthorn
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.29 Seconds