Paladins - Good does not mean Peaceful

[Valo65]

PALADINS! Smiters of evil and doers of good. These guys are really great to see when done well, but tend to be very annoying when done poorly. Here's a few tips I hope help anyone who decides to or does play a paladin.

Black and White:
Paladins often see the world in black and white - there is good, which they are sworn to protect, and there is evil, which they are sworn to oppose. But just because they see in Black and White doesn't mean they have to be Black and White. Give them a weakness, a vice, something they do that they really shouldn't do too much. Greed is a great one, a paladin who loves gold, and is a little greedy with it, is an excellent weakness. Maybe a gambling problem? Not as merciful as they should be? Quick to judge on instinct rather than getting all the evidence? A bum leg, even? It helps add something to the character, in my opinion.

Law vs Good:
Good and law are two different things, but not mutually exclusive. Good (in my opinion) means you try to better the world around you. Law means you do it in an orderly fashion, that you have your own code of conduct, be it always following the law, always following superiors' orders, never killing in cold blood, keeping your word, etc., you have rules, for yourself (going off topic briefly, there are Maskarran monks, lawful does not mean being honest or following the law, but most lawful characters do do that).

So, a Lawful Good character tends to work within the system to help people around him, or to oppose evil. If a Lawful Good character should decide to go against the system, due to corruption, for instance, he would typically do so through legal means (challenging the leadership via election or honor duels), or failing that, outright rebellion.

Oaths:
All paladins take oaths, breaking these oaths results in loss of powers. Oaths vary between faiths, and even individual paladins, but generally consist of a few basics. As an example, here is a copy of the oaths Tilur Rocklock swore just yesterday:
-"I, Tilur of Clan Rocklock, Kuld of Brogendenstein, do swear to conduct myself honorably, in and out of battle. Never will I resort to any craven tactics or trickery to succeed."
-"I shall never tell a lie, no matter what pressure is placed upon me, or what consequences await me, nothing but the truth shall pass my lips."
-"I shall remain ever vigilant and oppose the forces of anarchy, of injustice, that would see our great society, and those societies across the island and the entirety of Toril crumble, to ensure that civilization, law and order remains, that all goodly folk may prosper under a fair and just rule."
-"I will never cease my holy crusade against evil, regardless of its form, its sources, or its intentions, none with a black heart shall be permitted to pursue their dark goals."
-"I swear to, no matter the gain, no matter the loss, no matter pleasure nor pain it may bring, profit from, give in to, nor commit acts of evil."
-"By the Morndinsamman, my gods, by the All-Father, my creator, do I swear these oaths now, they are my duty, my honor, my life."

Atonement:
If a paladin should break these oaths, it's not so hard a thing to regain lost powers. An Atonement ritual could see the powers restored, but often the cleric performing the ritual typically sends the fallen paladin off on a quest of some sort, or do some deed. If for some reason Atonement isn't an option, a paladin can regain powers naturally through simply continuing to act as a paladin, and simply inspire his god to bless him once more. This however, requires that the fallen paladin go above and beyond the call of duty even for a paladin, and do something truly heroic - it will typically be a life-threatening situation for himself and/or others.

When to Smite?
Paladins, in my opinion, have one duty above all others: Protect good, redeem evil. If evil is threatening good, smite evil. It's really that simple, but just walking up and smiting Mr. Evil-Thief for being Mr. Evil-Thief is bad (unless he's already wanted). If Mr. Evil-Thief is breaking into a home to kidnap someone for ransom, then smite away, but until then, most paladins would likely try to redeem him, and bring him back to a more virtuous path. Of course, if someone is doing something evil toward other evil things, like animating the dead to attack orcs, paladins aren't okay with that, and typically intervene, attacking the necromancer (and orcs).

Good is Not Nice
Good. Is. Not. Nice. It can be, but it doesn't have to be. You can't be a COMPLETE Snuggybear but the most memorable paladins to me are those who are a little grim, even bitter, often have a short temper and are even condescending.

And.. Here's a few links that may help, as well:
http://www.escapefromunderdark.com/foru ... .php?t=260
http://www.escapefromunderdark.com/foru ... hp?t=24422
http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Paladin
http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Paladin (4th edition, a lot of info here does not apply to Arelith or NwN in general)

[Valo65]

Something recently said by Ecstatic in response to a player on a thread.

Player's Comment

They fight "evil" endlessly and demand that others conform to their personal standards of "goodness", and expect that "evil" will be defeated, and others will live up to their expectations. Neither will ever happen, yet they keep bashing other people's heads against the wall.

Paladins are lawful in that they equally hold everyone else (though rarely themselves) to an impossible but very well defined standard, and they're the craziest bunch of nut jobs that Toril has ever seen.

Ecstatic's Response:
I would make the following changes.

They fight "evil" endlessly:They fight evil endlessly. Full stop. No quotes. Evil in a D&D setting is a distinct, concrete force, not some abstract metaphysical theory. Sentient manifestations of it can crawl into the material plane and cause real hardship, misery, and death. I'm not particularly interested that physical murderdemons don't exist in the framework of modern morality. Neither do fireballs made out of bat poo.

and demand that others conform to their personal standards of "goodness":They try to insist that others avoid acting to further the aims of evil, but reserve their wrath for those who commit it. This includes people who would victimize and exploit others for any reason. There are degrees of this wrath: they shouldn't smite a guy for embezzling from his employees, but see that he gets put through the legal wringer? Sure. Generally, if you're not hurting people, the paladin isn't going to bother you. Gods know he has more on his plate. And "Avoid being an evil dick" is a far cry from "conform to paladin standards".

and expect that "evil" will be defeated, and others will live up to their expectations.: They acknowledge that evil has to be opposed, slowed down, and prevented from ruining the world for everyone. Some paladins feel that evil will be defeated, but many do not expect to do more than keep it from winning, and to them laying down their lives so that "The world will end now" can be turned into "The world might not end, at least not for a while" is worth it, because there are other people that objectively benefit from a delayed end of everything. They don't expect anyone to live up to their standards or to abandon human nature. But they accept that even flawed people are worth protecting, so long as they aren't hurting the people around them, and expect themselves (not others) to fight the good fight until they can't do it anymore.

Neither will ever happen, yet they keep bashing other people's heads against the wall.: They may not succeed at what they're trying to do, but success at wiping out evil isn't the important part. Winning a little more time for other people to live in peace and safety is. When they do have to bash someone's head against the wall, it isn't random. It's because that someone is playing for the other team, directly threatening the ability of people to live safely, peacefully, and happily.

Paladins are lawful in that they equally hold everyone else (though rarely themselves) to an impossible but very well defined standard: Paladins hold themselves to a well defined standard, because it is necessary. They know they need a code to bind their actions, because unchecked and unguided wrath over evil behavior is too prone disaster caused by human misjudgement. When they fail to live up to their standards, they don't quit the paladin job and send out resumés. They do penance, acknowledge their failings, and get back out there. They do not expect average, every day people to hold to this code though, because average, everyday people haven't sworn to live to that standard, and don't have to live every day prepared to die doing battle with literal cosmic evil. If they held everyone to paladin standards, they might as well not exist, because nobody would be protected from the hard, but necessary job of being a paladin.

Paladinism, on the whole, is actually a very logical and rational response to the D&D cosmos. When you have literal forces of evil, entropy, destruction, and mayhem which are intent on using force and raw power to destroy/remake/generally mess up with world, then it makes sense for the world (and the otherworldly powers on the other side of the great cosmic tug-o-war) to create their own militant response. Peaceful coexistence doesn't work when one side is only interested in peacefully coexisting with your mangled corpse. And that's how it goes in D&D. You can't really square moral relativism with the setting.

Do all players who try the class get this right? Of course not. It's a challenging class to RP convincingly while maintaining an interesting and compellingly human character. So we're bound to get some people who give the class a shot and land somewhere near the realm of perfectly-programmed GoodBot5000. It doesn't mean that's what the class is.

[The Rambling Midget]

Ehh... I dunno if the quote will be helpful here. Nearly all of that was first taken out of context and then further misinterpreted. It really was only meant to be a point about Paladin insanity, and not at all about the day to day goings on of goodly folk.

[Valo65]

The concept of absolute morality is a common debate in D&D. The topic the post appeared in was about insanity and alignment, but as Ecstatic said in his own post, he wanted to clarify some things not strictly related to the topic of the thread (namely, the nature of paladins, good and evil in D&D). In general I felt his post would fit here as it has a lot of stuff I agree with when it comes to paladins that more people should see.

[Rystefn]

Part of the problem with paladins is that one E. Gary Gygax went on record saying that it's mandatory they be bloodthirsty, genocidal, baby-killing psychopaths. Hard to have a coherent discussion about these paragons of virtue and right with that legacy dangling over their heads.

[The Rambling Midget]

I think that the question which needs to be answered before any discussion can begin is "what is expected of Arelithian Paladins?"

Most classes here have taken some divergent path, if only slightly, from the original intentions of Forgotten Realms lore, so it follows that Arelithian Paladins may follow a somewhat different standard.

[Marsi]

I think that the question which needs to be answered before any discussion can begin is "what is expected of Arelithian Paladins?"

Most classes here have taken some divergent path, if only slightly, from the original intentions of Forgotten Realms lore, so it follows that Arelithian Paladins may follow a somewhat different standard.

What is expected, in my opinion, is that they try. They try to be good, they try to be lawful. And sometimes they get it wrong. That's where the fun is. The self-crises, the inner conflict, the atonement path; character development.

I remember this really great quote someone had on paladins in the old forums, that touched on this (i'll try and find it). This is from the Children of Hurin -- ‘An honest hand and a true heart may hew amiss; and the harm may be harder to bear than the work of a foe'.

Trying and struggling, and the inevitable messing up of things, is what playing a paladin-- and surely any good character-- is all about.

[Katze]

perhaps instead go off of what your deity wants. a paladin of bahamut wants nothing more than to destroy tiamat and her spawn, a paladin of lavander would want to help others no matter the cost. It all just depends on whom they serve and abide the moral code of.

[What_Evil_Lurks]

...a paladin of lavander would want to help others no matter the cost..

A paladin of lavender would want to destroy all weeds, all the pruners, and make the world smell better. Right?

[Valo65]

What you're describing, Katze, is closer to a Divine Champion than a Paladin. Paladins uphold the Code, which in a nutshell involves not being dishonorable, smiting evil and protecting good, and typically do this in a fashion or mindset similar to their god's.

A paladin of Tyr would be very interested in assisting law enforcement across Faerun to bring bandits and thieves to justice, for instance. A paladin of Torm would likely be more of the questing sort who goes out and smites monstrous evils. But at the end of the day a paladin's code trumps his god's dogma, which is why Jergali Paladins cannot work with undead or they will lose their powers. Were they to learn of something that would bring about the world's destruction, they would also be obligated to prevent it as a paladin, despite the faith eagerly awaiting the apocalypse. Though they tend to just ignore the faith's undead and focus on bigger problems.

It's a minor, subtle, but important distinction.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I think there's a really big problem with how people perceive paladins. It's also because I think there's difference veins of "good" morality, which is why you see two LG characters get into heated arguments on the verge of sword-drawing.

I also hate looking to books - and no offense to Gary Gygax - but canon can often be flat out dumb.

There's an important distinction to make, that's often in history, about "good" -

Is it reactionary, or can you be proactive? I think this further demonstrates how a paladin can be played out. In my encounters it certainly has.

I think it's undeniable the fact that a militant paladin who wields a sword and shield in the face of evil, in turn, becomes something like he's fighting. That's where the "smite happy" paladin comes from. There's the reused saying that war and violence degenerates morality. Absolutely true of a paladin. But I find that to be a very "proactive" role - there's why a lot of gung-ho trigger-happy paladins often become the one's caught under fire.

But by no means is that the paladin's only route, and even though this thread is titled "Good does not mean Peaceful" the idea of reactionary, defensive measures (but equal militancy) is another path of a paladin. It does not equate to the idea of psychopathic, repeated, unjustified violence against the forces of evil (if you think that is that) but the preservation of what is good.

That's the idea of reactionary vs. proactive. And I think you can look at how a paladin acts by what they do.

Even though Ecstatic points out that moral absolutism is real (ugh hate admitting that), I think Mithreas once did a census of player's alignment, to find that the largest population of characters were neutral (was it around 40%?).

The paladin is the most interesting, testing and rewarding class, because of its negotiations with morality under the duress of visible evil, war, violence, protection and peace. And I think that's why it's the class that no one should ever come out and say it must be X, Y or Z.

If you follow canon to the C all the time, you'll never be creative or innovative as you could be if you pushed the enveloped and tried something exciting and risky.

[yellowcateyes]

The worst thing you can do as a paladin is to be apathetic or complacent. When you roll up a character, keep in mind that you are playing a fervent militant devoted to a cause. That character will be, by virtue of being what she is, an active actor. She will investigate. She will meddle. She will root out evil. And she will protect, smite, or redeem depending on what is appropriate.

To understand paladin behavior, you need to take a wider view of the setting as a whole. The cosmos is dominated by gods and greater powers - embodiments of certain fundamental forces, given divinity. Things such as murder, tyranny, pain, suffering, and loss are not conceptual, relativistic concepts. They are real forces, embodied in personalities of great power and ambition that wish to spread their influence as widely as possible. Similarly, there are powers of duty, justice, beauty, selflessness and knowledge, who seek to shape the world with their own views.

The overgod, Ao, mediates - but not in a way that guarantees balance. Ao, rather, seems interested only in rewarding those personas that act in accordance with their custodial portfolios, and punish those gods that break their own belief system.

As such, there is very real conflict between the powers that be. Gods live, die, and are born anew. Planes of existence are shaped based on the cosmic struggle. The ascendance or defeat of any of the greater powers re-shapes the universe in a very real way.

The Prime Material is at the core of the great conflict. Divinity is powered by worship and souls. A god without worship is forgotten, and eventually dies. A god with many worshipers thrives. Those that worship a god in life join that god in the afterlife. Burgeoning numbers of followers in that god's plane of existence only add to that deity's influence. Torm consumed the power of thousands of self-sacrificing followers to be able to do combat with Bane directly, and kill him.

Kelemvor ensures that mortal-kind plays by these rules with the 'Wall of the Faithless.' Those that do not elect to side with one god or another end up consigned to oblivion, slowly fading into nothingness as part of a horrific, impersonal structure.

A paladin is an individual of great faith, personal discipline, and rigorous training in a martial order. Moreover, a paladin is an individual who is aware of this grander struggle and, most importantly, elected a particular side of this struggle to champion.

This is why paladins often act with a fervent militancy that is off-putting to many others. A paladin sees herself as a soldier in the cosmic war, one that affects the very nature of the universe that everyone lives in. Every evil agent slain in the prime material, every soul saved and converted to the upper planes, tilts the cosmic balance in a slight - but extremely important - way.

Evil is real. Undead are malevolent entities and localized gateways into the negative energy plane, constantly siphoning the life of the prime material into the nether regions. Demons and devils are actual, physical beings that conspire eternally to corrupt the world, winning souls that their lords might feed upon.

Defeating such threats requires individuals of such certitude and surety, bound in an ironclad code, that no fear will touch them and no hesitation will hold them back. That is what a paladin is.

[Kashisjonny]

That was amazing, yellowcateyes. Well written.

[Rystefn]

Every evil agent slain in the prime material... tilts the cosmic balance in a slight - but extremely important - way.

Ummm... nope. Every evil agent slain in the Prime becomes a soldier for their cause in the afterlife. Often a stronger, more dedicated soldier. Pretty much universally, a soldier so far beyond redemption and and so difficult to permanently kill that from any practical standpoint, they have become immortal, eternal soldiers for the enemy.

That's why evil will always win. Because good is dumb.

[Ecstatic]

Every evil agent slain in the prime material... tilts the cosmic balance in a slight - but extremely important - way.

Ummm... nope. Every evil agent slain in the Prime becomes a soldier for their cause in the afterlife. Often a stronger, more dedicated soldier. Pretty much universally, a soldier so far beyond redemption and and so difficult to permanently kill that from any practical standpoint, they have become immortal, eternal soldiers for the enemy.

That's why evil will always win. Because good is dumb.

Um... Nope. The vast, overwhelming majority of people slain and sent to their eventual evil reward become petitioners, which are pretty well useless as soldiers, being eternally bound to the plane to which they are condemned. Only very select petitoners are ever vested with any meaningful power. Most of them, by and large are at most useful as soul fuel, but these people were headed that way anyhow, barring a drastic course correction. In this light, when they are slain, what you remove is their net capacity to perform evil deeds while alive and able to influence the mortal plane. Net balance: positive. Yes, it is less positive than securing their salvation (which is why a paladin should Always choose to save the ones they can), but salvation isn't for every evil.

Petitioners are also of pretty much no usefulness in influencing more people over to the side of evil, they have little to no initiative, and critically, no ability to be projected outside the plane to which they are bound: preaching the LE news to devils ain't exactly a useful expenditure of time for team evil.

And for the most part, being assimilated as a petitioner of an evil plane is a pretty raw deal. Good and neutral petitioners often continue their existence just as residents of their plane without being consumed. Evil is a little less likely to let a resource to to waste, so tends to consume its petitioners. These dribbles of soul eventually spawn new fiends, but it is usually after those souls have been absorbed by the plane and recombined. The transition from mortal directly to fiend is rare, and only exceptional mortals ever manage it. Most evil has successfully signed up for a spot in line for the great, cosmic soul-juicer.

[yellowcateyes]

Every evil agent slain in the prime material... tilts the cosmic balance in a slight - but extremely important - way.

Ummm... nope. Every evil agent slain in the Prime becomes a soldier for their cause in the afterlife. Often a stronger, more dedicated soldier. Pretty much universally, a soldier so far beyond redemption and and so difficult to permanently kill that from any practical standpoint, they have become immortal, eternal soldiers for the enemy.

That's why evil will always win. Because good is dumb.

Negative.

Live followers are often preferable to a god than feeble petitioners. And petitioners are rarely as strong or as powerful as they were in life. For example, only the most selfish, cruel, and evil of the mortals can - after an untold period of torture - become a lemure. That's right: the lowest-ranking, weakest devil, used mostly as cannon fodder in the Blood War. One's chances of advancing up the strict hierarchy of Hell from such a lowly position is hilariously, astronomically low.

Remember, powers without followers in the Prime Material are forgotten and then die. It doesn't matter how many dead petitioners are mucking about on their plane.

Secondly, live followers beget more live followers. A community of the faithful produces and raises children, brought into the church(es) of their society. Gods seek to establish their faiths over expanses of territory, since children raised in that territory will be natural converts. Further, live agents in the Prime Material can convert more souls to their cause.

A thriving goblin community produces numerous little goblin children that will become followers of Maglubiyet. Should that community be destroyed or scattered, many generations of followers will be pre-empted.

Slaughter and conversion are both tactics employed in the Prime Material to further a greater power's objectives in the cosmic struggle, for good or for evil. Paladins are only one example of the partisan agents that consider these calculations. Because of their good-aligned philosophy, they will (generally) prefer to redeem. But if given no choice, they will kill.

[Rystefn]

People make a big deal of this "Powers need worshipers or they'll die" but it's pretty much never actually happened. Look over the list of FR gods that have died, and you'll find that more have died at the hands of humans with weapons than from being forgotten and no longer worshiped. That's not even counting them killing one another off, which is overwhelmingly the most common end. In short: you will not ever make a significant impact in the direction of ending any Power by killing their followers. It's just not a thing. You are more likely to cause real damage to Shar by picking up a rusty butter knife and walking to the Shadow Plane than you are by killing purple robes.

Moreover - that lemure you were just scoffing at? Almost certainly a stronger and more dedicated servant of evil than whatever it was in life. That cannon fodder for the Blood War is effectively an unstoppable engine of death of destruction in the eyes of the hordes of 1st level commoners that comprise the overwhelming majority of the population of Toril. An unstoppable engine of death and destruction fueled by the souls of those not-quite-evil-enough individuals that also died on your paladin's sword.

So do go on, keep sending those souls over and telling yourself that killing people to have their souls turned into fuel and fodder for the armies of evil is for the greater good. I'm sure there's no fiend chuckling quietly to itself while it listens to your justifications and waits to collect your soul on the other side.

You're right. Good isn't dumb. But dumb people always do seem to think they're good.

[Valo65]

I think you're overthinking things, Rystefn. Killing evil beings that are actively causing harm or have an abnormal capacity for harm (due to being, for instance, undead) is not somehow adding fuel to the fire. When you put an end to these, you are putting an -end- to them because once they move on to the afterlife the number of ways they can influence the world is made very small.

If you kill a bandit and then he becomes a dretch, he'll probably spend most of his time being torn apart by devils or being tortured by more powerful demons. Unless he is in some way remarkable, he will probably spend all of eternity like that and will never become something like an Incubus or Balor, but it is still possible, admittedly. But the damage he is able to cause to average people is minimal at best, unless he is summoned to Faerun by an evil mage.

If, somehow, he were brought to Faerun, then his capacity to cause harm would indeed be greater as a dretch than as a regular bandit, but does this make killing the bandit in the first place wrong?

No. This dretch, formerly a bandit, is a tool of an evil mage. Were this mage killed, he as well may become a devil or demon, and we'll say he's strong enough to become an Imp, or even an Erinyes. I have to ask, what would this Erinyes be able to do? It's stuck in one of the layers of Hell, and likely has little to nothing to do with the Prime unless summoned by another evil mage or sent there by a stronger devil.

So again we see that killing an evil mortal at worst makes them a demon that MIGHT be summoned by a more powerful mortal. But in most cases they will waste away in the Lower Planes in an absolutely miserable existence while being unable to wreak havoc on Faerun as they did in life.

In the end, a paladin who kills a thousand bandits who become a thousand lemures has weakened "evil" in general because those thousand lemures, however vicious they are, are simply no longer able to do much due to a lack of opportunity.

[yellowcateyes]

Moreover - that lemure you were just scoffing at? Almost certainly a stronger and more dedicated servant of evil than whatever it was in life. That cannon fodder for the Blood War is effectively an unstoppable engine of death of destruction in the eyes of the hordes of 1st level commoners that comprise the overwhelming majority of the population of Toril. An unstoppable engine of death and destruction fueled by the souls of those not-quite-evil-enough individuals that also died on your paladin's sword.

A lemure is a CR 1 encounter. It is described as being on par with a basic human zombie.

I don't think CR 1 encounters qualify as "unstoppable engines of death and destruction."

Edit: Again, most souls bound for Hell do not become devils. Most end up as a side dish to Saturday morning tea and scones. Only the most evil, powerful and malicious souls end up - after untold centuries of torture - a CR 1 Lemure.

[yellowcateyes]

People make a big deal of this "Powers need worshipers or they'll die" but it's pretty much never actually happened. Look over the list of FR gods that have died, and you'll find that more have died at the hands of humans with weapons than from being forgotten and no longer worshiped. That's not even counting them killing one another off, which is overwhelmingly the most common end. In short: you will not ever make a significant impact in the direction of ending any Power by killing their followers. It's just not a thing. You are more likely to cause real damage to Shar by picking up a rusty butter knife and walking to the Shadow Plane than you are by killing purple robes.

Claiming that powers are independent of their followers is simply being disingenuous. The basic premise of Faiths and Pantheons rests on the dependance of deities on the waxing and waning of their faith on the prime material.

As for examples of deities that have faded or perished due to lack of worship, you need only look so far as the Netheril Pantheon. After the fall of the Netherese empire, many of their pantheon faded into namelessness. The most powerful, Amaunator - the god of law, the order and the sun - was explicitly written as to have died from lack of followers following the demise of Netheril.

If gods were independent of followers and happenings on the prime, why would any of them grant clerics spells and imbue mortal servants with divine followers? Some have philosophies and ambitions that need agents, but many powers are self-absorbed embodiments of natural phenomena.

Clerics get their spells because gods need worshippers, and clerics both safeguard and spread the faith.

[The Pretty Prince of Parties]

People make a big deal of this "Powers need worshipers or they'll die" but it's pretty much never actually happened. Look over the list of FR gods that have died, and you'll find that more have died at the hands of humans with weapons than from being forgotten and no longer worshiped.

. . .
As for examples of deities that have faded or perished due to lack of worship, you need only look so far as the Netheril Pantheon. After the fall of the Netherese empire, many of their pantheon faded into namelessness. The most powerful, Amaunator - the god of law, the order and the sun - was explicitly written as to have died from lack of followers following the demise of Netheril.

The majority of the gods that're given names/dogmas in the FR setting have churches that, while perhaps not open, are widespread and large enough to make their extinction due to lack of followers unlikely barring massive external forces/phenomena (the fall of Netheril, for example.)

However, a prime example of a spot where plenty of gods die from lack of followers? In Dis, there's a street - one of the few "constants" in the city - where new LE gods are born from wisps of faith and mortal belief. They're too weak to really influence anything, so they fight among each other for a divine demense on that street - the majority of them fade away before they gain any significant following.

[Rystefn]

Moreover - that lemure you were just scoffing at? Almost certainly a stronger and more dedicated servant of evil than whatever it was in life. That cannon fodder for the Blood War is effectively an unstoppable engine of death of destruction in the eyes of the hordes of 1st level commoners that comprise the overwhelming majority of the population of Toril. An unstoppable engine of death and destruction fueled by the souls of those not-quite-evil-enough individuals that also died on your paladin's sword.

A lemure is a CR 1 encounter. It is described as being on par with a basic human zombie.

I don't think CR 1 encounters qualify as "unstoppable engines of death and destruction."

Edit: Again, most souls bound for Hell do not become devils. Most end up as a side dish to Saturday morning tea and scones. Only the most evil, powerful and malicious souls end up - after untold centuries of torture - a CR 1 Lemure.

That's nice. Look at its stat line. CR to a party of actual adventurers is meaningless to the level 1 commoners that are, again, the overwhelming majority of the population. A group of PCs is assumed to have someone in it with with a 16+ Str and big-Snuggybear weapon. To a level 1 greatsword fighter throwing around d10+4 damage (more if she's got Power Attack), DR5 is an annoyance. To a level 1 commoner throwing around d4+0 with whatever non-weapon he picked up to bash at the thing, DR5 in a nigh-insurmountable obstacle. Torches and lanterns are likewise useless, because it's immune to fire. It will have killed off an entire household at least, if not more, by the time a proper milita can show up. Then, with their whopping d6+0 spears, it'll probably kill five or six of them before they can take it down. PCs with adventurer classes are freaking heroes from level 1 up precisely because they are capable of dealing with things like this. Regular people just aren't.

People make a big deal of this "Powers need worshipers or they'll die" but it's pretty much never actually happened. Look over the list of FR gods that have died, and you'll find that more have died at the hands of humans with weapons than from being forgotten and no longer worshiped. That's not even counting them killing one another off, which is overwhelmingly the most common end. In short: you will not ever make a significant impact in the direction of ending any Power by killing their followers. It's just not a thing. You are more likely to cause real damage to Shar by picking up a rusty butter knife and walking to the Shadow Plane than you are by killing purple robes.

Claiming that powers are independent of their followers is simply being disingenuous. The basic premise of Faiths and Pantheons rests on the dependance of deities on the waxing and waning of their faith on the prime material.

Pretending that's what I claimed is disingenuous. I said that one guy with a sword can't make a difference that way. If you can show me a civilization wiped out and its gods forgotten because of one paladin (or any number of paladins), you'll have a leg to stand on, but that's explicitly NOT what happened to Netheril, and therefore NOT what happened to the Netheril pantheon.

But hey, maybe I'm the stupid one here. Maybe I'm overthinking things. Maybe I've got it all wrong. If I do, so do the armies of Heaven and Hell, though. Because those demons and devils, they come to the Prime and kill people. Not just because some evil wizard summoned them, they do it on their own. It's not even that uncommon. The only reason they don't do it more is that they're preoccupied fighting one another in the Blood War. They do it explicitly to get more souls. Angels, though, they don't do it so much. In fact, you almost never hear of any of the soldiers of Upper Planes coming to the Prime to smite evil. They can. They have the ability. So why don't they?

While we've got our monster manuals open, let's take a look at the Solar, shall we? This is is literally a physical embodiment of all that is good in the form of the ultimate soldier of righteousness. Look at its stat block. Look at its innate abilities. Look at the fact that those numbers are unbuffed and it's also a 20th level cleric. How many goblin tribes could stand up to something like that? How many orc hordes? How many Red Wizard enclaves or Zhent outposts have even the slimmest hope surviving if a Solar turns up with intent to do them harm? If smiting those things into oblivion is a net good, where are the Solars?

With 22 Int and 23 Wis, they are literally superhumanly smart. They have a knowledge and understanding far beyond what the likes of you or I could ever hope to comprehend. And they do not come to the prime to wipe out the followers of evil gods in the hopes of weakening their eternal foes. Is a paladin trying to do it less good than the Solar, or less smart?

[yellowcateyes]

The discussion would be assisted by reading closely the replies written thus far. As pointed out many, many times in this thread, the denizens of the planes are limited in their dealings on the Prime Material. Archdevils can't decide to walk through Cormyr on their own, nor can Solars simply show up, unbidden, at the gates of Zhentil Keep.

Outsiders cannot freely enter the Prime Material except under very specific, limited conditions. The greater powers are largely limited to influencing the Prime Material through mortal agents (provided divine spells and power), exercising their domain powers, and the careful use of avatars (which is itself risky, as it exposes them to harm).

A power's agenda on the Prime Material is set back when that power loses agents and followers. Simple as.

I understand you have a strong partisan bent against the Good alignment, and paladins in particular. However, trying to impose a twisted reading of the setting to render an entire alignment - and class - as limited to "stupid" and pointless endeavors is not just unfair. It's also nonsensical, and goes against a plain reading of the core books.

It is also, to be frank, an unexciting and uninspired interpretation of the lore. The planar setting has been set up so that, despite the power and divinity of the greater forces in the universe, low-level adventurers and common people can still have a significant effect through their own choices and actions. The fact that "small people," through their exercise of choices and individual morality, can change the world is the foundation of this canon. And that is more compelling than the alternative.

If nothing any character ever does will ever change the status quo, that goes against the grain of D&D and roleplaying in general - the empowerment of players through the choices they make.

So yes, when a paladin and a blackguard fight each other, it is significant who wins. When a people's faith in a region is supplanted by another, it is significant for the powers that be - the deities that live and thrive off of the power of faith. Saying otherwise is just being obtuse.

[yellowcateyes]

That's nice. Look at its stat line. CR to a party of actual adventurers is meaningless to the level 1 commoners that are, again, the overwhelming majority of the population. A group of PCs is assumed to have someone in it with with a 16+ Str and big-Snuggybear weapon. To a level 1 greatsword fighter throwing around d10+4 damage (more if she's got Power Attack), DR5 is an annoyance. To a level 1 commoner throwing around d4+0 with whatever non-weapon he picked up to bash at the thing, DR5 in a nigh-insurmountable obstacle. Torches and lanterns are likewise useless, because it's immune to fire. It will have killed off an entire household at least, if not more, by the time a proper milita can show up. Then, with their whopping d6+0 spears, it'll probably kill five or six of them before they can take it down. PCs with adventurer classes are freaking heroes from level 1 up precisely because they are capable of dealing with things like this. Regular people just aren't.

Other CR1 encounters include Giant Toads.

I, for one, welcome our amphibian overlords.

[I_Am_King_Midas]

This is very entertaining.