Arelith

There's nothing heroic about simply taking paladin levels

LG is described as the alignment of paladins and many traditional heroes.

you don't have to be a paladin to be a hero, but it definitely lends itself to being one, because the class is one of action.

Paladins are people, and they're different. They all worship different gods, have different priorities, ect.

Some will be militant
Some will be persuasive
Some will be compassionate.
Some will be Furious.
Some will be scolarly.
Some will follow the law no matter what.
Some will answer to their Lord.
Some will be almost vigilantees.
So on. So forth.

Having paladins who are kind and gentle and keen on redemption is awsome! Great!
Having Paladins who are furious and angry, and want to go out and smite that evil is also fantastic!
Having the debate about which is 'right' is also awsome - let's do that In Game and In Character though.

This sort of conversation crops up every now and then, and Paladin is literaly the only class where people have huge Opinions about how they're to be played.

"For Verily, only I knoweth how to play a Paladin! For Our Lord and Savior Gygax hath touched me 'pon the Brow, and given me the Holy Roleplay Sight, with alloweth me to understand the Way and Nature of a Paladin! Those who art not doing it accoding to HIS HOLY VISION art Wrong and Bad and should not Play Paladins! For Only I knoweth! Only I can Judge what maketh a Good Paladin! The Only Sort of Paladin there is! AND THUS! I SAY UNTO THEE! UNWASHED MASSES! IF Thou art not playing a Paladin as I say, thou souldeth not be playing A Paladin At All! For I am Knoweth All and Seeth all and Understandeth all! And I know HOW this class should be played! And I have /suffered/ to play this Conceptr! Oh I have been pained and tormented! And I know that TRUE ROLEPLAY ELEET! who's fingers SING upon the KEYBOARDS of HOLYNESS may play True Paladins! And UNLESS you play them EXACTLY as I say! In EXACTLY the right measure of Mercy! Fury! And Passion, then I say unto thee. NAY! Thou shalt not play a Paladin! THOU SHALT NOT!"

Or something like this, anyway.

Let's get something streight.

You Cannot Play A Perfect Paladin in a Multiplayer Environment Like Arelith.

Consider this statement a moment, and let that sink in.

The Alignment system, was never meant to be used in the sort of mass player environment we use. In a Pen and Paper, it works because the Dm knows the players, can talk to the players on a constant one-to-one basis, and can adaquatly work out their concept. In arleith, that sort of micromanagement isn't avaiable.

For the 'law/chaos' side of it, there's the simple question of: - Does it mean 'external' law, or 'internal' law? Does being 'lawful' mean a Paladin has to follow all laws? Or if they judge the laws wrong, can they follow the tenants of their heart?

The obvious answer is 'a bit of both' but for some that'd never be a good response. See above argument.

The more well trodden argument goes back to the Good/Evil divide. Or the argument between Means and Ends.

People say 'Good/Evil is Objective in the Realms, not Subjective as in RL'
This is true. The problem is, however, that Real Life is Subjective, and how we play our characters, and judge other characters is, as such, subjective. And unless the DMs want to put up a massive list of actions that are Always Always Always Always good/Evil, covering every single possible option, it'll remain so.

Let's use the example of the Trolly Problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

The short idea of this is - There is a train coming down some tracks, but the tracks diverge. On one track is five people, tied down. This is the track the train is on and it will kill them. On the other track is one person, tied down. You can make the train switch tracks to the other one - just killing one person. But that means you activly chose for someone to die. Or you can not do so, and let the other five die.

To us this is a discussion. Is it right to take an active choice to kill someone, even if it will save others?

But in theory, in the Realms, this isn't a discussion. Good Is Objective. One of the options is Good. the other is Not.

So to go back to Paladins - either
a) It is never right to jump to violence. You need to give that warlock over there a chance. Yeah, maybe he'll torture/maim/sacrifice/murder 1000 people because you gave him a chance, but the thing is - you gave him a Chance and that's the Good Thing To Do.
b) It's never right to let a known practitioner of evil escape. Someone has sold their soul to the devils/demons/fey and they are now a menace to society that needs to be put down. Maybe they could be saved, but the risk just isn't worth it!

Which one of those is ALWAYS the right hting to do?

Well obviously - neither! And different characters, different paladins, are going to swing different ways, to different extremes on how to deal with that, and other, situations.

Yeah, of course there are extremes where you go 'uh, are you really playing your class?' But I think most of the time they should be treated as extremes, and leeway should be given for people to play their conceps. We dont' see nearly the amount of judgement and such for say, Blackguards as we do for Paladins. And that's hardly fair.

So yeah, just chill guys. If you think there's a massive alignment breach going on, report it. Otherwise, why not take the debate In Game? It's fertile ground for roleplay after all.

I can tell you why paladins get such criticism. It's because it's the class that's most likey to put a stop to demickey behavior

sad_zav wrote: Thu Nov 22, 2018 11:05 pm I can tell you why paladins get such criticism. It's because it's the class that's most likey to put a stop to demickey behavior

Demickey?

What does that mean?

Getting the terminology straight would also help here as the word "hero" is often interchangeable with the word "protagonist" with regards to storytelling. A dictionary definition sheds more light here as a protagonist is simply the main character of any story, whereas a hero is defined as somebody admired for their exceptional qualities by OTHERS.

• we all are playing the main protagonist in our character's story. A character shouldn't earn any extra spotlight in the larger narrative just by taking a handful of levels in a specific class, nor does it make them entitled to be acknowledged as heroes by default.

• The most basic way to make a protagonist interesting is having them overcome some sort of hardship resulting in the evolution of said character. Having other characters acknowledge this character arc is the best way for a character to earn the title "hero".
  That being said, there's nothing heroic about a group of paladins picking on lone stray villains, because they do not challenge themselves by doing so. Doing that only portrays them as unlikable schoolyard bullies.

• "Heroes" being only as interesting as their "villains" ~ that's true, but mainly because every antagonist merely represents the hardship outlined in the point above that the protagonist needs to overcome. It is important to remember that it is not the job of other players to portray a fitting antagonist for your character in order to facilitate their character arc and make them interesting. That's your job! You need to figure out a meaningful connection between these characters (a critical hit does not constitute a meaningful "connection" btw.) and most importantly, how does the conflict between them challenge your protagonist.

I don't think anyone here is confusing that

Perhaps relevant to the discussion:

What many seem to misunderstand is that good and evil do not entirely work the same way as they do in our world. You'd consider your average person who works a 9-5 job, keeps to themselves, raise their family, etc. a good person. But in D&D that's simply not enough. That would be considered a neutral character.

To be a good character is to actively do good. To be evil, likewise, is to actively do evil. I'm not saying characters never rest, naturally they do. But good characters will be driven by goals that promote good, and evil characters likewise vice-versa.

To abstain from evil is not good. That's merely neutral. And that's fine, most neutral characters won't cause much harm or stir the pot too much in either camp. They might lean back and forward for seasons, but their goals, bonds, and ambitions are ultimately selfish. Harmless? Most often, yes. But certainly selfish. They look after themselves and what they consider a part of theirs, be it family, friends, legal obligations, kindred bonds, etc.

Malcolm Reynolds wrote:I look out for me and mine. That don't include you 'less I conjure it does

There are always grey areas, but ultimately good characters will strive for good, and evil characters will strive for evil.

A Paladin is held to even a higher standard than Lawful Good characters. They're supposed to uphold the laws of their order and always strive to actively keep their oath. They have a mandate from the gods themselves. Societies of good look up to them and revere them for their servitude, while societies of evil envy and hate them for the very reason that they are not passive and seemingly always meddle with evil affairs (by destroying, redeeming, and/or overturning them).

If someone is very clearly breaking the be good part of a Paladin just report it.I do agree with the side that sometimes a few paladin players/characters step over the line. But many of the examples given a paladin can actually do,here,taken from the Arelith wiki itself:

"What the paladin must do in their life, however, is adhere to the tenants of their code, and do good. You must, and may not ever willingly commit an evil act for the sake of a sin. There are some murky waters surrounding this general statement, but it remains by and large inviolable. If the shopkeep is refusing to tell you where the evil ritual to bring ruin to the world is taking place out of fear of reprisal, you have permission to break his nose to get the information out of him. You're holy warriors, darn it. Not holy wusses.

That being said, a paladin is not to be faulted for on occasion not showing compassion, or getting fed up with people. They are not to be faulted for raising a fist in anger, briefly, given that they lower it with significantly less anger."

and

"There is a lot of variation and development for different ways for people to play paladins. They are not all the 'crusader' type, nor the righteous avenger. They have as much variation in preferences and activities as rogues or fighters. Just keep in mind the best intentions and a slightly stoic mindset concerning life, and you should be good."
- Author: Zeral

EDIT: I'm quoting that because it's exactly what i think.Lawful Good can have a lot of interpretations and it leads to good RP if played right! Lawful Good is not just one thing as many people seem to think,so just keep in mind while some actions indeed are stepping over the line many of them are just a different interpretation of the Lawful Good alignement than the "classic" one.Zealots for example can be LG yes. What i am trying to say here is many of the things some people may or are considering reportable on this thread aren't actually but just another interpretation of the alignement wich can lead to interesting RP,so before reporting think in depth: "Is this action truly over the line?"

sad_zav wrote: Thu Nov 22, 2018 11:43 pm I don't think anyone here is confusing that

...maybe with the exception of that one person who wrote this?

sad_zav wrote: Thu Nov 22, 2018 10:38 pm LG is described as the alignment of paladins and many traditional heroes.

you don't have to be a paladin to be a hero, but it definitely lends itself to being one, because the class is one of action.

I said hero, not protagonist

Exactly, paladins are mere protagonists until/unless you forge them into heroes with their story arc. They are no different in this regard than any other class.
They need to earn their heroic status and acknowledgment in the eyes of others by their achievements, just like every other class - hence my previous statement that there's nothing heroic about simply taking paladin levels.

Paladins don't get to be heroes simply by the virtue of them being paladins, that's just lazy writing.



...and if someone is anything less than a hero, why should they be looked up to by anyone?

did I say that? all I recall saying was that paladins lend themselves to being heroes

I don't really know what you're arguing at the point, and tbh your authority is kind of questionable to me considering you unironically lumped paladins and banites together. that just looks like a gross misunderstanding of alignment and purpose to me

TL;DR some and skimmed, but adding my points.

1: I know this is a topic some people are passionate about, but try to be nice. I'm not going to go back and doing any edits to any remarks so far, and will leave it open for now, but I will to any going forward in this thread.

2: Paladins are very restricted in alignment, but not as restricted in portrayal as a lot of people tend to believe. Lawful Good doesn't mean obeying the local law. If a law runs contrary to their alignment, they aren't going to follow it. This could mean bringing the sick in for care during a quarantine of Cordor, disrupting the slave trade in Sibiyad, complaining about local gambling in Guldorand, or complaining about a law that demands kittens are killed on sight in Myon.

3: I'm seeing some tension in regards to confrontation and PvP. Confrontation != PvP, though it is antagonizing tension. It might lead to PvP however, but not every paladin player is seeking to kill you. It could be just to de-summon a fiend, or for the ceasing of practice of necromancy. I very much agree with the view of paladins confronting evil. Passive/Responsive good is not bad persay, but we actually enjoy seeing Good (And Paladins) being active in their confrontations. I would not call this active confronting bullying/berating, though a paladin's personality certainly may be brash or jerkish in their efforts. This active seeking is as respectful a approach as the softer more passive one (Though not too passive so as to allow evil too much leeway, and not too aggressive either, extremes should be avoided).

4: No one can force PvP on you. Seriously. You can not log in to avoid it. Most people allow outs. You have lenses. You could stay in a locked room the whole time. Generally PvP that is like that (with no prior RP, one liner to only follow the letter of the rules) breaks server rules.

5: Paladins are generally looked up to in my opinion, often seen as heroes, or at least respected. Liked is another matter entirely. You have nothing to fear unless you're acting Chaotic/Evil.

6: If you see something out of line, report it. We may not agree with you in the end, but it can't hurt because you might be right and it can be a coaching point for the player.

For my sake and for others, I'm dipping from this thread

sad_zav wrote: Fri Nov 23, 2018 12:40 am I said hero, not protagonist

sad_zav wrote: Fri Nov 23, 2018 12:58 am did I say that? all I recall saying was that paladins lend themselves to being heroes

oh well if you want to hit me with the door on my way out by quoting me supporting myself that's cool

xd

check yourself

-XXX-, stop.

This topic's done.