A theory about Paladins.
Alexisisinneed
Member Posts: 470
My lore for Paladins for the D&D universe might not be correct, but doesn't the Paladins received their powers from some source of divinity? So whenever I play a Paladin class I always imagine that I receive my divine powers from the essence of Bhaal within me. This could also work with the sorcerers and Clerics class too. Anyone else think about this?
1
Comments
You are right, though, Paladins are the crusaders of their respective patron deity (or in some cases a primordial, demon, or devil) and it is through them that they gain their divine powers. BG doesn't properly reflect that system, same with clerics. Afaik there are no "vanilla" clerics either in D&D, they are all supposed to serve a specific deity. I suppose going into all the details would have made BG unnecessarily complex, so they toned it down a little.
"Neither: he *believes* that he serves Milil, but his divine magic stems from his Bhaalspawn taint. (Which is the only way I can see divine spellcasters among the Bhaalspawns - what gods would want to deal them? Well, maybe the evil ones...?)
So he is, in truth, a deityless paladin.
I know it doesn't work like that but heck that's how I roleplay it!"
From You and your PC thread.
I believe that their taint can grant the Bhaalspawn divine spells even without having a patron deity. Why? Because they are no mere mortals - they are the children of a dead god. As they grow stronger (if they are able to) they master their taint, that grows alongside them in power, and "wields" it however they wish. But it can also consume them if they are careless. And should the Bhaalspawn die... well, you know what happens.
Again, this is just how I roleplay it. It could be, and most likely is, just a big stinkin' plot hole, as pointed out by @Lord_Tansheron. ^^
The only thing that's missing is that option being actually implemented in some meaningful (or even visible) way. The way it is now, paladin patron deities "just happen" without any sort of special mention; it is assumed that every paladin has one, whoever it may be.
The same is true for "vanilla" clerics. They are not god-less, they simply follow some deity that isn't properly implemented (i.e. anything not Talos, Helm, or Lathander). Which deity that is, well, that's up to your imagination to fill in...
In that sense, BG is a bit immersion-breaking, especially given how important a role specific faith plays in D&D. Though as I said, implementing it all at a level of depth and complexity comparable to PnP would make the game too complicated and too convoluted.
But it seems that isn't too much of a problem, is it? You already came up with your own solutions, and that's also part of what makes BG such a great game. Not EVERYTHING is explained or immovably defined for you. There is always room for imagination and RP, and people should be glad for it. It seems you are
But yeah, maybe I'm overthinking it. Perhaps the gods, even the good ones, can overlook the Bhaalspawns' taint and accept them as one of their servants.
Even so, learning the truth of being a child of Bhaal and the fear of one's own inner darkness could all be interesting aspects of a Bhaalspawn paladin/cleric. Maybe even losing one's faith, if only momentarily... hmm...
An evil god might want to leverage the power of the Bhaalspawn essence. A good god might want to deliver the soul from the evil of the taint. But at the end of the day, the worship and devotion are what drive both the deity granting the power and the abilities that manifest in the character.
With regards to the Bhaalspawn saga it probably means a pretty devout individual who fights a winning battle against their demons within, with A LOT of help from their patron deity.
I actually find that a VERY appealing character!
And now I *really* want to play Planescape: Torment! :P
When 2E first came out it the whole "specialty priest" thing excited me a lot; so I took an old 1E DDG as an outline and choose spheres of influence, special powers, and armor/weapon restrictions fitting to each priesthood (I mean, a cleric of Apollo has to be able to use bows, right?).
I didn't add a lot of kits beyond defining where the various 2E kits were from and which ones just didn't fit Amazons, Barbarians, Peasants, Nobles... remember 2E kits were quite different than what they're currently doing with BG). I did add a healer kit for single class clerics of some good deities, but that was more AD&D inspired than Greek. I also added a "Champion" class that was sort of a NG Holy Warrior for Hestia, and "Anti-Paladin" as a CE (un)Holy Warrior of Ares.
I think the result was pretty successful. Several of my friends borrowed my work, and for several years every AD&D game I was playing in used the Greek Specialty Clerics I had designed. So that part was successful and a lot of fun.
I also like a lot about classical architecture and art so that played a big part in my game too (just um, ignore the thousand years difference between the Mycenaean and Classical eras...)
I also enjoyed basing a lot of adventures off classical myths and characters; and the ancient world in general (I ran a long sub-campaign set in Ancient Egypt).
But you know, I really like weapons technology too. And I found it very difficult to limit myself to Bronze Age or early Iron Age weapons tech, I mean seriously, any sword bigger than a short sword would bend in half if it was bronze; where's the fun in that! So I decided on a world that was culturally and politically Mycenaean (c 1250 BC), stylistically Classical (c. 300 BC), and technologically Medieval (c 1300 AD).
I think it worked well overall, and I've run variations on that world for over 30 years. But it's odd and unique too. My friends just call it Dave's game. And I'm really wishing I had more time to run it!
I think the genre is called "Sword & Sandal".