Does anybody use the tweaks option to make characters use the 'old' walking speeds? Heck with that. Would be unpopular I would bet as befits this thread. My kobold and ogre pc's slower pace gets them bit in the behind by wolves and bears more often than not as it is before finding boots of speed (or of the Weasel for rangers and druid/shamans).
Unpopular opinion: 90% of people who role play paladins/lawful good either do it wrongly or don’t adapt past the most simplistic characteristics of the alignment.
Unpopular opinion: 90% of people who role play paladins/lawful good either do it wrongly or don’t adapt past the most simplistic characteristics of the alignment.
Agreed, lawful good is already the most difficult alignment to roleplay and tossing a Paladin code in their doubly so. I hate how prevalent "lawful stupid" is as a trope.
Actually, I think the real question should be this: is any alignment easy to play well? Lawful good and Lawful neutral become Lawful stupid, Chaotic neutral becomes Chaotic evil, True neutral becomes Chaotic neutral, anything evil becomes Mr. Zsasz on steroids. Maybe Neutral good is hard to screw up, but that might be it.
Unpopular opinion: 90% of people who role play paladins/lawful good either do it wrongly or don’t adapt past the most simplistic characteristics of the alignment.
as someone who often plays good aligned characters, including paladins, I absolutely agree with this. The paladin is such an interesting concept and can be a lot more fun when you've got someone who doesn't live up to that code 100% of the time, because I mean, what regular person could? People got flaws.
And just the moral dilemma that can arise when the lawful thing to do isn't the right thing to do, and deciding whether you lean more towards "lawful" or "good" can be super interesting to play out. Being forced into introspection and the challenge of maintaining moral consistency in your actions in situations where law and good have become mutually exclusive is one of the coolest things about the alignment, especially if you throw a paladin's code of chivalry into the mix.
Seeing so many people who dumb all that potential down to "Lawful Stupid", or only play their alignment as long as it's CONVENIENT, really upsets me, and if I ever start playing Lawful Stupid myself, I sincerely hope someone smacks me upside the head.
Unpopular opinion: 90% of people who role play paladins/lawful good either do it wrongly or don’t adapt past the most simplistic characteristics of the alignment.
as someone who often plays good aligned characters, including paladins, I absolutely agree with this. The paladin is such an interesting concept and can be a lot more fun when you've got someone who doesn't live up to that code 100% of the time, because I mean, what regular person could? People got flaws. .
I used to have difficulty playing with priests, I mean, to roleplay someone who's got true faith and have fun with it. Then I realised that BG does it quite well, I mean, look at Jaheira, Keldorn, Viconia and Anomen - they all have true faith in their deities but it is quite obvious that they also have qualities and flaws which aren't related to their profession. S2
@LadyEibhilinRhett The problem with your stance on paladins is that people rarely if ever live up to their ideals. If they don't, people call them hypocrites but that is not always the case. All people have weaknesses, which accounts for the divorces of people who are opposed to divorce, but who do things which precipitate divorce.
Paladins are nothing but dangerous vigilantes with good PR. A paladin's certainty is either that of a foolish child who has never been confronted with a truly difficult moral choice, or of a dangerous zealot who sees the world only in absolutes.
@LadyEibhilinRhett The problem with your stance on paladins is that people rarely if ever live up to their ideals. If they don't, people call them hypocrites but that is not always the case. All people have weaknesses, which accounts for the divorces of people who are opposed to divorce, but who do things which precipitate divorce.
People rarely are favored from their deities with cool features due to their faith.
@Pantalion Even when the moral choices are not difficult, so often we don't do the right thing because of our own moral frailty. We do what we want rather than what is right, at least I do and I haven't noticed others being much different.
@Pantalion Even when the moral choices are not difficult, so often we don't do the right thing because of our own moral frailty. We do what we want rather than what is right, at least I do and I haven't noticed others being much different.
We generally do what we want and rationalize that decision as being the right thing to do.
I don't usually go for the most recent editions of D&D but they do have alot of interesting material that fleshes out new and old classes some. The oaths that paladins now take at 3rd lvl seem to be quite interesting. I particularly like the Oath of Vengeance and would use that play style if I did run a paladin. I think mostly because it seems so different than the standard type paladin of old. It mentions neutral or lawful neutral but seems like depending on one's belief/faith in the FR's, it could work with LG, well, in BG anyway as alignment and reputation don't always match. This one has almost gotten me to give a go at one. (from 5th ed. WIki) I like it anyway, particularly as an Inquisitor.
Oath of Devotion:
The Oath of Devotion binds a paladin to the loftiest ideals of justice, virtue, and order. Sometimes called cavaliers, white knights, or holy warriors, these paladins meet the ideal of the knight in shining armor. Acting with honor in pursuit of justice and the greater good. They hold themselves to the highest standards of conduct, and some—for better or worse—hold the rest of the world to the same standards. Many who swear this oath are devoted to gods of law and good and use their gods' tenets as the measure of their devotion. They hold angels—the perfect servants of good—as their ideals, and incorporate images of angelic wings into their helmets or coats of arms. Tenets of Devotion
Though the exact words and strictures of the Oath of Devotion vary, paladins of this oath share these tenets.
Honesty: Don't lie or cheat. Let your word be your promise.
Courage: Never fear to act, though caution is wise.
Compassion: Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them. Show mercy to your foes, but temper it with wisdom.
Honor: Treat others with fairness, and let your honorable deeds be an example to them. Do as much good as possible, while causing the least amount of harm.
Duty: Be responsible for your actions and their consequences, protect those entrusted to your care, and obey those who have just authority over you.
Oath of the Ancients:
The Oath of the Ancients is as old as the race of elves and the rituals of the druids. Sometimes called fey knights, green knights, or horned knights, paladins who swear this oath cast their lot with the side of the light, the cosmic struggle against darkness, because they love the beautiful and life-giving things of the world, not necessarily because they believe in principles of honor, courage, and justice. They adorn their armor and clothing with images of growing things—leaves, antlers, or flowers—to reflect their commitment to preserving life and light in the world. Tenets of the Ancients
The tenets of the Oath of the Ancients have been preserved for uncounted centuries. This oath emphasizes the principles of good above any concerns of law or chaos. Its fair central principles are simple.
Kindle the Light. Through your acts of mercy, kindness, and forgiveness, kindle the light of hope in the world, beating back despair.
Shelter the Light. Where there is good, beauty, love, and laughter in the world, stand against the wickedness that would swallow it. Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren.
Preserve Your Own Light. Delight in song and laughter, in beauty and art. If you allow the light to die in your own heart, you can't preserve it in the world.
Be the Light. Be a glorious beacon for all who live in despair. Let the light of your joy and courage shine forth in all your deeds.
Oath of Vengeance:
The Oath of Vengeance is a solemn commitment to punish those who have committed a grievous sin. When evil forces slaughter helpless villagers, when an entire people turns against the will of the gods, when a thieves' guild grows too violent and powerful, when a dragon rampages through the countryside—at times like these, paladins arise and swear an Oath of Vengeance to set right that which has gone wrong. To these paladins—sometimes called avengers or dark knights—their own purity is not as important as delivering justice. Tenets of Vengeance
The tenets of the Oath of Vengeance vary by paladin, but all the tenets revolve around punishing wrongdoers by any means necessary. Paladins who uphold these tenets are willing to sacrifice even their own righteousness to mete out justice upon those who do evil, so the paladins are often neutral or lawful neutral in alignment. The core principles of the tenets are brutally simple.
Fight the Greater Evil. Faced with a choice of fighting my sworn foes or combating a lesser evil, I choose the greater evil.
No Mercy for the Wicked. Ordinary foes might win my mercy, but my sworn enemies do not.
By Any Means Necessary. My qualms can't get in the way of exterminating my foes.
Restitution. If my foes wreak ruin on the world, it is because I failed to stop them. I must help those harmed by their misdeeds.
Paladins are nothing but dangerous vigilantes with good PR. A paladin's certainty is either that of a foolish child who has never been confronted with a truly difficult moral choice, or of a dangerous zealot who sees the world only in absolutes.
And that would perfectly describe our beloved "Lawful Stupid" (seriously, they have to add that alignment to the rule-books along with "Crazy Loony"). True paladins are not supposed to be like that, but writers often do not have enough time to think or dig deep to understand, so, we get what we get.
Fun fact: it is directly inspired by Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.
I’m not at home atm so I can’t check but if I recall they have an ability where instead of being killed they are brought down to 1hp, similar to how the Green Knight was decapitated but then just put his head back on. I’ll edit my post with more details when I can.
@Zaghoul I played a paladin of Hoar once in 3e, and, due to the nature of Hoar's tenets, my playstyle for that character WAS very similar to the Oath of Vengeance. I can confirm it is an interesting way to play a paladin.
All paladins should be pretty blonde girls with blue eyes, riding an armored Yamaha bike with a magic sword in hand. And the D&D rules can object all their want.
Fun fact: it is directly inspired by Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.
I’m not at home atm so I can’t check but if I recall they have an ability where instead of being killed they are brought down to 1hp, similar to how the Green Knight was decapitated but then just put his head back on. I’ll edit my post with more details when I can.
Reminds me of the old Sean Connery movie Sword of the Valiant where he does just that after losing his head.
Actually, I think the real question should be this: is any alignment easy to play well? Lawful good and Lawful neutral become Lawful stupid, Chaotic neutral becomes Chaotic evil, True neutral becomes Chaotic neutral, anything evil becomes Mr. Zsasz on steroids. Maybe Neutral good is hard to screw up, but that might be it.
Chaotic Neutral is easier than it sounds, just be a jerk without being evil. CN has a wealth of different ways with the simplified way of it being Chaotic Neutral Good, Chaotic Neutral Evil and Pure Chaotic Neutral
Chaotic Neutral is easier than it sounds, just be a jerk without being evil. CN has a wealth of different ways with the simplified way of it being Chaotic Neutral Good, Chaotic Neutral Evil and Pure Chaotic Neutral
Honestly, I'd say that that's an internal contradiction. It can't be "easy" to do CN precisely because too many players want to used the bolded characterization as their excuse to be a jerk while being evil, but also without the stigma of having a mechanically evil character. You know, like in The Gamers 2.
@Abi_Dalzim I feel as if we will just have to respectfully disagree. An example is my character Zaram who's heart is in the right place most of the time but he's still an impulsive jerk who occasionally does something that could be seen as evil (example: killing the Paladin for Dorn at the wedding) but wouldn't go around randomly killing innocent people or (intentionally) burning down a village. He won't go out of his way to make someone's life miserable or kill someone unless he feels they deserve it.
@ZaramMaldovar I think we're approaching the question from fundamentally different perspectives. I'm sure you can play a fine CN character, or of any other alignment. It's not like these are platonic ideals that no roleplayer ever meets. When we say "Lawful Good is hard to play as not Lawful Stupid", we don't mean that nobody can do it, but that too many people fail at it in a predictable way. By the same token, when I say that Chaotic Neutral is too easy to roleplay as Chaotic Evil in all but name, I certainly don't mean that's an impossible pitfall to avoid, but that it's a convenient excuse for bad roleplayers.
Abi_Dalzim said:Actually, I think the real question should be this: is any alignment easy to play well? Lawful good and Lawful neutral become Lawful stupid, Chaotic neutral becomes Chaotic evil, True neutral becomes Chaotic neutral, anything evil becomes Mr. Zsasz on steroids. Maybe Neutral good is hard to screw up, but that might be it.
This is why I like the Crusader Paladin kit. Being Chaotic Good allows you to use your brain, and for me allows me to play naturally, i.e. as I would in RL. I prefer to play good without having to be PC.
For instance I was recently criticised for calling a paralytic drunk that I was helping, a drunk. To me that wasn't being judgemental, just objective. For all I know, he could have had very good reasons for getting that drunk, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't drunk.
Comments
And just the moral dilemma that can arise when the lawful thing to do isn't the right thing to do, and deciding whether you lean more towards "lawful" or "good" can be super interesting to play out. Being forced into introspection and the challenge of maintaining moral consistency in your actions in situations where law and good have become mutually exclusive is one of the coolest things about the alignment, especially if you throw a paladin's code of chivalry into the mix.
Seeing so many people who dumb all that potential down to "Lawful Stupid", or only play their alignment as long as it's CONVENIENT, really upsets me, and if I ever start playing Lawful Stupid myself, I sincerely hope someone smacks me upside the head.
If they don't, people call them hypocrites but that is not always the case. All people have weaknesses, which accounts for the divorces of people who are opposed to divorce, but who do things which precipitate divorce.
I particularly like the Oath of Vengeance and would use that play style if I did run a paladin. I think mostly because it seems so different than the standard type paladin of old. It mentions neutral or lawful neutral but seems like depending on one's belief/faith in the FR's, it could work with LG, well, in BG anyway as alignment and reputation don't always match. This one has almost gotten me to give a go at one. (from 5th ed. WIki) I like it anyway, particularly as an Inquisitor.
Oath of Devotion:
Tenets of Devotion
Though the exact words and strictures of the Oath of Devotion vary, paladins of this oath share these tenets.
Honesty: Don't lie or cheat. Let your word be your promise.
Courage: Never fear to act, though caution is wise.
Compassion: Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them. Show mercy to your foes, but temper it with wisdom.
Honor: Treat others with fairness, and let your honorable deeds be an example to them. Do as much good as possible, while causing the least amount of harm.
Duty: Be responsible for your actions and their consequences, protect those entrusted to your care, and obey those who have just authority over you.
Oath of the Ancients:
Tenets of the Ancients
The tenets of the Oath of the Ancients have been preserved for uncounted centuries. This oath emphasizes the principles of good above any concerns of law or chaos. Its fair central principles are simple.
Kindle the Light. Through your acts of mercy, kindness, and forgiveness, kindle the light of hope in the world, beating back despair.
Shelter the Light. Where there is good, beauty, love, and laughter in the world, stand against the wickedness that would swallow it. Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren.
Preserve Your Own Light. Delight in song and laughter, in beauty and art. If you allow the light to die in your own heart, you can't preserve it in the world.
Be the Light. Be a glorious beacon for all who live in despair. Let the light of your joy and courage shine forth in all your deeds.
Oath of Vengeance:
Tenets of Vengeance
The tenets of the Oath of Vengeance vary by paladin, but all the tenets revolve around punishing wrongdoers by any means necessary. Paladins who uphold these tenets are willing to sacrifice even their own righteousness to mete out justice upon those who do evil, so the paladins are often neutral or lawful neutral in alignment. The core principles of the tenets are brutally simple.
Fight the Greater Evil. Faced with a choice of fighting my sworn foes or combating a lesser evil, I choose the greater evil.
No Mercy for the Wicked. Ordinary foes might win my mercy, but my sworn enemies do not.
By Any Means Necessary. My qualms can't get in the way of exterminating my foes.
Restitution. If my foes wreak ruin on the world, it is because I failed to stop them. I must help those harmed by their misdeeds.
I’m not at home atm so I can’t check but if I recall they have an ability where instead of being killed they are brought down to 1hp, similar to how the Green Knight was decapitated but then just put his head back on. I’ll edit my post with more details when I can.
Unpopular opinion.
Alignments?
Who cares?
I tend to use the alignment,
"if you don't agree with me you are just stupid"
I call it,
"Neutral Superior"
Keldorn isn't racist; Viconia is evil.
Aerie isn't whiny; she's a double amputee and former slave with legitimate issues.
Jan isn't annoying if you skip through all of his stories.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Gawain_and_the_Green_Knight
A.K.A. pure Chaotic Neutral
I feel as if we will just have to respectfully disagree. An example is my character Zaram who's heart is in the right place most of the time but he's still an impulsive jerk who occasionally does something that could be seen as evil (example: killing the Paladin for Dorn at the wedding) but wouldn't go around randomly killing innocent people or (intentionally) burning down a village. He won't go out of his way to make someone's life miserable or kill someone unless he feels they deserve it.
I think we're approaching the question from fundamentally different perspectives. I'm sure you can play a fine CN character, or of any other alignment. It's not like these are platonic ideals that no roleplayer ever meets. When we say "Lawful Good is hard to play as not Lawful Stupid", we don't mean that nobody can do it, but that too many people fail at it in a predictable way. By the same token, when I say that Chaotic Neutral is too easy to roleplay as Chaotic Evil in all but name, I certainly don't mean that's an impossible pitfall to avoid, but that it's a convenient excuse for bad roleplayers.
This is why I like the Crusader Paladin kit. Being Chaotic Good allows you to use your brain, and for me allows me to play naturally, i.e. as I would in RL. I prefer to play good without having to be PC.
For instance I was recently criticised for calling a paralytic drunk that I was helping, a drunk. To me that wasn't being judgemental, just objective. For all I know, he could have had very good reasons for getting that drunk, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't drunk.