Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE!
Buy nowCavalier or Inquisitor? For a playthrough of at least Baldur's Gate EE.
So I got through Baldur's Gate with a character(sorcerer) and finally get to the start of SoD. Now I am thinking about going through Baldur's Gate again with a Paladin. I am asking for RP reasons and not what is more powerful, and what can do what. Already read the posts, and know the pros and cons of both kits. I am asking from a rp perspective. Trying to rp a character who while Law and Order knows that everything is not black and white and sometimes law serves evil and you need to be willing to do somethings that are not exactly black and white to combat that Evil. I know we can get an Inquisitor type Paladin in BG 2, but I am okay with a bit of redundancy in classes if I can tell the story I want. I can see a Inquisitor mostly because of the name of the kit be more willing to do things that some would call questionable for the greater good and to make sure the forces of darkness are stopped. Though I can also see where a Cavalier might color out of side of the lines to make sure evil is stopped too. So I am unsure. I really don't want to restart yet again given 3's early access is around the corner. Any insight and how you rp Paladins to do stuff like allow people to break into houses and would even give Eldoth the time of day and participate in his plot(I want Skie in my party for a little while for story reasons). That would be most helpful. Thank you.
0 ·
Maverick81685
Member Posts: 9
Comments
bg1 originally didnt have paladin kits so if you are only going to play bg1 and SoD and that is it, you could always just go with a plain paladin and then you would be more flexible on how you could RP your character as apposed to playing a kit that MUST act a certain way if ya know what i mean
Simple - you don´t. Paladins if played right are a a pain in the ass, when they are part of a party that contains people who are more than 1 step away from the Paladin´s alignment.
You simply can´t abuse the system, play a Paladin and reason you way into having your party do evil deeds. The game might not put a hard break on that due to game limitations (e.g. Temple of Elemental Evil had several instances where a Paladin might "fall from Grace" due to certain actions).
If the Paladin joins in thievery or burglary - or even knows about party members doing that and doing nothing about it:
I regularly take people like Edwin, Shar-Teel and Viconia into my party because I work on the basis that my paladin gives people the benefit of the doubt and doesn't judge them until they step out of line in her presence. Of course, this creates problems with reputation and at some point if you want to keep evil characters in your party you are going to have to lose some reputation points. I generally manage this by sending the evil guys off on their own to do a spot of burglary - and to make sure they get caught in the act. There is also a mod (I'm afraid I can't remember which one) that allows you to hire bards to sing of your misdeeds and so lower your reputation (True, this doesn't seem very appropriate for paladins but I do use it if I want to keep a particular party together).
It helps that I play my paladin as a well-meaning but not very bright person. So when Imoen pickpockets a Ring of Free Action for her and tells her that she found it under a tree my paladin believes her. After all, that's where Imoen found her Ring of Wizardry so it seems plausible.
Finally, the alignment system has never really worked for me so I tend to ignore it and just create my party from characters I like having around. Kagain doesn't seem like such a bad guy and he doesn't do anything evil so I see no problem with having him in my party. Eldoth is a bit tougher to accept because he wants to involve you in evil acts from the get go. I think the only way to get round this is to tell yourself that you are pretending to go along with his plan because you want to foil it somewhere down the line.
If played as feels proper they are very restrictive, which is the fun / challenge of playing them I guess. I recall someone on here saying that good pcs properly role played shouldn’t really get Crom Faeyr because they wouldn’t sacrifice to demogorgan for the strength belt, which I think is right without some mental gymnastics (you don’t know you will get the belt when you do it). However, it’s just a game and each to their own. ToEE implements these rules more according to how I understood them. Maybe paladins of Lathander, Sune etc can be more flexible. I enjoy playing characters that do give much more flexibility.
To answer the question, I don’t think cavalier or inquisitor should necessarily play differently and be more or less restrictive in the terms of moral ambiguity.
If you are going to RP a paladin who actually follows those oaths, then it won't be possible to justify committing evil acts for the greater good. The reason is that their whole ethos is centered on evil acts never being justifiable regardless of their consequences. That's why they can't commit even a single evil act without falling (though admittedly BG/BG2 do a generally awful job enforcing that restriction).
However if you want to RP a paladin who doesn't follow those oaths, here are three options you might consider. One is to set your paladin status to "fallen" at character creation and then play the entire saga as a fallen paladin who commits questionable acts for what he perceives as the greater good. Going that route would make a powerful statement that you're willing to sacrifice power for what you believe is right. A second is to roll a blackguard who embraces questionable acts for what he perceives as the greater good. And a third is to unilaterally, in your own mind, change the world's paladin oaths to what you believe they should be, secure in the knowledge that BG/BG2 won't notice you're violating the "real" oaths and hence will let you keep your paladin status.
In any of these scenarios, it doesn't make much difference which paladin kit you pick because you wouldn't actually be following any of their codes as BG/BG2 define them. So I would just treat this run-through as a parallel reality with nonstandard rules, and then go with the paladin kit you'd most like to play.
RP-wise, I don't have her do anything objectionable herself, even if the mod/game wouldn't call it out. So, for casual thievery or general backstabbery, Imoen gets the jobs. This lets Isra make catty comments without violating her oath.
I see no reason why you couldn't do this with a PC paladin as well.
"Have sex with me. It will make you a better person." It's a pretty good chat up line. I'm going to use that one.
In BG2, Keldorn is willing to work alongside some of the evil aligned NPCs and stays with you for the Shadow Thieves quests and won't leave from a bunch of other quests as well even if you don't always solve them in the lawful good way. So I think there's plenty of justification, within the game world, of playing a good-aligned paladin who isn't perfect. That's all on you to decide. Although the reputation system obviously sets some limits, but that's a good thing, imo.
It is a good roleplaying route if you challange yourself.
Other than use a fighter and choose chaotic good allignement or the all time gamer neutral evil as gain power, horde treasure and kill enemies
How are you supposed to gear up if you have to give all your gold away?
"Lawfulness and good deeds are the meat and drink of a paladin. If a paladin ever knowingly performs a chaotic act, he must seek a high-level (7th or more) cleric of lawful good alignment, confess his sin, and do penance as prescribed by the cleric. If a paladin should ever knowingly and willingly perform an evil act, he loses the status of paladinhood immediately and irrevocably. All benefits are then lost and no deed or magic can restore the character to paladinhood."
They also had strict restrictions on the number of magical items they could own and the amount of wealth they could possess, as well as having to "immediately" tithe 10% of everything they receive from all sources, whether it comes in the form of magic items, jewels or gold. That isn't exactly the same as a vow of poverty but yes, paladins had to tangibly show they were willing to sacrifice on behalf of the less fortunate, no matter how fervently they told themselves the cause of Good was best-served by them being optimally equipped.
Any other paladin kit (or true class) could be justified within RP and setting considerations. I don't see any significant morality differences between the paladin kits except Blackguard of course.
For those reasons I see an inquisitor charname as a functional/gameplay choice for this story line. You can certainly RP the anti mage attitude of the inquisitor but it does violate logic for the campaign setting and background of charname, as do a few other classes like Barbarian/Druid/Ranger for a child raised in a library keep by a sage
I've played in numerous pen and paper groups for 30 years, and outside of a single DM, the rules were more guides than they were laws. Some were a little more rigid than others, but aside from that single DM, there were no such restrictions if the evil player was Lawful. One of my longest campaigns, which was 2nd edition and lasted four years had a paladin and a Lawful evil mage in the group. The role playing was super fun as their ideologies differed so much. But they were both after the same goal. It worked because we had a great DM and great role players. Ok, that might be a little conceited as I was the Paladin....
By the way, the least fun group I ever played was also the most rules rigid DM. It sucked.
Unfortunately, most people probably wouldn't touch that class then. Much less rigid playing a chaotic neutral berserker instead. A few special powers don't make up for those immunities and grandmastering!
It's captured somewhat in BG2, where the Paladin stronghold rewards are less impressive than the other class strongholds. BG1 does very little for roleplaying as relates to your class.
Of course not IF it is made impossible to that person to commit evil acts - if need be by putting the person in chains. And only until the person can be dumped at the next jail/jugde to pay for her/his crimes.
Fallen Paladin according to the rules. To a Paladin there are always better ways to do things than to commit evil acts - for whatever sneaky reason less than trustworthy people might try to use on her/him.
BG and BG2 generally do not do a good job at enforcing alignment restrictions, with the exception of "party alignment" which causes partymembers of unfitting alignment to leave.
And while some character classes have a few restrictions based on alignment (e.g. Druids), those are far more lax than those for the Paladin class - at least according to the book, as the video game does not enforce those restrictiosn and does not punish accordingly.