Skip to content

Blackguard = Anti-Paladin?

I'm not overly familiar with what in effect, a Blackguard is;

As I am of an ancient breed, an ADnD v2.0 player, I did not really stay current wrt what this new class is meant to identify. I recall back in the early '80s there was talk of utilizing a script antithetical to the Paladin and so the "Anti-Paladin" was developed.
However, these were the "last" guys you wanted to party with, they were essentially created as a nemesis that a group of heroes would confront as part of a campaign and were treated much as you would a Lich.
These guys were all sorts of bad news;
- aura of decay ( not much fun in a camping tent)
- easily willing to sacrifice companion or minion at first opportunity to advance own desires
- total coward that would always use devious ends to achieve goals
- powerful yet extremely rare to confront one-on-one as will always exploit opportunities
- never achieved allegiances, would black-mail, coerce or threaten for services
- basically, Sauron before the ring thing.

So, what is a Blackguard?

As far as I can ascertain, not all of these characteristics have been implemented. Take Dorn for example. Apparently he has some bizarre code of ethics and is willing to join a group regardless of personal traits they exhibit ( short of an actual Paladin confronting him).
He also doesn't seem to exhibit a hidden agenda that would essentially guarantee the party ends up worm-food
( that an Anti-Paladin would go out of his way to ensure, "leave no loose ends").

And, if you are creating a Blackguard as your PC, what in essence is your considered play-style/goal?
An Anti-Paladin would have ZERO interest in resolving ANY of the plot quests the campaign unfolds. If anything, he would do everything he could to become Sarevoks best bud, then have a minion back-stab him in the toilet and take over. Achieving god-status through expediency, heh.

This also brings to mind my whole concept on the ambitions of any evil aligned party, but one thought train at a time.....

Your thoughts?
JuliusBorisovFinnTheHumanSmilingSword
«1

Comments

  • JumboWheat01JumboWheat01 Member Posts: 1,028
    When I think Blackguard, I think Darth Vader. Deliberate. Methodical. Unquestionably evil. He has a code he follows, and he will follow it to the tee. If it involves betrayal, that betrayal will come when it would benefit him most, and not a moment before then.

    Though I admit to being crap when it comes to making evil characters. Even the most "evil" character I've ever come was a Chaotic Neutral Warlock in Neverwinter Nights 2. He eventually turned out Chaotic Good.
    SharguildCaptRorydok0zhivago
  • SharguildSharguild Member Posts: 186
    JumboWheat01 - ah, but was Darth Vader "evil"?
    I suggest not to his way of thinking. His interests were certainly different than that of the alliance as he was a proponent for the Empire but I don't recall even the Jedi Council calling him "evil". I was of the impression the "dark side" of the force was more a yin-yang thing than an evil-good thing.
    But... this conversation will assuredly de-rail the thread so perhaps another conversation another time on this.
  • magisenseimagisensei Member Posts: 316
    Think of the blackguard as less of an anti-paladin and more of a dark knight who follows a darker calling.

    If you've read Dragonlance - the dark goddess created a group of dark knights that would essentially battle the light gods' - knights of Solmania - dark knights follow a calling - whatever it may be - and even though the description makes them seem pretty evil - they should have their own code of ethics that shapes what they do.

    As a paladin follows the will of his gods so does a blackguard follow the will of his dark gods. This does not necessarily mean you don't help those in need or stop wanna be mages that want god-hood or is demon-hood - I imagine the black knight's gods would want to stop another evil god from ascending and becoming another foe to deal with or a dark god that might surpass them.

    In truth, BG doesn't do that great of a story line for evil alignments - besides the need for revenge for the death of Gorion - of course a lot depends on your definition of what evil means and how it plays out - a lot of thieves are evil aligned doesn't mean that they want to consort with demons and become evil gods.

    Evil - might just simply mean doing something outside what is accepted by society/government - its hard to be different - and so you are evil in there eyes.
    JuliusBorisovFinnTheHuman
  • SharguildSharguild Member Posts: 186
    Magisensei - you raise one salient point that the whole story-line has a difficulty addressing.
    As a Child of Bhaal you essentially have interest in denying your heritage and ascending despite it or embracing your heritage and ascending because of it.
    I've played pnp evil campaigns and they were notoriously difficult to control and come to a successful conclusion. Main reason being, we teenagers had a propensity for confusing evil with psychotic mass murder of everyone. Fun times....
    I can only imagine the difficulty Ray and the gang had trying to fashion a story-line that would enable "evil" characters to somehow come to a rational conclusion.
    Alas, I'm side-lining once more....
    Thanks for your thoughts re; "Dark Knight", I like it.
    I would be interested to know what the "intent" was of a Blackguard in the game though.
    Yeah, I can google "Blackguard". That would tell me nothing of the games intent however.
    Thanks again for your thoughts.
  • Clumsy_DwarfClumsy_Dwarf Member Posts: 112
    Depends on what you see as an anti-paladin. I see Blackguards as a lawful evil paladin. Someone not above torture and such to uphold the law. If you see them as a chaotic evil paladin, then I would say no.
    dunbar
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    edited April 2016
    Strictly speaking the prefix "anti" can mean either "opposed to" or "opposite of". My interpretation is to play a Blackguard as the latter, i.e. the antithesis of a Paladin (with an equally rigid mind-set).
    Blackraven
  • drakirdrakir Member Posts: 61
    @magisensei Oo, that's a really cool backstory. I guess there's more possibilities in that vein - like a power-hungry charname finding a forbidden tome on demon-summoning in the Candlekeep library that some part-timer filed in the wrong department and whatnot. I guess I just thought that Gorion & Co. would "sense a disturbance in the force" if a demon or such appeared in Candlekeep, but maybe Gorion is not a Jedi, and this is not Star Wars, but Forgotten Realms, and I don't need to worry about it ;)
    JuliusBorisovSkatanFinnTheHuman
  • BillyYankBillyYank Member Posts: 2,768
    drakir said:

    @magisensei Oo, that's a really cool backstory. I guess there's more possibilities in that vein - like a power-hungry charname finding a forbidden tome on demon-summoning in the Candlekeep library that some part-timer filed in the wrong department and whatnot. I guess I just thought that Gorion & Co. would "sense a disturbance in the force" if a demon or such appeared in Candlekeep, but maybe Gorion is not a Jedi, and this is not Star Wars, but Forgotten Realms, and I don't need to worry about it ;)

    You don't need the demon to show up in person. The extraplaner version of a tin can and string would work fine.
    drakirFinnTheHuman
  • Mikey205Mikey205 Member Posts: 307
    Eh theres a hand-wavey get out clause that these are an extra controlled manifeststion of your Bhaal powers. This is what I like to believe with sorcerers too.
    drakirdradam
  • znancekivellznancekivell Member Posts: 58
    My favorite character from playing BG is my Blackguard PC. She willingly uses the power of evil to smite evil, fighting by their own rules. She see's things such as a "honour" and "selflessness" as tools that those who work evil use against the good - she has no need for such exploitable weaknesses. She will poison, coerce, and kill as ruthlessly as any villain, but only against those who are evil themselves and display no redemptive qualities or otherwise guilty actions.

    She uses the power from the God of Murder to murder; taking a path down darkness few would choose or could even consider following. She does so to rid the world of evil; she will fight fire with fire. She will not rest until all the evil of the Bhaalspawn lay dead at her feet. When that lofty goal has been met she will kill the last lineage of that vile taint: herself.
    jackjackSkatanJuliusBorisov
  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,108
    For that matter, "psychotic" has literally nothing to do with killing for any reason, nor does it have anything to do with being evil. Psychosis refers to delusions, hallucinations, ideas of reference, etc. Psychopathy is more associated with actual killing, although most psychopaths never actually kill anyone, and psychopaths could be any evil and probably any neutral alignment.
    JarrakuljackjackGenderNihilismGirdle
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,354
    My vague recollection of the expanded 2.0 material (fiend folio etc.) is that anti-paladins and blackguards were two distinct takes on the same theme. The anti-paladin was directly the antithesis of a paladin, taking a simple-minded mirroring of the abilities, and being designed primarily as monsters, perhaps getting a power boost along the way. A paladin can summon their war-horse, and anti-paladin gets a night-mare, etc.

    The Blackguard took a more ground up approach, imagining what set of powers would be appropriate for the ultimate champion of an evil deity/power, much as the paladin is the ultimate (mortal) champion of a good deity/power. In some ways they look similar, and in other ways they have distinctly different feel.

    An anti-paladin, with the mirror nature, is always going to be Chaotic Evil. I would expect a Blackguard, with a strict role of service to their patron, to skew Lawful Evil.
    FinneousPJJuliusBorisovFinnTheHuman
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited April 2016

    For that matter, "psychotic" has literally nothing to do with killing for any reason, nor does it have anything to do with being evil. Psychosis refers to delusions, hallucinations, ideas of reference, etc. Psychopathy is more associated with actual killing, although most psychopaths never actually kill anyone, and psychopaths could be any evil and probably any neutral alignment.

    I understand this. My father is a retired psychiatrist (not that you'd know that /shrug ).

    Point is, to wantonly slaughter without reason and with full knowledge of what one is doing actually does require a measure of insanity. This is why chaotic evil characters tend to be viewed as psychopaths/psychotic. Psychosis can manifest itself as attacking those around you in a fit of violent rage, although that is rare. Due to the nature of the FR, a violent and chaotic evil psychotic is likely to be thought to be influenced/controlled by an evil-aligned god who views slaughter as a good thing. Below are several such gods.
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Cyric
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Gruumsh
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Urdlen
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Zaltec
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Baphomet
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Garagos
    http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Deities_of_Fury

    A psychotic who isn't chaotic evil is unlikely to called or recognized as such. It's more likely that the delusions or hallucinations would be viewed as visions from one of the evil-aligned FR gods.
    Post edited by rapsam2003 on
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    @rapsam2003 Sarevok is CE and quite lucid.
    jackjackZiminair
  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,108
    edited April 2016
    I really don't think chaotic evil translates into "violently insane" any more than lawful good translates into "kill all evil on sight" (as some people suggest paladins do).

    There are better ways to describe this sort of thing without zeroing in on psychosis, however. More precise ways. Like talking about how chaotic evil leaders rely on strength to intimidate others into serving them as opposed to a more organized hierarchy. For example.
    GenderNihilismGirdle
  • SkatanSkatan Member, Moderator Posts: 5,352
    I, for one, look at the alignement system like I look at the class system; there's a difference between class and profession. The class is the abilities and knowledge you have, the profession is how you use them. A fighter has the skill and ability to fight with weapons and may be an adventurer, a guard or whatever.

    I look at the alignment system similarly; there's a difference between alignment and actions. The alignment is the nature of your persona, the combined wishes, aims, goals, thoughts, ideas etc. The actions you do usually reflect that, but may also be something opposite.

    Ie a lawful neutral soldier can commit really awful, "evil" crimes by only following the orders of his or her superiors without being evil.

    The reason a Blackguard has to be evil is probably because he or she is considered very selfish, putting his/her own's good ahead of others, doing evil acts on account of his/her patron. Though ion my humble opinion, a blackguard could also be ie lawful neutral.

    Lets say a semi-brainwashed fighter-esque man joins a cult. The cult worships some kind of demon and that demon really likes the idea of having its own small army rampaging around killing in its name. The fighter, being used to follow orders, agrees to becoming a blackguard for said demon, using its power to augments his own. Then he recieves orders to kill civilans and piss on their corpses. Is he evil?

    Dunno, maybe the above scenario could never happen within FR, but I wish the alignment system was less rigid about classes. I think the system is interresting, but I dislike when it hinders RP and potential character enrichment.
    drakirGenderNihilismGirdleGozetalolien
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,354
    @skatan the D&D alignment system is such a wonderful subjective scheme, that really is a tool for the players, rather than hard and fast absolute part of the rules. It can often lead to interesting discussions though :)

    I find a huge difference between alignment in D&D vs. the real world, simply because alignment is such a palpable part of the game world, with various embodiments in divine powers that interact directly in the world, and rules/spells/effects that interact directly with alignments.

    In terms of real-world analysis, I don't think you can get away with saying "I am neutral, I work only for the money, not the cause". Is a hired assassin a neutral, or an evil character? An assassin that keeps taking hits from evil patrons to execute painfully, publicly, and messily only saintly government officials doing good works, as they pay the best?

    While good and evil are frequently interpreted as opposites, I don't think it is as simple as just reversing everything. A person is generally 'good' if their motivation for doing deeds is good - allowing yourself to be hired to do good deeds because you need a paycheck does not make you a good person. Taking the same contract as you specifically want a contract you can live with, turning down others, even though you care only about the money and not the specific good being done, is probably a sign of a goodly character.

    Evil can be manifest entirely by the deeds. If someone hires you to butcher every infant in a town, that act is evil, even if under performed under the force of law by the king who is hiring you. You cannot simply side-step moral responsibility by saying it is just another paying job - the evil in the act is sticky. Conversely, if you are hired to play santa clause, you do NOT become a saint. Good acts are not 'sticky', per my previous point ;)
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited April 2016

    @rapsam2003 Sarevok is CE and quite lucid.

    He also has delusions of grandeur, which can be labled as "insane" in certain circles. I mean, the guy wants to become the new Lord of Murder...
    Post edited by rapsam2003 on
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636

    I really don't think chaotic evil translates into "violently insane"

    Chaotic Evil is best described by this description from http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Chaotic_evil :
    Chaotic evil is power without control - selfishness unfettered by any law.

    A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. His plans are haphazard and any groups he joins or forms are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.

    These characters will commit any act to further their own ends. Chaotic evil is sometimes called "demonic" because demons are the embodiment of chaotic evil.

    Many serial killers would fit this description, as would indeed most of the more violent and reckless criminals found in the worst sorts of places.
    So, no, Chaotic Evil is NOT strictly "violently insane", but there is a measure of insanity depending on how you look at it. Chaotic Evil characters are more likely to be "clinically insane" than other alignments, in general. Tiax is a perfect example, so is Shar-Teel. These characters have a definitive odd mentality to them.
  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,108
    edited April 2016

    I really don't think chaotic evil translates into "violently insane"

    Chaotic Evil is best described by this description from http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Chaotic_evil :
    Chaotic evil is power without control - selfishness unfettered by any law.

    A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. His plans are haphazard and any groups he joins or forms are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.

    These characters will commit any act to further their own ends. Chaotic evil is sometimes called "demonic" because demons are the embodiment of chaotic evil.

    Many serial killers would fit this description, as would indeed most of the more violent and reckless criminals found in the worst sorts of places.
    So, no, Chaotic Evil is NOT strictly "violently insane", but there is a measure of insanity depending on how you look at it. Chaotic Evil characters are more likely to be "clinically insane" than other alignments, in general. Tiax is a perfect example, so is Shar-Teel. These characters have a definitive odd mentality to them.


    I don't buy that it is insanity. Being poor at planning isn't a mental illness, even if it is a symptom of various conditions (such as ADHD or several personality disorders). Committing any act to further their own ends isn't a mental illness either. Most of these traits listed aren't really symptoms of mental illness or complete mental illnesses of themselves.

    Directly linking mental illness to being evil is a fairly bad practice and does no good for people in the real world who have real mental illnesses but who are in large part not what anyone would describe as "evil."

    Plus what @jackjack said about the gap between chaotic evil and chaotic stupid and the alignment as a magnetic pole as opposed to a strict definition.
    jackjackGenderNihilismGirdle
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636

    I don't buy that it is insanity. Being poor at planning isn't a mental illness, even if it is a symptom of various conditions (such as ADHD or several personality disorders). Committing any act to further their own ends isn't a mental illness either. Most of these traits listed aren't really symptoms of mental illness or complete mental illnesses of themselves.

    I don't think you're understanding me. Chaotic evil is not necessarily insane, but a chaotic evil character is MORE LIKELY to be insane than characters of another alignment. Do you understand the distinction?!
  • SkatanSkatan Member, Moderator Posts: 5,352
    @GreenWarlock



    In terms of real-world analysis, I don't think you can get away with saying "I am neutral, I work only for the money, not the cause". Is a hired assassin a neutral, or an evil character? An assassin that keeps taking hits from evil patrons to execute painfully, publicly, and messily only saintly government officials doing good works, as they pay the best?

    While good and evil are frequently interpreted as opposites, I don't think it is as simple as just reversing everything. A person is generally 'good' if their motivation for doing deeds is good - allowing yourself to be hired to do good deeds because you need a paycheck does not make you a good person. Taking the same contract as you specifically want a contract you can live with, turning down others, even though you care only about the money and not the specific good being done, is probably a sign of a goodly character.

    Evil can be manifest entirely by the deeds. If someone hires you to butcher every infant in a town, that act is evil, even if under performed under the force of law by the king who is hiring you. You cannot simply side-step moral responsibility by saying it is just another paying job - the evil in the act is sticky. Conversely, if you are hired to play santa clause, you do NOT become a saint. Good acts are not 'sticky', per my previous point ;)

    My example above with the soldier becoming a blackguard but not necessarely being evil himself was to show that one can commit evil acts without being evil. BUT if that same soldier/blackguard starts to like what he is doing, starts to embrace being a blackguard and doing the dirty deeds his patron demands, then he will experience a shift in his alignment and become lawful/evil. This is seen (although sometimes quite poorly implemented) in BG2 for ie anomen, sarevok etc.

    So this is what I mean when I separate actions and alignement. One can differ from the other, but just as @jackjack said, they will be drawn to eachother instinctively.
    jackjackGenderNihilismGirdlelolien
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    Skatan said:

    My example above with the soldier becoming a blackguard but not necessarely being evil himself was to show that one can commit evil acts without being evil.

    Blackguards willingly DECIDE to embrace evil. There isn't a grey area.
Sign In or Register to comment.