Paladins are self-rightous bast*rds, who here agrees?

[Sazerac]

Back in my PnP days, I usually would play either NG or CG, so I had a major issue with LG alignments, especially paladins. I used to say, "drop the 'L' from their alignment and you'll have what they REALLY are." So I do understand some of the outcry about Palys, especially the more uptight ones. However, there are some cool ones as well, and there's no reason why one can't play a hip Paladin. Bjornin in BG1 was pretty cool; I felt badly that he was a non-addable NPC, as he would have probably been better than Ajantis.

-Sazerac

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Zuvio: Paladins come in many forms, like in BG2 or in Fallout 1&2. They seem to have poor judgement, as it is mostly clouded or prejudiced. Being purely good is at times as bad as being purely evil. At some points in your life you'll be confronted with the fact that you cannot be ALWAYS completely true to your alignment. It seems that all creatures, except for paladins, that tend towards a good alignment can make a decision that defiles that alignment a little bit, for the sake of a good outcome. Paladins cannot. They SWORE their allegiance to the good side and cannot divert from that path. So to actually make a point here: Planescape: Torment's alignment system should have been incorporated in BG2.

Interesting discussion. While paladins have sworn to uphold the ideals of law and good, that does NOT mean they can't deviate from them for a greater good. Unfortunately, most games and DM's don't play them that way. Here is a good example I read concerning an unusual action by a paladin in my PnP days:

The party had completed thier quest to help save a forest from some evil beast. After the fight was over, a dryad comes out of the woods and starts trying to charm some of the party members and get them to go off with her. The whole group is battle-weary and a couple of them become entranced by the dryad. Before she can lead them away - though - the paladin steps in and punches the dryad in the nose. This breaks her concentration (and her nose too) and she ends up running off rather than face the wrath of the paladin.

The DM admitted that he deducted some experience points from the paladin - at first. Then he reconsidered. The paladin had stepped in and prevented two of his party members from being led off into heaven-knows-what. He had also driven the dryad off without doing any serious (or permanent) damage to her (a cure light wounds would fix her nose).

So...paladins don't have to be stuffy, goody-two shoes. A good DM will allow them some flexibility.

Oh - one other thing - stereotypes are NOT created by the majority of a group. They are created by the overly-vocal minority of any group.

[Cyril Darkcloud]

Cerek, I remember reading that very same example quite a ways back.

Personally, I've found that a large amount of the stereotyping of such characters as paladins has very much to do with the way alignment functions both in the rule books themselves as well as within individual game worlds.

Even within the official rule books there is a tendency to be rather simplistic in the examples given to illustrate alignement behavior. What happens frequently is that the lawful good alignment is modeled as somehow being the most good and virtuous of the good alignments. Understood this way, not only paladins, but lawful good characters in general, are set up to be annoying cartoons. The interplay of order and goodness and the way duty can check the demands of spontaneous generosity in the life of a paladin should not be lost sight of. I believe, in fact, that some of the richest roleplaying possibilities in the D&D system arise precisely when the demands of law and goodness do not easily coincide for a paladin. It might well be in cases like this that the chaotic good or neutral good party member might be frustrated at the way a paladin's obligations hold back or limit the group's pursuit of a good end. In a case like this, the 'do-gooder' lable is on someone other than the paladin.

[Darlon]

Originally posted by The Hierophant: quote: Originally posted by Darlon: Anomen is VERY annoying yes, and I have to agree HE IS NOT A PALADIN, HE IS A FIGHTER/CLERIC CLASS. besides Anomen probably doesn't deserve to be a paladin, why? heres a GOOD example: (probably a spoiler) Anomen's quest if you decide to avenge anomen's sister: Anomen kills a CIVILIAN! can you believe that!? He kills the daughter of the rival family so he can avenge his sister! Thats what made me dislike Anomen. Anyway on to the subject, paladins can't be all bad I know that some can be quite snooby (which they are not supposted too), I play a paladin in BG2 often and I DON'T act like a snob like nobles (which happens to be MOST of them).

Yes, and if you opt to kill the daughter of Anomen's rival family then Anomen is not accepted into the Order. He gets rather disillusioned at being rejected by the order and become chaotic neutral. If he joins the order (ie: if you DON'T kill the girl) he becomes Lawful Good. Anomen is a good man (albeit a little misguided when you first meet him. But he matures substantially as the game progresses) and a solid party member. He is NOT a Paladin however. Edwin is Lawful Evil in alignment, that doesn't mean he is an anti-paladin does it? No. Everyone is different. Don't stereotype too much.

For the love of God... why are we all taking this COMPUTER GAME so seriously?[/QUOTE]Your right, my mistake, Anomen is a good NPC, just a little misguided at first.

[Zuvio]

For the love of God... why are we all taking this COMPUTER GAME so seriously?

You would be wise to watch your tongue in the near future my friend, lest it might come off... [img]graemlins/evillaughter2.gif[/img]

Naah, just kidding. And aren't stereotypes made through the generalisation made by people other then the ones that are being called a stereotype?

[Xero279]

i actually found a use for them. do their fallen paladin quest then in ch. 6 SPOILER they will send some paladins to help fight bodhi. they might not be the best but help is help.

[Legolas]

Well, yes. Paladins are selfrighteous. Ehr... you mean that's a problem?

[Sir Exxon]

Originally posted by Legolas: Well, yes. Paladins are selfrighteous. Ehr... you mean that's a problem?

Good stated. They indeed are selfrighteous, but that doesnt necesserily have to be negative. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Garnet FalconDance]

Originally posted by Sazerac: Anomen is a Fighter/Cleric of Helm (or Torm, it seems to change from dialog to dialog [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img] ) He becomes a Knight, but not a Paladin. Please don't judge palys on the basis of him! [img]graemlins/uhoh1.gif[/img] Mazzy, I think, is the same way...a Female Halfling Knight, but not a Paladin. Keldorn Firecam is the only NPC Paladin in the game. He's pretty cool...and he doesn't cut Anomen any slack, either! Cheers, -Sazerac

I found it a little confusing (and actually pretty funny) when some thug in the Slums called Mazzy a "baby paladin" and she wiped the floor with him! Very gratifying .

Paladins *can* be self-righteous prigs if that's how you play them. My gal Aurelia LightBringer isn't, but she can be snotty if need be. ::shrugs:: Just depends, I suppose.

[Tancred]

'Self-righteous', huh? Oooo! Don't make me cut off your head, man! I HATE it when people make me cut their heads off!