Tell me more ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

What are some tips for/examples of an epitome-of-good type paladin who does not disrupt the 'sinful' fun of the rest of the group?

As an example of the type of paladin I'm talking about, one of the first and only 3.5 books I bought was the Book of Exalted Deeds, and I've used it as guide for how I play good characters ever since.

As an example for those who've never read Exalted Deeds, I once played a Paladin who refused to kill any humanoid, and would actively defend defeated allies from other party members on the grounds that no one in the group was a judge, and thus could not render a death sentence. This did not go over well with the group, who quickly became tired of needing to haul around enemies to the nearest court, not to mention dealing the the occasional escape attempt on the baddies' part. I felt I was playing the character as was appropriate, and the GM agreed with me on that fact. However, the group quickly deteriorated, as players began to grow bored of listening to my paladin preach at their characters to be better people.

I enjoy playing this type of character. However, not everyone enjoys playing with that type of character. So, how do I balance it so that I'm still playing my paladin characters the way I like them to be portrayed, without disrupting everyone else's fun?

share|improve this question
1  
How about reading up on historical "paladins" aka Pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Solomonici. – Sardathrion Nov 23 '12 at 7:51
1  
I wouldn't call this enough to be a full answer, but how about trying to get group buy-in on the idea of having a paladin of this type in the party during character creation? Other players may have an easier time living with your kind of paladin if they were specifically built to deal with the relationship. I should stress, this doesn't mean all your party members have to be lawful good - just that they need a way of relating to your character that allows reasonable compromises to be reached without damaging either character's concept. – GMJoe Nov 26 '12 at 4:04

8 Answers

up vote 47 down vote accepted

The biggest issue with paladins is when their partners' behavior is judged as if the paladin himself had done the deed. If your DM is willing to avoid that pitfall, may I suggest...

A paladin who does not expect non-believers to obey the laws of his faith. He hopes that through his shining example his teammates will come to see the value of his code, but understands that doing Good under threat of punishment doesn't count. He guides the party to consider mercy, but does not expect them to follow oaths they did not swear. Perhaps his own past is not lily-white and he recognizes that true Faith takes time; he is patient with the party.

Underen commented:

When the PC's ignores the paladins advice, simply tell them in character: "Remember, the gods will be the judges of your actions. I wash my hands of this."

It's important to recognize that the values of D&D are not our modern values. Justice is often swift and brutal when you don't have the luxury of modern civilization. Think wild west justice or battlefield trials. As a paladin, you may have the authority to conduct hasty trials; ask your DM to consider this.* Remember there are methods of punishment that fall between letting criminals go and killing them: branding, and cutting off a finger or a hand, come to mind.

[Perhaps I should clarify that branding and mutilation in these contexts are not about sadism: they are about preventing future crime without killing the criminal, in a land without good jails. Brands alert future targets that they are dealing with a particular kind of criminal, and cutting off a gun-happy outlaw's trigger finger makes it harder for him to kill.]

Just as you are considering the enjoyment of your friends at the table, the DM and other players should be willing to meet you half-way. The player characters should do the same for their friend the paladin. This is a mutual storytelling challenge: a group of friends (or at least comrades-in-arms) with different moral attitudes is pretty common in real life and in storytelling. How do they function without coming to blows? That's a cool story for your group to tell.

*EDIT: Apparently there's some confusion about the paladin's requirement to "respect legitimate authority," and whether one's class dictates in-game social duty or privilege. As I understand it, 'Paladin,' 'Cleric,' and all other class titles are meta-mechanical terms rather than in-game titles/distinctions unless you're in a setting that makes it explicit. Thus no character (player or non-player) has legitimate authority by virtue of their class alone (there are some rare PrC exceptions to this, whose explicit nature supports my general claim). Authority is conferred based on merit, heritage, experience (and possibly bribery). My suggestion that your paladin might have some legitimate authority is explicitly at the whim of the DM. It could just as easily be bestowed on a bard or a fighter, should social circumstances warrant it, and serve the same purpose --perhaps even better.

EDIT TWO - The Linking: Making the Tough Decisions is an essay by Rich Burlew which addresses (in more general terms) the exact problem you're facing.

share|improve this answer
10  
Look to Shepherd Book from Firefly for inspiration :) - Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killin'? - Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps. – Ravn Nov 23 '12 at 8:30
1  
It's a valid point, as the Paladin cannot judge the party either. – deltree Nov 23 '12 at 12:16

I think the first thing to do is break the link between "paladin" and "knight". It's the classic formulation, but that's because the original paladin's image is based on medieval knights fighting in the name of Christianity. But take an LG deity in your campaign setting, and try to build the paladin in his image.

You tagged your question Pathfinder, so I went over and checked the Lawful Good gods in Golarion, the default setting's pantheon to see what do we have. Also, as Martin Sojka noted in the comments, just because the paladin has to be Lawful Good, doesn't mean he has to serve a Lawful Good deity. Pathfinder's wiki has a little chart to see what alignment followers can be, and quite a few ones accept Lawful Good followers. But for our example, we'll focus on two LG deities:

Andoletta

Portfolio: Consolation, Respect, Security
Description: appears and acts like an elderly family matriarch. She treats her flock as any grandmother would, protecting the innocent, reprimanding the wayward, and punishing the sinful.

How would a paladin of Andoletta be seen? A woman, probably. Not necessarily old (since you have to start somewhere) but compassionate. Perhaps a healer or wise-woman, who also steps in to defend her friends and charges when they are risked. She or he could be a member of a large extended family, even a noble family, and be the protector of the household and the family name.

Erastil

Portfolio: Farming, Hunting, Trade, Family
Description: He is a god of the hunt and of farming, leading his followers by example and good deeds rather than flowery rhetoric

The classic paladin, the one we're trying to avoid, LIVES by his flowery rhetoric. A paladin of Erastil will seem to many to be a ranger. He might live in small farming communities, maybe even outside the communities, but he serves as their protector. He makes sure the traders coming in for the harvest are safe, that no shady dealings occur, and that monsters and animals don't hurt the town. Think of a classic wild-west sherriff, protecting his little town. That could be a paladin of Erastil.


Iomedae

Portfolio: Valor, Rulership, Justice, Honor
Description: The goddess of righteous valor, justice, and honor.

The problem with Iomedae is that from her description, her paladins are the classic, stereotypical paladins: holy knights, dressed in white, tasked with rooting out evil. The church of Iomedae was designed as a vehicle for exactly those paladins. However, there's no reason for a paladin to be an unflexible dogmatist. He could be aware that others have not been as blessed as he has with proximity to the Goddess, and might require his sympathy, not his scorn. He could be more pragmatic - striking a bargain with the rest of the party to give up certain aspects - torturing captured humanoids, for instance - while accepting certain practices himself. After all, Iomedae knows that she is not the only deity - she views the likes of Cayden Cailean as allies, after all - and will allow her servants some measure of flexibility, assuming their overall goals server her purposes. Of course, such a paladin would always be on somewhat unstable footing - her eye would be extra vigilant to make sure those that walk on the thin line don't stumble over to the other side.


The list goes on, and you can think of many more archetypes. The Sherriff, as we said. An Exiled Prince, on a divine mission to reunite a torn kingdom, can also fit. What most of these archetypes share is that they're not necessarily preachy, and they're not necessarily dogmatic and rigid. Paladins are Lawful Good, but they don't have to be Lawful Stupid. And their Paladinhood doesn't have to be their only defining trait. Take any LG character, add divine motivation to their actions, and you have yourself a paladin.

share|improve this answer
2  
+1 Paladin's aren't black and white. Inspire, Lead and make yourself the example people should aspire to be or look up to! Also, really like the sheriff example. – Rob Nov 23 '12 at 10:07
1  
Good stuff on explaining paladins that resemble the gods they follow. :) – Chris Nov 23 '12 at 11:16
1  
I don't think there's a requirement anywhere in Pathfinder that a Paladin's deity has to be LG too; they have just to accept LG followers. As such in the default setting, Arshea (NG; freedom, physical beauty, sexuality), Korada (NG; foresight, forgiveness, peace), Abadar (LN; cities, wealth, merchants, law), Irori (LN; history, knowledge, self-perfection) and a ton of others also apply. – Martin Sojka Nov 23 '12 at 14:22
1  
Paladins are much more than a LG character with divine motivations. Your typical LG character uses his alignment as a guideline - it's what their alignment typically is. They can stray from it on occasion. The paladin is not capable of such compromise. One little evil act, and they lose everything. – Steve G Nov 23 '12 at 16:27
Good point. @MartinSojka. I'll add it to the answer. – lisardggY Nov 23 '12 at 16:53
show 3 more comments

By the far the best gamable description of a paladin I seen was given by Elisabeth Moon in her Deed of Paksenarrion series.

Paraphrased From page 579 of the Trade Paperback the Deed of Paksenarrion.

Most think being a holy warrior means gaining vast arcane powers, that they would be nearly invincible against any foe. But truth is that while Paladin are skilled at fighting, that was the least of their abilities. A quest might involve no fighting at all, or a battle against beings no steel could pierce.

Above all paladins show that courage is possible. It is easy enough to find reasons to give in to evil. War is ugly as many know. But we do not argue that war is better than peace; paladin are not that stupid. It is not peace when cruelty reigns, when stronger men steal from farmers and craftmen., when the child can be enslaved, or the old thrown out to starve, and no one lifts a hand. That is not peace: that is conquest and evil.

Paladins do not start quarrels in peaceful lands, never display their skills to earn applause. But we are the sword of good defending the helpless and teaching by our example that one person can dare greater force to break evil's grasp on the innocent. Sometimes that can be done without fighting, without killing, and that is best.

But some evil needs direct attack, and paladins must be able to do it, and lead others in battle. Wonder why paladins are so likable? It is important, we come to a town, perhaps, where nothing has gone right for a dozen years. Perhaps there is a temple there and sometimes there is not. The people are frightened, and they have lost trust in each other, in themselves. We may lead them into danger, some will be killed or wounded. Why should they trust us?

Because we are likable, and other people will follow us willingly. And that's why we are more likely to choose a popular adept as a candidate rather than the best fighters.

To me this is best summary of a D&D style paladin I ever read and the basis for how I referee them. One reason for this is because Moon gets to heart of what it means to be a paladin which is not the same as adherence to the letter of a written code. Although a written code may be a useful teaching tool to novice paladins (and clerics).

The implications of this for your campaign is that is that the paladin is with the party because he or she was called by their god to adventure with this particular group. Sometimes a paladin's call operates on multiple levels. A paladin joins with a group to fight an evil lurking in the dungeon, but also his presence is what needed to tip one party members into working for good, and to give hope to another who is struggling.

share|improve this answer

I just want to respond with an example of a Paladin done right:

Due to setting off a trap, my paladin/crusader and some his comrades were trapped in a solid wall of force that was filling up with a mist that was causing us drowning checks. Our DM was being nice and making it a flat DC 16 fort check instead of a steadily rising con Check, and it took two failure to drop us unconscious.

Through trial and experimentation, we discovered that my crusaders Foehammer and Mountain Hammer maneuvers would crack the shell long enough to get one person out. So, every turn, I cracked the wall, and one person would squeeze through the opening. First out was the wizard, who had failed two saves and had to be thrown. Then the cleric, to whom the same thing had happened. Because they were lying there inert, I sent the monk (trained in heal) out there to help them. At this point, the fighter who was in there, helping me, dropped unconscious due to failed saves. The DM was not being nice to me…I made save after save trying to figure out a way to strike the wall and hurl the fighter out. It ended in me managing to put the fellow on my shoulder, slam the wall with a warhammer, and toss him out. The round I did that in, I got my first failed fort save, upon which my DM said I could feel my lungs filling with water. Still, I was able to hurl my friend out of the wall of death and pick up the gear I’d dropped. Armed and ready, I make my next fort save.

Nat 1. I drop unconscious. IRL, the group panics. And I mean they PANIC. I have been playing the laid-back moral compass of the group…My paladin didn’t police, but he was kind and noble and to many of them, a bit of an innocent…he was a farm-raised boy and it reflected in the way he treated things and people. They didn’t want him dead. Well, the rogue did, but that’s because the player hates me IRL (he’s the person my inevitable conflict thread was about). The swashbuckler’s player almost started crying. And then we switched to the portion of the party that was pursuing a hag coven.

I sat back and actually smiled, because you know what? How much of a better death can a Paladin 5/Crusader 1 with an utter devotion to his friends and his god ask for? I saved every single person in that orb with my conviction and devotion to my god, hurling a fully armored fighter to safety with my lungs filled with water before giving in. My friends would have seen nothing more than me hurling our friend to safety before the wall closed in and then…nothing but silence. The wizard player gave me a back-thumping man-hug, saying that this was the first time he’d seen a paladin played as he imagined it instead of a fighter with a superiority complex. The monk-player who plays a paladin in another game gave me a salute. All in all, I was proud. In game, enough time had passed that the monk was now flailing at the wall in a panic (his character had grown very close to mine, due to mine saving his life, trusting him, and backing him up in matters of honor) and trying to figure out if he could leap the wall and rig up a pulley system.

I stepped outside to call my girlfriend in our downtime and we talked for a while. When I returned, I was greeted with triumphant shouts of joy and given a beartackle hug by the swashbuckler. They saved me. Thanks to some shenanigans with an elixer of firebreathing and the cleric, having been healed up via wands, charging through the flames to drag my unconscious body through the opened up hole.

The party was ecstatic, I was happy, and the DM gave me a giant grin and a handshake. I was simultaneously ectstatic about this and a little sad. I felt cheated of an amazingly poetic death…while I wasn’t even there. But the party seemed so very happy I didn’t want to say anything about it.

Still, it allowed me to have a bit of a moment of badass. While the cleric and monk and wizard are all thanking me, we hear the swashbuckler’s character scream in the distance. Having recently regained consciousness, I hit myself with lay on hands, charges of a cure mod wand, and start running. The cleric catches up to me and says

Cleric: “Haven’t you done enough heroics for the day?”

Paladin, stonefaced, with water dripping off his face and still coughing up liquid as he runs: “Nope. Paladin.”

That “Nope. Paladin,” to me captures everything a Paladin should be. A Paladin isn’t about forcing his comrades to conform to his oaths; he is not an evangelist or demagogue. He is an example. An example of everything Law and Good can do for the world. He can respect allies who use other methods to achieve Good; he can respect allies for whom Good isn’t their first goal in life so long as they are not Evil. But for himself, he is the unrelenting, unwavering bastion of Good. He tells you he is coming, he plays with all his cards on the table, and he never, ever quits.

And ultimately, Paladins are not beholden to any organization, faith, or even god: they may join with others that they find like-minded, they may worship those deities they think are going to achieve the most Good, but ultimately they answer to Goodness itself. If they discover corruption within their church, or secret evils in their god’s plan, they are beholden to leave that church, forsake that god, and continue to pursue Good.

That’s the ideal, anyway. That is what a well-played Paladin should strive for: and he should not, at least initially, have attained it. A Paladin is only interesting if he falters, second-guesses himself, and so on. To bring up another quote:

Book: I've been out of the abbey two days. I've beaten a lawman senseless. Fallen in with criminals. I watched the captain shoot the man I swore to protect. And I'm not even sure if I think he was wrong.

Inara: [softly] Shepherd...

Book: I believe I just... I think I'm on the wrong ship.

Inara: Maybe. Or maybe you're exactly where you ought to be.

That’s pretty much how your Paladin should be on a bad day. And if he’s doing things right, there will be bad days.

My last piece of advice is, make sure your DM is on-board with this. A lot of DMs have very narrow pre-conceived ideas of what makes a Paladin. Some DMs won’t let you avoid being a stick-in-the-mud. I’d strongly recommend avoiding the Paladin class with such DMs. Actually, I’d probably avoid their games entirely, personally.

share|improve this answer

Paladins seem to be consistently characterized as downers because so many adventuring parties have wandered far afield from good behavior. In a party of truly good characters, the Paladin won't stick out so much.

Regardless of whether a Paladin is surrounded by like-minded characters or not, his approach need not be naysaying and dour. Think of the most engaged religious people you know – those who have truly committed themselves to a pious life. Regardless of the religion they espouse, many of them tend to look upon their calling with a sense of lightness and good humor.

A Paladin with this sort of attitude would use chiding, jokes, allegory, and other means of persuasion to get the rest of the party to see her view of things: "Ah yes, we'll be the talk of the town for our martial prowess if we slay these dangerous goblin babies! It'll be just like the time Rhodegar the Magnificent slew Grak the Evil Dragon!"

share|improve this answer

Sometimes the problem is in the setting that the DM runs. Now, this is not an attack on the quality of your DM in the least. If your DM is agreeing that you're playing the character right, but they still throw the types of enemies at your party that your character becomes a hindrance around. Plus, as BESW said - in a world where a mundane sheriff/guard/warden/etc needs to have a way to punish someone and tell strangers in foreign places how they infractioned the law and don't always have things like Magic.

Then again, the standard way to bypass the nonlethal rule is for the paladin in question to use subduing damage so they can participate int he fight. Plus, even though you're LG, they put Smite on your class features. You are not eternally expected to refrain from violence, especially with that fighter BAB.

Lastly, something that may be considered will involved a nice chat with your DM. While there are rules to the Blackguard (LE paladins) all of my local DMs have fashioned a homebrew rule that you can pick any deity as a sponsor for a Paladin and as long as your alignment matched theirs exactly, you are being "Lawful Good" by that deity's morals. Certain Smite/detect abilities are shifted to match. It has been extremely successful for my circles.

share|improve this answer

Here's a easy fix to the party-splitting issue without changing too much of your roleplay concept: Make the paladin more concerned with stopping evil and doing good by himself rather than making sure others do good. What I mean by this is that you yourself can be as merciful as you want, just making sure that you don't let your party members do evil actions or disrupt rightful authority. This can go over so much better with your party without causing you to fall due to breaking the paladin code of conduct.

share|improve this answer

The Extremist Paladin

I'm a fan of the paladin who doesn't necessarily adhere to the rules, but rather to ideals. I've had several of these in my group, and played a similar character myself, and they go well. The catch is that they are going to have conflict, but not for the reasons you'd expect. This isn't necessarily for most paladins, since they're somewhat alternative to what most people think of when they look for a D&D Paladin or their ilk. Some of them will probably lose their divine favor if they're played with a true good deity, since they're more "hardcore" than other paladins tend to be.

The Ends Justify The Means

These characters will do almost anything to do what they feel is right. This includes collaborating with criminals and their sorts if the target is greater (which is a justification for traveling with morally ambiguous adventurers). If the campaign fits it, this also serves as a potential source of interpersonal conflict, with the other characters always being on high alert for when the paladin decides that they're too bad to be accepted any more, perhaps serving as a limit to their more questionable behaviors.

I Am The Law

Technically, if a paladin is told to have a judge try criminals, they'll do this most of the time. But some paladins may themselves be judges. This is a darker and edgier twist (Judge Dredd, anyone?) to the typical paladin archetype, but even a LG or NG paladin for a god whose spheres include justice may consider himself worthy of executing it on his own judgment, or what he believes to be divinely inspired judgment. The character may conduct trials with any available witnesses (including party members he trusts) before deciding on a sentence. This follows a more brutal, bloody form of justice, which is common more in medieval settings than modern ones. This sort of character is very dangerous to other player characters unless there is some connection or justification for their actions.

Sacrifices Must Be Made

The paladin is devout and recognizes even the nonviolent tenets of his faith. However, on an individual level, he believes that he must be the one to bear the burden of guilt for the execution of justice. This sort of character will sacrifice his own moral superiority for the greater good, perhaps even accepting eventual loss of powers as their chosen deity turns their back on them (at which point they may play a fighter, or, if the DM allows, switch over to a paladin for a god that permits such things). Alternatively, the paladin may spend periods undertaking penance or pilgrimages to recover his deity's blessing after a particularly brutal episode. This is perhaps the least dangerous of the extremist paladins to the other characters, since they can easily consider their fellow adventurers to be kindred fallen souls.

share|improve this answer
1  
+1 for the self assured darker paladin archetype (Miko Miyazaki, anyone?) – kravaros Apr 30 at 18:57

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.