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.
up vote 5 down vote favorite

I only heard of Paladins being good. However, was there any instances of Paladins being evil? Is it physically possible for Paladins to be evil?

share|improve this question
5  
Please specify what system you're talking about. D&D 3 or 4, or something else? – Jeremy Aug 21 '11 at 17:28
3  
Yes, in a given arbitrary system Paladins can be evil. This question doesn't make sense. – Jeremy Aug 21 '11 at 17:45
3  
@Sard - closing is not a death sentence. In my mind asking the OP to edit and casting a close vote should be part of the same action. – wax eagle Aug 23 '11 at 11:38
3  
@ChaosGamer Given that you're picky, what game were you thinking of? Regarding expectations and deserving of play, I've found that it's the GM that makes the game... and the rules support their vision or fight with it. – Brian Ballsun-Stanton♦ Aug 25 '11 at 4:26
3  
People, please don't just add random-guess tags to the question. I've rolled them all back. If you have a question about this in a specific game, please do ask your own question. – SevenSidedDie Aug 25 '11 at 4:50
show 13 more comments

6 Answers

up vote 14 down vote accepted

In AD&D1E, and the predecessor "Classic" D&D, the Paladin is not permitted to be Evil. A Dragon article (Laking & Mesford, Dragon, Issue 39, GOOD got you down? Try this for EVIL: The Anti-Paladin NPC. Reprinted in Best of Dragon Vol II) provided for an Anti-Paladin, who is in essence a lawful evil paladin.

So, yes, there is an Evil Paladin, but he's not JUST a paladin gone wrong; his powers are changed slightly.

Further, as noted by Wimanric, there's the Dragon 106 article giving the various other flavors.

Later editions (3.X) used Blackguard to represent fallen paladins; the resulting characters look like toned down antipaladins.

And, per AD&D1E and 2E, a Paladin gone wrong is just a fighter (or Cavalier, if using Unearthed Arcana).

Further, under AD&D1E + Unearthed Arcana, Cavaliers can be evil, get many of the specials of being a Paladin and fewer restrictions.

Many other games also use the term Paladin; some have them as Good only; others less restricted.

share|improve this answer
Also note that I believe in 3.x and certainly in Pathfinder there is a distinct anti-paladin class that is literally an evil paladin. (The logic behind this is that paladins are essentially supposed to strongly emulate their god so if your god is evil, etc then a paladin of that god would be like that.) – mirv120 Aug 25 '11 at 13:49
1  
@mirv120: There are also variants in 3rd Edition Unearthed Arcana. Here are wiki versions of Lawful Evil, Chaotic Good, and Chaotic Evil aligned paladins. The Lawful Evil one is the only one that I feel right about, though - how can you have an order of people opposed to order? – user1637 Aug 26 '11 at 17:35
I dunno but maybe you're really chaotic if you act lawful and organized sometimes? – mirv120 Aug 26 '11 at 18:13
@mirv120 No, D&D alignment doesn't work like that. Groups of chaotic individuals act as mobs or hordes—they don't create orders that exist only by virtue of group acknowledgement of the rules and structure (i.e., "laws") of the order. However, you don't need to imagine some way of making CE individuals act lawful enough to create an order: there's no reason you can't just have a Chaotic Evil "paladin" who acts as a lone agent of destruction and chaos. They might be directly inspired/created/twisted by a CE god rather than being in a hierarchy like LG paladins. – SevenSidedDie Aug 28 '11 at 18:10
Chaotic types in D&D do organize into groups... but not usually long term ones. Temporary groupings. The CG equivalent would be an Avenger from D&D Cyclopedia/Companion rules... same powers, but different focus and methods. The chaotic evil version is a reaver - a killing machine out for his own pleasure. – aramis Aug 28 '11 at 19:32
up vote 6 down vote

This depends a lot on the type and historical period (or not) that the game is set in.

The earliest uses of Paladin are Palatine which as a high official of the sovereigns court. It is only later tales of Charlemagne and Arthurian that give us the concept of the Holy Knight.

So it all depends on the background to the game. Paladin can just be a member of the King's Guard, one of his trusted nobles or a holy knight. In DnD 1e to 3e they had to be Lawful Good but in Fourth they do not.

share|improve this answer
+1 link to real world history. – Sardathrion Aug 25 '11 at 9:24
up vote 5 down vote

In Dragon #106, there were versions of paladins for all the non-LG 1st Ed AD&D alignments. enter image description here

share|improve this answer
I couldn't find that one when searching... Good catch! – aramis Aug 25 '11 at 6:05
up vote 3 down vote

For D&D 3.5/Pathfinder: My answer is No. A paladin as written must be LG. But! There have been paladin variants written that are evil, see Paladin of Slaughter and Paladin of Tyranny. imho these are not Paladins, and I would not allow them in any game of mine. There is also the Blackguard prestige class which gives a fallen Paladin (one who has broken the Paladin code) special abilities. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/blackguard.htm

share|improve this answer
1  
What about the anti-Paladin whose design is specifically to be an evil opposite of the paladin? – mirv120 Aug 23 '11 at 11:22
@mirv120: Evil opposites need not be of the same type, only comparable in a way that makes their similarities visible. – Alticamelus May 23 '12 at 9:06
up vote 3 down vote

I would say that the crusading knights that founded the Templare orders and any Knight of the Temple afterwards were Paladins in real life. The Sohei of Sengoku Japan were described as warrior monks and thus could well be modelled as Paladins as well. You could even argue that the Shaolin temple monks were Paladins.

So, I see no problems in Paladins being any alignments and culture whatsoever. Edit for clarity: I do not say that all crusaders were evil. Some were, some were not. This is real life, there are shades of grey. Go read books on the crusades (I recommend Crusades: the illustrated history by Thomas F. Madden as a good start), you will be both horrified and pleasantly surprised.

However, I always had a problem with a LG character class those mission was to kill those not of his religion but that's okay because they only kill bad ones. Hum...

share|improve this answer
Here, Here, Paladins where never the Spanish Inquisition. – David Allan Finch Aug 25 '11 at 11:43
No, but they were Crusaders… – SevenSidedDie Aug 25 '11 at 16:34
up vote 1 down vote

In their introduction, paladins are clearly modelled on the chivalrous tradition coming from Arthurian legend, and from idea of a pious crusader in the mold of the Templar knights, as Sardathrion and David essentially say. If only I had my 1st ed. AD&D books to hand, I'm sure I could find supporting quotes for this in under a minute. Rules for D&D that spoil the romantic connection to these types are spoiling the interest of the game and debasing the gaming community - please do us a favour and don't have them in your campaigns.

I'd say it's essential to good D&D of any flavour that paladins virtuously and chivalrously adhere to (i) obedience to a liege, and (ii) piety. The obedience to a liege bit pretty much makes chaotic paladins impossible. Trying to run an evil PC/NPC that is at once, evil, virtuous, and pious I think is hard, but not impossible.

And the connection to the Arthurian legend brings up a point: the "best knight", Lancelot, one of its two strongest models, with Parsifal, for paladin, was driven into a situation that destroyed the round table and led to the rise of Mordred, stemming from his chaste pursuit of courtly love. The paladin's code is a great basis for tragedy, and good tragedy makes the deeds of the best lead to terrible evil. Just don't inflict tragedy on your PCs unaware: they hate it.

The rule book for Pendragon is a great place to mine for ideas about how to develop the chivalric side of paladinhood.

share|improve this answer
2  
Uh, your badwrongfun is showing there, um… – SevenSidedDie Aug 25 '11 at 16:36
1  
@Seven: Paladins are relatively innocuous as a source of gaming debasement. Dominant tropes regarding elves in generic fantasy, on the other hand ... you know, I've just thought up a great post for the blog! Seriously, I should probably put in some mellowing context in the first paragraph. – Alticamelus Aug 25 '11 at 20:39
2  
I happen to personally agree that anti-paladins are dumb, but on the other hand I also believe that answering an innocent question about the existence of something with a lecture that it's existence is dumb and a pox on The Game is a bad answer by virtue of being solidly off-topic. – SevenSidedDie Nov 1 '11 at 7:17

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.