[net.games.frp] Paladins

ttorgers@udenva.UUCP (Troy Torgerson) (04/24/85)

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR ANTI-PALADIN ***

Ok, we all know that Paladins are a pain in the *, but what I'd like to 
know is how do people play their Palidins? (Or DO they play Paladins?)

How do all you DM's handle your Paladins PC's and NPC's?  
Specifically, how do you handle a Paladin PC that is being played
as a pain in the ass instead of a Paladin. . .

I would like a better method than just killing the Paladin off,
because I don't believe in that kind of DM'ing.  I only believe in
letting someone die if they do something to deserve it.  Granted, the Paladin
I was thinking of was looking for trouble, and I didn't let him find
it, which of course made him more beligerient. . .  Oh well.. next time.


			Troy Torgerson
			udenva!ttorgers

hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) (04/26/85)

In article <544@udenva.UUCP> ttorgers@udenva.UUCP (Troy Torgerson) writes:
>*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR ANTI-PALADIN ***
>
>Ok, we all know that Paladins are a pain in the *, but what I'd like to 
>know is how do people play their Palidins? (Or DO they play Paladins?)

I was in a campaign a while back where a brand new, level 1 Paladin  joined
a party of high-level PCs.  He immediately attatched himself to our highest
level (13th at the time) cleric of similar alignment (LG) and looked to him
for  guidance  in  all  things.  This probably helped keep him from being a
_total_ pain in the {your favorite organ here}.  The only real  problem  we
had  with him was getting thrown out of bars.  He insisted on ordering milk
and cookies wherever we went ... (We got even once by bribing a  leprechaun
to  change  _all_  his food and drink into milk and cookies.  Didn't change
his habits but was good for a laugh).
-- 
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe)
Citicorp TTI
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.
Santa Monica, CA  90405
(213) 450-9111, ext. 2483
{philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex}!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe

phil@osiris.UUCP (Philip Kos) (04/27/85)

> Specifically, how do you handle a Paladin PC that is being played
> as a pain in the ass instead of a Paladin. . .
> 
> 			Troy Torgerson

Paladins are pretty odd characters, and require some very serious
role-playing to get right.  Of course, "right" depends a lot on the
DM, but then doesn't it always?

I've had to handle obnoxious paladins in campaigns before.  Usually
the reason for the obnoxiosity was that the player didn't really
understand how paladins (according to me) are supposed to think.

The best way to keep players like this in line is to remind them that
if they do anything you consider to be evil or unlawful, they get
defrocked.  After such an action, atoning for their sins is a VERY
expensive procedure (particularly in terms of time).

In one campaign I played in, the DM deliberately foisted a helm of
opposite alignment on an NPC paladin, who proceeded to become an
anti-paladin and took over a town.  The game was eventually inter-
rupted (by most of the PCs dying), and was subsequently continued
with new characters, who found the town a real mess, and wound up
having to kill the anti-paladin to stay alive.  Interesting situation.

					Phil Kos
					The Johns Hopkins Hospital

phil@osiris.UUCP (Philip Kos) (04/27/85)

By the way, I forgot:

****    ****                 ***
 **      **                   **
 **      **                   **
 **      **                   **
 **      **                   **
 **      **                   **
 **********   *****  *** **   **  **
 **      **  **   **  *** **  **  *
 **      **  **   **  **  **  ** *
 **      **  **   **  **  **  ***
 **      **  **   **  **  **  ****
 **      **  **   **  **  **  ** **
****    ****  *****  ***  ** ***  **



				Phil

ncg@ukc.UUCP (N.C.Gale) (04/28/85)

You think Paladins are a pain in the *, eh?
Listen, Smelly, my longest ever running character is a 9th level
Paladin, and if you think they are difficult to get on with,
you should try *playing* one.
It takes more than forever to achieve a worthwhile level, and in the
meantime, you're not allowed to do any of the obvious things that
Parties resort to: burning Oche Jellies, killing helpless CE creatures -
most of the really valuable decisions in our Party had to be made
while I was incapacitated.

but as to the question of what to do when a paladin is being played
as the equivalent level A***hole, that's easy:
You either remove, or suspend his Paladinhood. Give him (or her) a
(temporary?) compulsory change of alignment.

This happened several times to me, even when I played him impeccably:
The party once found some poison (gasp, horror), obviously we couldn't
use it, so we gave it to an NPC to sell, as a bonus.
For this generosity, my P'hood was suspended, I had to spend a
considerable amount of time wearing hair undergarments and beating
myself with birches. I very nearly had to get Atoned as well.

On another occasion we were lumbered with half a dozen Hobgoblin
prisonners. We couldn't keep them, but should we release them -
no, they're intrinsically evil, and would rush out raping and
killing innocent peasants the minute we let them loose. So we
killed them (humanely, like dangerous animals). Whups, there goes
the Paladinhood again.

There were a couple of times when I didn't play him impeccably,
and the same thing happened.

(shakes with frustration)

No one can call Paladins anything until they've been one, then they
know just how much of a burden a P'hood can be.

-Nige Gale

dave@gitpyr.UUCP (David Corbin) (04/29/85)

> 
> Ok, we all know that Paladins are a pain in the *, but what I'd like to 
> know is how do people play their Palidins? (Or DO they play Paladins?)
> 
> How do all you DM's handle your Paladins PC's and NPC's?  
> Specifically, how do you handle a Paladin PC that is being played
> as a pain in the ass instead of a Paladin. . .
> 
> I would like a better method than just killing the Paladin off,
> because I don't believe in that kind of DM'ing.  I only believe in
> letting someone die if they do something to deserve it.  Granted, the Paladin
> I was thinking of was looking for trouble, and I didn't let him find
> it, which of course made him more beligerient. . .  Oh well.. next time.
> 
> 
> 			Troy Torgerson
> 			udenva!ttorgers

Why do you consider Paladins a pain in the *?

-- 
David Corbin 
Georgia Institute of Technology
Box 34034
Atlanta GA 30332
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,masscomp,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!dave
...!{rlgvax,sb1,uf-cgrl,unmvax,ut-sally}!gatech!gitpyr!dave

holmes@dalcs.UUCP (Ray Holmes) (04/30/85)

I have recently played two paladins without being subject to the "pain in
the ***" syndrome.  The last (the first lived a short life) has become quite
a character.  He (though skilled with a sword) uses as a primary weapon a
bull whip (he has become very good at disarming oponents, or taking their
feet out from under them with it) and is always acompanied by a LARGE wolf
(who has finally goten used to the idea of going underground) wearing studded
leather armor.  He is the only Palidin that I know of that has intentionally
killed a member of his own party (but that's an other story).

					Ray

goldman@umn-cs.UUCP (Matthew D. Goldman ) (04/30/85)

In article <380@ttidcc.UUCP> hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) writes:
>In article <544@udenva.UUCP> ttorgers@udenva.UUCP (Troy Torgerson) writes:
>>*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR ANTI-PALADIN ***
>>
>>Ok, we all know that Paladins are a pain in the *, but what I'd like to 
>>know is how do people play their Palidins? (Or DO they play Paladins?)
>
>I was in a campaign a while back where a brand new, level 1 Paladin  joined
>a party of high-level PCs... 
				...He insisted on ordering milk
>and cookies wherever we went ... 
>-- 


**** FLAME ON ****

Why do all paladins have to have Christain 'morals' concider the Islamic
Paladin, or any other religious group you care to think of.  Just a gripe
of mine, why does everyone insist that Christanity is Lawful Good?  To do
so is to ignore the rich history of murder and mayham sponcered by Christanity.
For starters you have the Spanish Inquisition, Programs in Europe, the 
events in Europe during WWII - read up the Nazi's were NOT the only ones
killing 'non-desirables' the partisans killed  thier share.  

**** FLAME OFF ****

I don't insist, nor encourage my players to play their paladins as Christains.
Life is so much more interesting when the 'Bad Guys' think that they are
on the side of TRUTH, Justice and the {fill in the blank} way.  In the end
we all must face the face that there are no TRUTHs, just lots of truths.

Just who is the monster here anyway???

-- 
-------
				Matthew Goldman
				Computer Science Department
				University of Minnesota
				...ihnp4{!stolaf}!umn-cs!goldman

Home is where you take your hat off...			Banzai!

hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (05/01/85)

In article <544@udenva.UUCP> ttorgers@udenva.UUCP (Troy Torgerson) writes:
>*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR ANTI-PALADIN ***
>
>Ok, we all know that Paladins are a pain in the *, but what I'd like to 
>know is how do people play their Palidins? (Or DO they play Paladins?)

A pain in the asterisk?  I disagree!  Paladins are a wonderful tool.
They can get you into SO much trouble!  Paladins provide a REASON for
the players to be battling the evil dregs, rather than JOINING them.

For example, and this is only a possible scenario ...
A paladin leads the party because she's PAYING them.  He has access to the
coffers of his religion because she gains fame and he has the favor of the
deity or deities.  She can recruit or requisition the help of clerics of
his religion, especially if it is a martial religion (like, say, that odd
Spartan worship of Mars...)  The other players would in this case be the
specialists brought in for the express purpose of handling particular
situations.  They may not particularly agree with the paladin's religion
but they will certainly follow her leadership.

>How do all you DM's handle your Paladins PC's and NPC's?  
>Specifically, how do you handle a Paladin PC that is being played
>as a pain in the ass instead of a Paladin. . .

Easy.  Convince the player to roleplay in a more reasonable fashion.
(I disagree with the suggestions in the Player Handbook about the
personality traits which accompany Lawfulness.)  The LAW in question is
the one to consider.  Taoists can be considered lawful in some respect
yet their Law emphasised personal responsibility.  The specifics of the
Law are the responsibility of the DM but you can get the player to help
in the design work, which will make for better roleplay.

Or, have another player, who is better at paladining, run a paladin in
a mentor role.  The turkey will catch on with a lawful, good example to imitate.

If you still have problems, let the player know that the disruption is
wrecking the game, and getting everyone mad, and that it will have to
stop.  If the problem remains after that, then the player is out, and
good riddance.  There's likely no shortage of reasonable people who are
willing to act like adults when acting out murderous fantasies.

>
>			Troy Torgerson
>			udenva!ttorgers

- Hutch

elliottg@stolaf.UUCP (Glenn E. Elliott) (05/01/85)

In article <684@umn-cs.UUCP> Matthew Goldman writes :
> 
> **** FLAME ON ****
> 
> Why do all paladins have to have Christain 'morals' concider the Islamic
> Paladin, or any other religious group you care to think of.  Just a gripe
> of mine, why does everyone insist that Christanity is Lawful Good?  To do
> so is to ignore the rich history of murder and mayham sponcered by Christanity.
> For starters you have the Spanish Inquisition, Programs in Europe, the 
> events in Europe during WWII - read up the Nazi's were NOT the only ones
> killing 'non-desirables' the partisans killed  thier share.  
> 
> **** FLAME OFF ****
> 
> I don't insist, nor encourage my players to play their paladins as Christains.
> Life is so much more interesting when the 'Bad Guys' think that they are
> on the side of TRUTH, Justice and the {fill in the blank} way.  In the end
> we all must face the face that there are no TRUTHs, just lots of truths.
> 

Hear! Hear!  I agree whole-heartedly.  I don't encourage players to
imitate Christian Ethics with their Paladins, nor do I necessarily
play mine that way.  In fact, the most fun that I ever had playing
a Paladin was one time when the group HAD to have the Paladin with
them in order to fulfill a quest, and he kept forcing them to
contribute to his church to keep him from leaving!  (Paladin's can
be greedy too, as long as it is within the morals of their
"church"... )  The most fun I've ever had DMing for a Paladin in a
group was for one that thought he was a Ninja - have you ever seen
a Paladin try to fight open-handed?


				Glenn Elliott
				St. Olaf College
				Northfield, MN
			   ...ihnp4!stolaf!agnes!elliottg
				    or
			   ...ihnp4!stolaf!elliottg


I don't claim to be sane, just normal...

plutchak@uwmacc.UUCP (Joel Plutchak) (05/03/85)

In article <684@umn-cs.UUCP> goldman@umn-cs.UUCP (Matthew D. Goldman ) writes:
>
>**** FLAME ON ****
>
> ...why does everyone insist that Christanity is Lawful Good?  To do
>so is to ignore the rich history of murder and mayham sponcered by Christanity.
>For starters you have the Spanish Inquisition, Programs in Europe, the 
>events in Europe during WWII - read up the Nazi's were NOT the only ones
>killing 'non-desirables' the partisans killed  thier share.  
>
>**** FLAME OFF ****
>
  I believe that the key is not the actions of the Christians, but the ideal
to which they presumably aspire.  And that's as far as I wish to get into that;
if I really wanted to argue religion, I'd subscribe to net.religion!
  Anyway, in all campaigns I've been involved in, the source for paladin
behaviour has come more or less from TSR and related material, and that's the
way they seem to go.  I do agree that most people I've known who have played
paladins played them as royal pains-in-the-nether-regions.

-- 
                                   - joel 

  "The only worse than a hacker is a hacker who's proud of being one."

mike@whuxl.UUCP (BALDWIN) (05/03/85)

FLAME ON***!
> ..., you're not allowed to do any of the obvious things that
> Parties resort to: burning Oche Jellies, killing helpless CE creatures -
> most of the really valuable decisions in our Party had to be made
> while I was incapacitated.

Say What?! you have got to be kidding! Ochre jellies are NON- intelligent!
I can just imagine my DM telling me
"your paladin inhales deeply killing 46,732 microbes which so offends your
deity that you are fried on the spot"
and as for killing helpless chaotic evil monsters, what the h**l else are
you supposed to do?! send them to the home for wayward baddies?
be real.  You kill them (as in dead).

> The party once found some poison (gasp, horror), obviously we couldn't
> use it, so we gave it to an NPC to sell, as a bonus.
> For this generosity, my P'hood was suspended, I had to spend a
> considerable amount of time wearing hair undergarments and beating
> myself with birches. I very nearly had to get Atoned as well.

see previous flames on the stupidity of assuming that paladins
have judeo-christian ethics. beating yourself with switches and
wearing hair coats is strictly medieval roman-catholic, the same
ones who burnt millions of people at the stake for witchcraft 
(read being different).  perhaps your paladin should have destroyed
the poison, perhaps not, but certainly not his paladinhood.
I HATE PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT LAWFUL GOOD IS LAWFUL STUPID!!!
Paladins can be intelligent, reasonable people.

> On another occasion we were lumbered with half a dozen Hobgoblin
> prisonners. We couldn't keep them, but should we release them -
> no, they're intrinsically evil, and would rush out raping and
> killing innocent peasants the minute we let them loose. So we
> killed them (humanely, like dangerous animals). Whups, there goes
> the Paladinhood again.

ARGGH!! see previous comment about home for wayward nasties!
try something fun like asking your DM what in the H**L he thought
you should do?! I strongly suspect that he didn't know, because he
assumes that paladins adhere to an insane code of ethics that is
impossible to follow(Lawful Stupid).  I would have long since given
up playing a paladin in that campaign because obviously the DM is
using them to illustrate nothing more than his belief that the
judeo-christian ethic is insane and untenable in real life.
FLAME OFF***

anyway, my sincere sympathies for having to put up with this nonsense
(though I wonder at your persistance).  I also agree with most of
the other articles that paladins should not be based solely on a
judeo-christian ethic.  I can well imagine a Zen Paladin.
"what is the sound of one orc dying?"
"Leather boots" :-)


Yeah, well, whatever

reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/03/85)

In article <684@umn-cs.UUCP> goldman@umn-cs.UUCP (Matthew D. Goldman ) writes:
>**** FLAME ON ****
>
>Why do all paladins have to have Christain 'morals' concider the Islamic
>Paladin, or any other religious group you care to think of.  

The powers of Paladins are those appropriate to lawful good, squeeky clean
religions, such as the idealized version of Christianity one reads about in
Arthurian legend and epics like "Orlando Furioso" and "Tirant Lo Blanc".
I think that people who say, "Well, any religion can have a paladin." have
a point, but they blow it by allowing their paladin to have the same powers
as the AD&D standard while living up to lower obligations.  If you are going
to have your blood-and-guts war god have paladins, then give them a set of
powers more appropriate to that god.  Paladins are extremely powerful 
characters, except that they have inconvenient obligations which they must
meet which cripple them somewhat.  If you remove those obligations, you've
destroyed the game balance.  Less realistic, too.  ("Destroys balance!"  "Less
realistic!"  "Destroys balance!" "Less realistic!"  "Hey, guys, it's the game 
mod that destroys balance *and* is less realistic!") 

>Just a gripe
>of mine, why does everyone insist that Christanity is Lawful Good?  

Most fantasy campaigns take place in more ideal circumstances.  Christian
ideals are Lawful Good, if you will.  The practices of Christians rarely
live up to those ideals, and frequently don't even come close.  If the 
Christian god acted like D&D gods, lightning insurance would be very expensive.
-- 
        			Peter Reiher
        			reiher@ucla-cs.arpa
        			{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher

mccolm@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/04/85)

> >Why do all paladins have to have Christain 'morals' concider the Islamic
> >Paladin, or any other religious group you care to think of.
>
>The powers of Paladins are those appropriate to lawful good, squeeky clean
>religions, such as the idealized version of Christianity one reads about in
>Arthurian legend and epics like "Orlando Furioso" and "Tirant Lo Blanc".

Funny you should mention King Arthur.  The requirement that Knights of the
Round Table help ladies in distress held only for Sir Gawaine, because he let
a woman die unjustly, and was geased by the Queen to help women in need
forever after.  But this gives a good idea of how to deal with Paladins
who goof up:  put yet more (and appropriate) requirements on them.
Anyway, while Sir Gawaine was required to do so, for the rest of the knights,
it was just a nice thing to do, and they were under no real compunction unless
lives and livelihoods were threatened.

>I think that people who say, "Well, any religion can have a paladin." have
>a point, but they blow it by allowing their paladin to have the same powers
>as the AD&D standard while living up to lower obligations.

I submit that any religion can have a paladin, and that the obligations of
paladins of other religions are not lesser than those of Christianity, just
different.  And should be different.  The powers should be different, as well.
What matters is UNSWERVING DEVOTION (in thought and in action, in commission
and omission, to speak and to be silent, to slay and to hold, 'til my God
leave me, or Death take me, or the World end) TO THE PATRON.  Blow this, and
it's all over.  A good case in point is Paladins of the truly nasty Gods.
They'll have radically different powers (carry disease, protect/good,
frighten animals, cause fear, etc.) and obligations toward causing suffering,
death, destruction, sickness, and so on.  And instead of releasing EVERYONE
who begs for mercy, they have to ritually torture and slay EVERYONE who
yields to them.

>...Christian
>ideals are Lawful Good, if you will.  The practices of Christians rarely
>live up to those ideals, and frequently don't even come close.

This is also part of the Patron's religion.  Christianity emphasizes forgive-
ness, sometimes after penance.  Other religions don't.  So don't think that
your paladin will be forgiven (eventually or ever) for transgressions, unless
the patron is predisposed to forgiveness, atonement, penance, etc.  The
backlash of screwing up will be appropriate to the seriousness of the
transgression, and the religion the paladin follows.  This brings up another
requirement.  The player and referee MUST decide in advance EXACTLY what the
religion is all about, so the atonements (if any) will fit the religion.
That way, the player won't be nearly as upset when it happens.  It will also
make the punishment LESS severe when it comes, because the referee will find
something short of defrocking as a reasonable alternative.
--
					 -Eric
					 ...!ucla-cs!mccolm
Shade and sweet water...

chenr@tilt.FUN (Ray Chen) (05/06/85)

In article <5189@ucla-cs.ARPA> reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (Peter Reiher) writes:
>I think that people who say, "Well, any religion can have a paladin." have
>a point, but they blow it by allowing their paladin to have the same powers
>as the AD&D standard while living up to lower obligations.  If you are going
>to have your blood-and-guts war god have paladins, then give them a set of
>powers more appropriate to that god.  Paladins are extremely powerful 
>characters, except that they have inconvenient obligations which they must
>meet which cripple them somewhat.  If you remove those obligations, you've
>destroyed the game balance.  Less realistic, too.

Untrue.  NOTHING could be more painful than opening a door, discovering
3 Balrogs, and as everyone thinks "Let's get OUT OF HERE!!!" having
the paladin of the blood-and-guts wargod go "CHAAAARRRGE !!!"

There are other situations that can be just as bad.  For example,
when you're facing the traditional enemy of the paladin's religion.
Or better yet, "Guys, do we REALLY want to desecrate this temple?
This could be VERY painful.  Oh, sh*t, somebody grab the paladin
before he..."

	Ray Chen
	princeton!tilt!chenr

christer@kuling.UUCP (Christer Johansson) (05/06/85)

In article <544@udenva.UUCP> ttorgers@udenva.UUCP (Troy Torgerson) writes:
>How do all you DM's handle your Paladins PC's and NPC's?  
>Specifically, how do you handle a Paladin PC that is being played
>as a pain in the ass instead of a Paladin. . .
>
If the Paladin's God doesn't like him/her, he/she becomes an ordinary fighter
of the same level as the Paladin. No spells, no special abilities.

I prefer not to play whith players (or GM:s) that can't play a realistic
character. Hack&Slay (as a princip) are NoNo:s in my campaigns.

nmhr@nmtvax.UUCP (05/06/85)

> *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR ANTI-PALADIN ***
> 
> Ok, we all know that Paladins are a pain in the *, but what I'd like to 
> know is how do people play their Palidins? (Or DO they play Paladins?)
> 

	As someone who has played three paladins in his gaming life, I feel
that I can answer that question.

	I have always played paladins with Sir Galahad in mind. He was
(allegedly) a pure and good knight of the Arthurian days. I have also
always thought of paladins as possessing "Christian-like" ideals.
That is, they are goody-two-bootsies. For instance, my first paladin
(four years ago) refused to take part in the lecherous activities that 
his fellow adventurers performed (such as visiting a local bordello).
My current paladin doesn't drink anything stronger than Welches Sparkling
Grape Juice. My impression of a paladin has always been that of a
super-good tough-guy.

> How do all you DM's handle your Paladins PC's and NPC's?  
> Specifically, how do you handle a Paladin PC that is being played
> as a pain in the ass instead of a Paladin. . .
> 

	As a DM I would always remind inexperienced paladin-players of what
activities are not deemed meritable. Examples: a paladin will not condone
wanton slaughter, pillaging, raping, and any other chaotic/evil 
activity; a palading does not mutilate bodies after death; a paladin
should not travel with evil people. (On that last note...I once had an
assassin that was evil in a party composed of a mage, a fighter, a cleric,
and a paladin. Everyone else was neutral (except the paladin, who was
lawful good of course). Every time the paladin would try to detect
evil, he would get a positive reading. He finally figured out that the
assassin was evil and kicked his butt. The assassin ran and later doubled
back to attempt to kill the paladin. Well, when that happened, the party
ganged up on him and fried his tail to the road. 	In that instance, 
the paladin was played correctly. He felt evil and destroyed it. 

	As for the pain in the ass paladins, I'm not sure I know what
you speak of. 

	That's it for now. See you in the watno-jacurai!!!


(-*  Don't you know that women are the only works of art?

			              ---Don Henley *-)

-- 
Tracy A. McInvale
New Mexico Humanities Review
Socorro, NM  87801

...!cmc12!lanl!unm-cvax!nmtvax!nmhr
...!ucbvax!unmvax!nmtvax!nmhr

jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) (05/06/85)

[...]

I know the whole Paladin business is getting a little tedious, but
no one has made what I consider to be an important point.  It seems
that a number of people are objecting to a player character playing
his personality, even when it is not expedient...in this case,
Paladins being too noble for the party's good.  Pardon me, but this
is one of the most interesting aspects of role-playing: your character
has a personality all his/her own, and you have to go with that personality,
even when your own inclinations are different.  It's known as having
*character*.

A Paladin happens to have a more restricted range of personalities than
most other character classes.  However, I would hope that GMs enforce
character consistency in ALL player characters, even if the personality
traits are not directly linked to class/race/etc.  As a simple example,
I have a character in one of my campaigns who fancies himself a ladies'
man and will chase wenches with abandon.  Of course, this makes him
vulnerable to being set up in a number of ways.  Tough.  If that is the
character he has chosen to play, he is not going to be allowed to throw
it aside just because the player suspects that a particular woman's come-on
is a trap.  The player must play the personality and take the lumps as
they come.

Of course, I am not advocating that GMs demand that their players be
stupid.  If the character himself has some reason to suspect a trap, he
can take whatever precautions he wants.  However, the Player should not
be allowed to change personality traits because of suspicions.  (For the
last three weeks, the character has bedded a different wench each night.
We didn't play any of those encounters out because they were uneventful.
Now we begin to play out an encounter with a new wench, and because we're
spending time on it, the Player suspects that there is more here than
meets the eye.  Of course.  But to the character it's just another night,
and he should not be allowed untypical behaviour.)

Paladins, Christian or non-Christian, are just special cases of this
principle.  They happen to get special powers out of the deal, so they're
more visible.  However, I don't see that they're really any different in
the long run.

				Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo

reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/06/85)

In article <619@whuxl.UUCP> mike@whuxl.UUCP (BALDWIN) writes:
>I can well imagine a Zen Paladin.
>"what is the sound of one orc dying?"
>"Leather boots" :-)

I'm no Zen expert, but some of the koans I've heard suggest that a Zen paladin
would be likely to have a very short life span.  The one about the monk
achieving enlightenment just as the tiger finishes eating his unresisting body
doesn't bode well for a Zen Buddhist paladin's lifespan.

Seriously, though, paladins really only make sense for militant religions.
A Jewish paladin could be really interesting.  Imagine the fun of deciding
which monsters are kosher and which aren't.  And under what circumstances is
it permissible to smite a monster on the Sabbath?  Some Talmudic scholar with
a bent towards gaming could have a field day here.  As far as your major point
goes, I think that it is necessary to play Paladins, as written in AD&D, very
tight.  They have major powers which must be balanced by major restrictions.
Thus, the question of whether one is permitted to kill prisoners of CN 
alignment, for instance, or whether it is permissible to allow one's comrades
to use poison against CE nasties is the heart and soul of AD&D paladins.  If
you want to have paladins with more freedom of action, you would be well advised
to change their powers.

Finally, I'm getting sick and tired of people flaming the paladin concept
because the Church in the Middle Ages killed a bunch of people.  The paladin
concept is based on an idealized form of Christianity, true, but AD&D is
fantasy, anyway, so why not use a fantasy version of Christianity?  The excesses
of the Catholic Church are irrelevant, just as similar excesses by other
branches of Christianity.
-- 
        			Peter Reiher
        			reiher@ucla-cs.arpa
        			{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher

phil@osiris.UUCP (Philip Kos) (05/08/85)

There was (is?  anybody at UIU-C want to let me know?) a game on
the University of Illinois PLATO system called "Avatar" which had
a character class called the "Heretic".  These guys were primarily
Clerics of a basically evil bent, but they had more powers than
plain old Clerics - more like an anti-Paladin, in fact.  I played
them exclusively because it was a great dungeon for hack-and-slash;
the only problem with them was that you couldn't run with Good
characters.

Ah, those were the days...


Phil Kos
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

ncg@ukc.UUCP (N.C.Gale) (05/11/85)

POINT (1):    Doesn't the word 'paladin' imply a defender of the Christian
faith agianst the hordes of Islaam (in the pay of Charlemagne)?

POINT (2):    As far as I can make out, you were citing tee-totality as an
example of Christian morals?! Moslems are a damn sight more teetotal than
Christians, who include guzzling alcoholic beverages as a part of their
worship.

In my campaign, there are evil Christians, good Moslems and heathens,
and there are Clerics and Paladins (and demonists) of every religion.

-Nige Gale

ncg@ukc.UUCP (N.C.Gale) (05/12/85)

Of Lawful Stupid Paladins...

So there's this thief, who's fighting for his life after checking a floor
for traps ahead of the party, and getting attacked from all sides by
wraiths. The only person who can save him is the Paladin, Devlin. If Devlin
leaps into the affray, he will almost certainly be killed, but the rest of the
party will get away. If he doesn't, the thief will cop it, but Devlin and the
rest of the party will get away.
Devlin is a more valuable member of the party than the thief (much more now the thief has lost a couple of levels). If Devlin gets away, rather than the thief,
the party will be that much less greedy, that much more able to combat evil.
So what does Devlin do?


I read Le Morte Dartur, which is a middle-English chivalric book(s) of
Arthurian Legends.
One knight who was clearly a Paladin (I think it was Bors de Ganis), 
somehow offended the hot-tempered Sir Gawain.
Sir Gawain chased him into a church, and started hacking at him, but Sir Bors
only defended himself with a shield, refusing to strike such a noble
lord (who he didn't want to harm).
A priest appeared on the scene, and flung himself between the two knights.
So Gawain cut his head off, and continued trying to beat the crap out of
Sir Bors (middle English phrase).
A maiden arrives, and hurls herself between the knights, and Gawain kills
her too.
Another passing knight, Sir Colgrevaunce, hears the noise, and comes into
the church. He rushes up and starts to defend Bors.
This makes Gawain very mad, so he turns his rage on Colgrevaunce, and soon
Sir Colgrevaunce is fighting for his own life, and losing.
He calls out to Bors:
"Why don't you come and help me, Bors, I only joined this bloody fight
to save your neck" (middle English again), but to no avail.
Eventually, Gawain kills Colgrevaunce, but when he at last gets to Bors,
his rage is gone, he apologises for his disgraceful behaviour, and everyone
is friends again.

Paladin's morals, no matter what religion, are not at all easy to define.

In the same book(s), Sir Bors is hailed by a witch in a castle, who says
that unless he comes into the castle and adulterises with her (Bors is
married), she will execute a dozen maidens that she has captive.
Bors wrestles with his conscience for a while, and then refuses to comply,
and goes away with 'paladinhood' intact. 

My feeling is that this is purely a GM decision, just as selling poisons,
using fire against unintelligent creatures, and killing hobgoblins
who have committed no crime, but probably will if you let them loose, also
are GM decisions. The GM might be swayed by the player giving enough
thought to the problem in hand to find the nicest solution.

(Oh yes, in the campaign I am GMing, no creature is always evil, and evil
creatures can have their alignment changed by being treated well, etc,
when they are captured. Except for demons. - neutral demons, now there's
an idea)

-Nige Gale