Quote from: S'mon;1059695Playing one, it felt better than a Fighter, but not as good as a Barbarian, unless you know you only have one fight that day.

My main issue was that it was all about the spell slots, burning for damage, and felt boring to play, whereas I love playing the 5e Barbarian.

5e barbarians are very fun I have to admit. I played a human sumo barb with an oversized hammer and a demon mask that caused madness effects, but allowed him to see in the dark. Good times.

*swimming in the yawning abyss, making a mouth fountain of its inky ichor*
"Come on in, the void is cozy and fine!"

I really liked how Companion D&D required you to make tenth level in Fighter before becoming a paladin.  Why should the militant orders accept some first level loser?  Not saying it's the only way to be, but it makes more sense than Clerics converting to Druidism at tenth level.

Quote from: Chris24601;1059798I guess my hangup in your description was that ONLY Paladins could be "Good" aligned (i.e. everyone else was limited to Law, Chaos, Introspective or Neutral). That seems off to me, since one doesn't need to have a direct connection to a higher power to champion that power's cause and live by its tenants.

In real world terms a religion is more than just the clergy, there's the laity. Many Catholic Monastic and Knightly orders (upon whom the Paladin is based) had Auxiliaries; groups of laity that existed specifically to take care of smaller matters so the brothers/sisters or knights could attend to more important matters of the faith. To say that the laity in those auxiliaries, many of whom made great sacrifices to support the cause, were not aligned with that cause would make no sense.

Remember, for me, in my campaign, alignment is not behavior but your connection to a metaphysical power.

So, this is a bit more detail than what I wanted to get into as most people usually aren't that interested in other people's campaigns. But, in short, The Ancient of Days is the Prime Mover. The Ancient ignited the Empyrians, the Radiant Obelisk of Law and the Churning Maelstrom of Chaos. Later, the Twelve Patrons (gods) scribed the Sublime Pattern of Insight. While there are other, lesser empyrians and thus alignments, the Big Four are Law, Chaos, Insight, and Neutrality. The Ancient of Days is too distant, ineffable, uncomprehensable for mortals to build a connection with. (c.f real faiths of Voudoun, Condomble; fictional Arch of Time from T. Covenant stories by Donaldson)

However, the Ancient of Days is able to inspire select mortals who have the potential to be more than what they could achieve on their own. Other classes are unable to utilize this inspiration as they have more direct ties to other empyrians that drown out the more subtle divine inspiration (magicians - Chaos, mystics - Insight, Eidonic sorcerers - Law). Only fighters and thieves, classes that have no intrinsic connection to a metaphysical power, could utilize this inspiration. But thieves disqualify themselves because they're, well, thieves. That's why if a paladin should fall they become fighters.

Okay, what about the laity? They tend not to be inspired- those that do usually become paladins. The Patrons are very present in the lives of the plainfolk, through miracles, clergy, and the social aspects of the temples. While many are certainly aware of the stories of the Ancient of Days, the Patrons come much more easily to mind.

QuoteSo to get to the nub of what I was trying to discern with my questions was... if only Paladins can have the Good alignment, what is the alignment of all the people who act just like Paladins (in the sense of embracing their virtues) and support their higher power even if they cannot access that power themselves (just as the Catholic laity cannot forgive sins nor perform the Mass as a priest can, but are still fully aligned with the same God in whose name their priest acts)?

Those folk who live the five virtues as well as they can, as well as a paladin does, could have any of the big four alignments, potentially. Lawful might emphasize Justice, the Chaotic looks to Mercy, the Neutral Prudence, perhaps. I would say that the Insightful's favorite might be Temperance. But, not Good. Mortals are just not able to make that connection on their own. They can't conceptualize the Ancient sufficiently to make that bridge; it has to come from the Ancient of Days. This is not to say that regular folk can't be "Good". Would it help to say the alignment really isn't "Good" as much as "Beatific"?

Quote from: HappyDaze;1059804The key to the 5e Paladin is in the Oath, not in the Alignment. However most often the Oath will only be viable for a narrow range of Alignment. The classic Paladin is the Oath of Devotion, and that one is going to be very hard to play if you're not LG. True, there are other Oaths that fit other Alignments, but the classic Paladin is still there and still bound by an Oath that's got teeth even when Alignment itself doesn't. Alignments can change fairly easily and without issues in 5e. If a character is following the Oath of Devotion as it is written (not some weird-ass creative interpretation of it), then the character will quickly become LG even if that isn't where they started--and this is important since Paladins now don't formally swear that Oath until 3rd level.

And this demands that I ask - Whose "Cause" does a Paladin serve more? His Oath itself? OR the Metaphysical Concept/Religion/God/Whatever that the Oath is MADE TO?

The problem here is the Oath is coming before whom/what the Oath is made to which presumably is granting the Paladin his nifty abilities. It has the compounded mistake of divorcing more roleplaying opportunities by, as you succinctly identified: forcing the Paladin to roleplay within a specific bandwidth of their Alignment. Both concepts are completely removed from the higher ideal which the Oath is being made to. In fact - by 5e standards, you don't even need to have them.

This is why I advocate for Gods, Creeds, and Ethos to define a larger spectrum to which Paladins adhere to. This is how you get the different examples of the Knights of the Round Table's Galahad and Lancelot's version of Paladinhood. It also completely opens you up to other types of Paladins for other causes diametrically different - and completely distinct of the Fighter.

And they're still Paladins. Strong in their Righteousness. Stalwart in their Faith. Deadly in their Conviction.

Why do you even need Alignment. Their adherence to their code and Gods/Creed via action defines them before that. Assuming they're going to stick to that creed, they will remain Paladins. That they happen to be good/evil/neutral - ultimately is irrelevant because they're doing as their Creed/Belief dictates. Presumeably as their God intends. If not? Well then they're actively choosing to not be a Paladin for that cause with the usual results.

This is not rocket science. This is also why Alignment is not a useful tool. It only causes arguments (and likely why people fall back to the OSR version of them.)

I think it's best to separate 5e the toolbox from 5e the New Forgotten Realms Setting. Insofar as the classes and races available define what goes on in the Realms, yes, it's pretty much a mess, and it doesn't cohere internally at all. In the new Realms, a Paladin starts off with the ability to Lay on Hands and gains the ability to Divine Smite because...uh...like...whatever, I guess. He can take whatever oath he wants at 3rd level regardless of what god he has served, or no god at all, or how he has lived his life. Note that he reaches 3rd level in the time it takes to kill nine orcs. That's right, folks, a 3rd-level character in 5e is simply someone who has slain nine orcs in his life.

As a toolbox, 5e is really wonderful. There's lots of stuff in there to draw your world and campaign out of. You don't have to have Warlocks or Great Old Ones or Tabaxi or Dragonborn at all. You don't have to allow irreligious clerics or paladins. You can give specific gods that correspond to each oath or domain. It's up to you.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1059902I think it's best to separate 5e the toolbox from 5e the New Forgotten Realms Setting. Insofar as the classes and races available define what goes on in the Realms, yes, it's pretty much a mess, and it doesn't cohere internally at all. In the new Realms, a Paladin starts off with the ability to Lay on Hands and gains the ability to Divine Smite because...uh...like...whatever, I guess. He can take whatever oath he wants at 3rd level regardless of what god he has served, or no god at all, or how he has lived his life. Note that he reaches 3rd level in the time it takes to kill nine orcs. That's right, folks, a 3rd-level character in 5e is simply someone who has slain nine orcs in his life.

As a toolbox, 5e is really wonderful. There's lots of stuff in there to draw your world and campaign out of. You don't have to have Warlocks or Great Old Ones or Tabaxi or Dragonborn at all. You don't have to allow irreligious clerics or paladins. You can give specific gods that correspond to each oath or domain. It's up to you.

Would you make it take longer to level up?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1059916Would you make it take longer to level up?

Yes. Absolutely. The part of the game where you and some companions are traveling on foot, besting grotesque humanoid tribes, and exploring caves lasts about 3-4 sessions in 5e. In Ye Olde D&D terms, Keep on the Borderlands is supposed to be for levels 1-3; in 5e there is enough XP in one orc cave to take a party of 4 well into 3rd level.

Quote from: tenbones;1059888And this demands that I ask - Whose "Cause" does a Paladin serve more? His Oath itself? OR the Metaphysical Concept/Religion/God/Whatever that the Oath is MADE TO?

From the way it is written, it appears the Paladin is intended to serve the ideals of the Oath, not the deity/religion/organization that likewise champions it (but those make great allies). Of course, in 5e, most Paladins have dumped their Int and their Wis is only likely to be around 12, so this isn't a question that most of them will ever bother to ponder in depth.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1059931From the way it is written, it appears the Paladin is intended to serve the ideals of the Oath, not the deity/religion/organization that likewise champions it (but those make great allies). Of course, in 5e, most Paladins have dumped their Int and their Wis is only likely to be around 12, so this isn't a question that most of them will ever bother to ponder in depth.

Greetings!

Good post, HappyDaze. I like that. It's got me thinking, on one hand, I think the institution of the "Oaths" like Tenbones also mentioned, is great flavor. But the actual *execution* of that, like you mention here, gets generally divorced and *disconnected* from both alignment, and Deity. This *disconnection* from both alignment and fervent service and identification with a Deity, in past editions, is a large part of what distinguished the paladin. I'm also reminded of Tenbones' earlier point about all of this window dressing is merely to open the door to players of paladins in the game being indulged in embracing whatever flavour of moral relativism, instead of strictly adhering to a demanding code, and an otherwise demanding spiritual and religious identity. I think a good deal of the paladin's identity gets lost in that process.

And yeah, you're disturbingly incisive: Most paladins in the game won't be aware of these distinctions, and from notably low intelligence and wisdom scores--will not even care about them, even if they are made aware of them.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

There is a lot of room to experiment with paladins in 5E.  There is also, as a necessary corollary, a lot of rope to hang yourself with.  Of course, which is which depends a lot on what you are trying to accomplish.

I wasn't particularly trying to emulate the classic paladin as such for my current campaign, though I wanted something within spitting distance of it.  I also thought the Oath of the Ancients and Oath of Vengeance were some of the more interesting options in the game.  They also happened to fit my selection of gods, which is a mix of pseudo Celtic and Norse.  So I've got the default Oath of Devotion as a "imperial civilization" thing associated with a couple of LG/NG gods, almost always human, with a few other assimilated races into the imperial culture--dwarf being the most common, but still rare.  Then Ancients is elder elves, those removed from the dominant imperial culture. I haven't completely forbidden it to other races, but no one has even asked, and I've included no NPC Ancients that aren't elves.  Then the Vengeance paladins is the "traditional" dwarven route.  (It's also the dark elf route, as they are allies of the traditional dwarves, but not necessarily a good mechanical fit, and no has wanted to go that route yet, either.)

Based on what has been said here, I doubt that the above would be very appealing to either Shark or Tenbones, as "paladins"--but they are certainly working well for me right now.  We've had three really interesting characters grow out of this arrangement so far.

Quote from: SHARK;1059934Greetings!

Good post, HappyDaze. I like that. It's got me thinking, on one hand, I think the institution of the "Oaths" like Tenbones also mentioned, is great flavor. But the actual *execution* of that, like you mention here, gets generally divorced and *disconnected* from both alignment, and Deity. This *disconnection* from both alignment and fervent service and identification with a Deity, in past editions, is a large part of what distinguished the paladin. I'm also reminded of Tenbones' earlier point about all of this window dressing is merely to open the door to players of paladins in the game being indulged in embracing whatever flavour of moral relativism, instead of strictly adhering to a demanding code, and an otherwise demanding spiritual and religious identity. I think a good deal of the paladin's identity gets lost in that process.

And yeah, you're disturbingly incisive: Most paladins in the game won't be aware of these distinctions, and from notably low intelligence and wisdom scores--will not even care about them, even if they are made aware of them.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

The way I look at the Oaths and Alignment in 5e is this: the Oaths are what the Paladin serves, but the Alignment of the character colors how they serve it.

The same Oath could be taken a totally different direction by an LG Paladin as compared to an LE one.

So it opens the door to more flexibility in the roleplaying.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1059939The way I look at the Oaths and Alignment in 5e is this: the Oaths are what the Paladin serves, but the Alignment of the character colors how they serve it.

The same Oath could be taken a totally different direction by an LG Paladin as compared to an LE one.

So it opens the door to more flexibility in the roleplaying.

Looking at the Oath of Devotion:
Tenets of Devotions

Though the exact words and strictures of the Oath of Devotion vary, paladins of this oath share these tenets.

•    Honesty. Don't lie or cheat. Let your word be your promise.
•    Courage. Never fear to act, though caution is wise.
•    Compassion. Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them. Show mercy to your foes, but temper it with wisdom.
•    Honor. Treat others with fairness, and let your honorable deeds be an example to them. Do as much good as possible while causing the least amount of harm.
•    Duty. Be responsible for your actions and their consequences, protect those entrusted to your care, and obey those who have just authority over you.

All of these work well for LG and can be made to work for NG and LN characters reasonably well. LE does fine with Honesty, Courage, and Duty but Compassion and Honor (at least in regards to treating others with fairness and doing good) are going to be a bit more tricky. Such characters could try to follow an Oath of Devotion, but they will find it conflicts with their Alignment tendencies (or their Alignment tendencies will start to shift towards LG). If the character values their LE nature more than the tenants of Devotion, they would be well served to consider another Oath, such as Vengeance or Conquest, instead.

Who you serve and how you serve can be in concord, it just requires manner being subset to cause.

This is all easy to me because In Nomine SJG. Your Superior serves a Word (a realist concept made manifest) for they come to embody that Word. You, the servitors, serve the Superior according to your resonance/aptitude/conception of how to navigate reality. If you further take Oaths or Geas, you further restrict your manner, so as to keep your being wholly imbued (attempting to avoid pain of doubt and temptation,).

In TSR D&D this imbuement is a fighter blessing contingent upon staying within benediction. Thus following their truths, through the manner of their life's calling (class,) by added effort through oath restrictions. That agonizing tension brings forth "mystical powers," like mental discipline brings visions to seers, or stress induces poltergeist activity.

Nowadays there is not much attachment to that thinking. All these words for classes are detached from cultural meaning. All that matters is slapping together all the power widgets to feel cool. Hence Sorcadins (sorceror & paladin) and Padlocks (paladin & warlorck). I blame skill-based systems. j/k (but am I? :eek: )

Quote from: Opaopajr;1059958Who you serve and how you serve can be in concord, it just requires manner being subset to cause.

This is all easy to me because In Nomine SJG. Your Superior serves a Word (a realist concept made manifest) for they come to embody that Word. You, the servitors, serve the Superior according to your resonance/aptitude/conception of how to navigate reality. If you further take Oaths or Geas, you further restrict your manner, so as to keep your being wholly imbued (attempting to avoid pain of doubt and temptation,).

In TSR D&D this imbuement is a fighter blessing contingent upon staying within benediction. Thus following their truths, through the manner of their life's calling (class,) by added effort through oath restrictions. That agonizing tension brings forth "mystical powers," like mental discipline brings visions to seers, or stress induces poltergeist activity.

Nowadays there is not much attachment to that thinking. All these words for classes are detached from cultural meaning. All that matters is slapping together all the power widgets to feel cool. Hence Sorcadins (sorceror & paladin) and Padlocks (paladin & warlorck). I blame skill-based systems. j/k (but am I? :eek: )

Greetings!

Hey Opaopajr! Indeed, Padlocks!!! LOL! My god, when the guy in our AL group said he took a level of Warlock for his paladin--my friend tells me later,

"Man, that bullshit wouldn't fly in your campaign, SHARK. That guy's paladin/warlock would have been burned at the stake for heresy!" LOL.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK