Hi I have been lurking on this site for a while now & I am returning to D&D after a long absence. I need some advice. The game I am starting has need of a Paladin but one with a more worldly view. One that could see the need for druids in his kingdom & could be on good terms with alignment besides LG obviously nor evil but not a Lawful Any Ideas what Power He could worship.
Pelor (NG) has both paladin and druid followers, so he'd be an especially good choice, but I think all but paladins of the most strictly lawful gods (like Pholtus, St. Cuthbert, and Allitur) can be tolerant of non-lawful people.
Well like I said I havent played in a while.. like 20 years. Back then the my friends & I viewed paladins they would not deal with any one but lawfull good. This caused many role playing problems & I am glad this has changed. I have to ask though.. how can a NG God have Paladins? I though they only served LG Gods.
I have to ask though.. how can a NG God have Paladins? I though they only served LG Gods.
Pelor's paladins are all themselves lawful good. Gods can have priests and paladins with alignments up to one step removed from their own alignment. Pelorite paladins tend to be more concerned with good and evil, and less about law and chaos, than for example Heironeous's paladins.
Personally, I say pick a L/G or N/G god and just make your paladin more worldly and open-minded. L/N is generally not a good choice, as they tend to be close-minded, but even that could work. The personality of the paladin doesn't have to match up directly with the deity. So, even if you are a paladin of Pholtus, you don't have to be Judge Dredd. Pelor probably is a good choice, although I've always liked paladins of Rao - find peaceful solutions, think before you act, and use violence only as a last resort. Hope this helps some. _________________ Greyhawk is dead; long live Greyahwk! It is not heresy; I will not recant!
While all good religions have compassion as a component (by the general definintion of 'good'), these two are generally petty big on it. And Rao being a god of peace as well is the frosting on the cake.
As far as paladins go, a lot of people tend to forget they are both Lawful and Good, and tend to go strcitly Lawful and barely any Good. While this makes perfect sense for worshipper of, say, Pholtus, for worshippers of Pelor and Rao this would likely be somewhat less appropriate.
Measure 'law and order' against 'what's best for the people' and you have a better idea of what paladins are generally about.
Besides, Veluna is run by a High Priest of Rao; little encourages open-mindedness like ruling a country in a generally peaceful area.
Also keep in mind that Paladins are not just the military arm of the church (of what ever deity they happen to follow) they are the ELITE military arm of the church. A Paladins not supposed to associate (under 2ed rules) but that is more because they would see themselves as keeping to a code that most people are not strong enough to follow.
In regards to Paladins getting along with Druids, think something in terms of real world Hippie/Peace Activitist Doves Vs. the more Hawkish "I support our President and our troops" crowd. Druids (NG) VS. Paladins (LG).
The Paladins are the guys that say, "We are the people that go out and risk everything so that you can live your lives without fear. You cannot know what it means to do this because you have not seen what we see. There is a right and there is a wrong and in between them is a line that is not crossed. We are the men and women that defend that line." The Druids are the people that say, "It is because of what you do that we have to live in fear. You cannot understand it because you do not take the time to understand the subtleties of the world around you. We are all linked, there is a balance in all things and without understanding that balance you threaten to topple it over."
The differences between Druids and Paladins seem to be beyond reconciliation but they are really easily transposed into the difference between two different viewpoints of the same ideology. Both groups would hold life to be sacred, both groups would believe strongly in duty to god and country, but both groups would have wildly different viewpoints of what that duty is.
This is probably the part of D&D that I like best. How to create a PC acceptable version of something that seems inappropriate. Explaining cultural lines and what not.
Interesting as it is, I'm not sure if I agree with projecting that much of modern attitudes onto D&D is really the right way to define things.
In particular, the assertation that NG druids would hold life to be sacred seems a little shaky to me. In nature, there is nothing particularly sacred about any one life; if there was there would be no predators. Since druids (in D&D anyway) are nature-worshipers, even NG ones would understand that death is a necessary balance to life. Where a NG druid stands is for finding ways for people and nature to coexists; for people to be part of the ecology, not apart from it.
My point is that Druids and Paladins have some common ground. Holding life as sacred doesn't mean being a vegan. Maybe I shouldn't have made reference to real world politics here. My intention was to illustrate that while the two groups seem to be diametrically opposed, the truth is not nearly so black and white. They do have some common ground, true, not a lot but there is something to go from.
Also, saying that druids hold life as sacred doesn't seem to imply that they attempt to live forever. By saying "holding life as sacred" I don't mean that they won't fight, hunt or kill, I mean it in the sense that they would serve their deity, a deity that is the very embodiment of the natural world. Druids are the midwives and the wise men of the village. They are the keepers of the sacred groves and the hidden, secret places were the wonders of nature are abundant. Being neutral doesn't imply callousness towards death, it implies, in a sense, a love for all.
I think of druids as living by the the Code of the Jedi in D&D.
There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force.
The whole thing smacks of neutrality. Especially the whole "There is no death, there is the force" or rather "There is no Death, there is only Obad-Hai".
A person's alignment isn't, necessarily, going to "set off" a Paladin, as long as the person isn't overtly evil. Without casting "Know Alignment," how does your Paladin know? It's the act of law breaking itself that will get your Paladin worked up.
A person can "not" respect a city's traffic signals, but, as long as he's not actually running the stop light, who cares? Not even a Paladin. If a person isn't openly breaking the law, why should the Paladin care?
The fact that the "normal" person doesn't think like him/her, or share the same point of view, is the very reason(s) your Paladin doesn't associate with "normal" people.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
Without casting "Know Alignment," how does your Paladin know? It's the act of law breaking itself that will get your Paladin worked up.
Not even a Paladin. If a person isn't openly breaking the law, why should the Paladin care?
