Paladins

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:49:56 +0000, Keith Davies
<keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote:

>Tetsubo <tetsubo.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Allen Wessels wrote:
>>
>>> So The Emperor radiating pure malice is less evil than Luke wanting to
>>> take apart Vader because Vader taunted him?
>>>
>>> My intuition disagrees.
>>
>> Does either act on these impulses? If not, neither is acting in an evil
>> manner. They may well 'ping' a Paladins senses of course. One doing so
>> much more strongly then the other.
>
>Have you watched these movies? They've only been out about twenty-five
>or thirty years.
>
>Luke did his level best to kill Vader -- become a knowing patricide. He
>failed because his father was still stronger.
>
>The Emperor was just fine with Vader and son trying to kill each other
>because he would end up with the stronger of the two afterward, and the
>other will have been removed as a threat. Within the setting, Luke
>killing Vader would have been an evil act.
>
>That he *failed* does not absolve him. Even trying would still be an
>evil act.

What of the fact that (in Return) he had Vader at his mercy - full
opportunity to kill him - but refused to finish him?

I would say he walked perilously close to the edge, but did not quite
cross it.

Baird Stafford <baird RemoveThis @newstaff.com> writes:

> In article <86iqp06art.fsf RemoveThis @gareth.avalon.lan>,
> Mart van de Wege <mvdwege_public RemoveThis @myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> Baird Stafford <baird RemoveThis @newstaff.com> writes:
>>
>> > In article <gjd549$r34$1@news.motzarella.org>,
>> > Tetsubo <tetsubo RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> > <snip>
>
>> >> We could argue that thinking evil thoughts is bad for a person. And I
>> >> would agree. But you don't arrest, charge, try and possibly convict a
>> >> person for those evil thoughts.
>
>> > Depends on the laws of a lawful society. If the law says that thinking
>> > evil thoughts is a capital offense, then it's a capital offense.
>
>> NO, NO, NO.
>
>> It can't be hammered at enough: Lawful in D&D has *nothing* to do with
>> the laws of the land. Otherwise a Paladin could be constrained to
>> follow Evil laws.
>
> Wrong. A Paladin is Lawful *Good* and therefore in opposition to Lawful
> Evil and not constrained to follow Evil laws - nor even Lawful Neutral
> laws with which he finds himself in ethical disagreement.

Why do you start with 'Wrong'? You are agreeing with me here: Lawful
!= law-abiding if the laws conflict with other priorities, like being
and acting Good.

Mart


--
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.

Kaos <kaos.DeleteThis@xplornet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:49:56 +0000, Keith Davies
><keith.davies.DeleteThis@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>
>>Luke did his level best to kill Vader -- become a knowing patricide. He
>>failed because his father was still stronger.
>>
>>The Emperor was just fine with Vader and son trying to kill each other
>>because he would end up with the stronger of the two afterward, and the
>>other will have been removed as a threat. Within the setting, Luke
>>killing Vader would have been an evil act.
>>
>>That he *failed* does not absolve him. Even trying would still be an
>>evil act.
>
> What of the fact that (in Return) he had Vader at his mercy - full
> opportunity to kill him - but refused to finish him?
>
> I would say he walked perilously close to the edge, but did not quite
> cross it.

Sure. He was still predominantly good. Alignment in 3.x doesn't
mandate character behavior, it describes the general tendencies of the
character.


Keith
--
Keith Davies You know you're working too much when you
keith.davies.DeleteThis@kjdavies.org receive spam with
keith.davies.DeleteThis@gmail.com "Subject: Erection issues resolved!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ and you go looking for the trouble ticket.

Kaos <kaos DeleteThis @xplornet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:34:42 +0000, Keith Davies
><keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org> wrote:
>
>>Tetsubo <tetsubo DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> But did Luke kill his Father? No. He discovered within himself the
>>> strength and wisdom to see the truth.
>>
>>That, and Vader kicked his ass. Again.
>
> How long's it been since you've seen Return of the Jedi?

Quite a while. I've already admitted I didn't remember the details as
well as I'd thought.


Keith
--
Keith Davies You know you're working too much when you
keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org receive spam with
keith.davies DeleteThis @gmail.com "Subject: Erection issues resolved!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ and you go looking for the trouble ticket.

Allen Wessels <awessels.TakeThisOut@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnglotsc.k3q.keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org>,
> Keith Davies <keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>
>> Allen Wessels <awessels.TakeThisOut@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
>> > In article <slrnglonpu.k3q.keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org>,
>> > Keith Davies <keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Oddly, it's part of why I like being a DM -- figuring out how to make it
>> >> all work. Take all the disparate pieces, and find a way to have them
>> >> fit together in an enjoyable whole.
>> >
>> > For me it's kind of like writing. You build a world, you set the
>> > characters loose in it, and a story you hadn't imagined takes place.
>> >
>> > The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
>> >
>> > It feels good when that happens on my canvas.
>>
>> That's good too. I find it tends to be easier, though -- all the hard
>> work's been done making a good canvas, after that it's maintenance.
>
> Yep. It's why I like worldbuilding. At a certain point, after stupid
> amounts of work and thought, a lot of the maintenance is just turning
> the crank.

That's an extremely satisfying stage. It's even better when you get
enough character engagement that *they* turn the crank, and all you need
to do is make sure things don't get out of line.

Note that this has *nothing* to do whatsoever with them going where you
expected. When they have enough to work with to say "we'd rather...",
that's a *good* thing. Even when it's a pain in the ass, and even
that's not too bad if you've got your structure in place well enough.


Keith
--
Keith Davies You know you're working too much when you
keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org receive spam with
keith.davies.TakeThisOut@gmail.com "Subject: Erection issues resolved!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ and you go looking for the trouble ticket.

In article <slrnglqc6h.614.keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org>,
Keith Davies <keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote:

> That's an extremely satisfying stage. It's even better when you get
> enough character engagement that *they* turn the crank, and all you need
> to do is make sure things don't get out of line.
>
> Note that this has *nothing* to do whatsoever with them going where you
> expected. When they have enough to work with to say "we'd rather...",
> that's a *good* thing. Even when it's a pain in the ass, and even
> that's not too bad if you've got your structure in place well enough.

Sure, and you can always throw a few things at them showing developments
in other parts of the world. There is an area in our adventuring
campaign that the party has been meaning to go to for about 10 levels.
Other stuff just keeps being more important.

It's the Superman problem.

- Allen

Baird Stafford <baird DeleteThis @newstaff.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnglm0l0.8uv.keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org>,
> Keith Davies <keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org> wrote:
>
>> Baird Stafford <baird DeleteThis @newstaff.com> wrote:
>
>> > I have two series that I suggest for anyone who wants to play or DM a
>> > paladin. The first is David Weber's series that begins with THE WAR
>> > GOD'S OWN and ends with WINDRIDER'S OATH;
>
>> I'm not familiar with this one.
>
> Read it; it should be still available in paperback. Bahzell Banahkson
> is, um, unexpected. And the series is downright fun.

The first book in the series is actually _Oath of Swords_, followed by
_The War God's Own_, and _Windrider's Oath_. (More books are planned to
follow and will probably be written someday when David Weber manages to
take some time away from the all the other book series he is busy with.)

Not only should they be available in paperback, the first two can also
be downloaded for free (and perfectly legally!) from the Baen Free Library -
http://www.baen.com/library/defaultTitles.htm




--
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr1013 DeleteThis @student.uu.se

"Baird Stafford" <baird.RemoveThis@newstaff.com> wrote in message
news:baird-01D0C4.19100601012009@news.giganews.com...

> The major thing that caught my interest was the corruption within the
> Church. I don't think I've ever seen that theme used in a D&D campaign
> - nor not without overt meddling from another, opposed deity, in any
> case.

It's actually implemented quite well in the Eberron campaign setting. The
Church of the Silver Flame is, in principle, the ideal Paladin order, but
corruption is rife within it, from the lowest levels right up to the upper
echelons - and it's not, in major part, caused by outside influences, simply
by the people within the organisation behaving like people.

I had good fun running a campaign set in Sharn, where the all-too-earnest
Silver Flame paladin frequently visited the cathedral for advice and
guidance, which was given to him primarly by a rather self-serving
middle-level priest who was far more concerned with steering him along the
politically expedient path than keeping him righteous.

--
Mark

In article <495d3f34.RemoveThis@news.midgard.homeip.net>,
Erik Trulsson <ertr1013.RemoveThis@student.uu.se> wrote:

> Baird Stafford <baird.RemoveThis@newstaff.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnglm0l0.8uv.keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org>,
> > Keith Davies <keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org> wrote:

> >> Baird Stafford <baird.RemoveThis@newstaff.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > I have two series that I suggest for anyone who wants to play or DM a
> >> > paladin. The first is David Weber's series that begins with THE WAR
> >> > GOD'S OWN and ends with WINDRIDER'S OATH;

> >> I'm not familiar with this one.

> > Read it; it should be still available in paperback. Bahzell Banahkson
> > is, um, unexpected. And the series is downright fun.

> The first book in the series is actually _Oath of Swords_, followed by
> _The War God's Own_, and _Windrider's Oath_. (More books are planned to
> follow and will probably be written someday when David Weber manages to
> take some time away from the all the other book series he is busy with.)

You're right about the titles and order, of course; I was pulling them
from memory which in my case is sometimes like trying for rabbits out of
a hat and getting rats.

It'd be nice if Weber'd get back to those, and if he'd get back to the
Honorverse, and if he'd get back to.... Oh, I have quite a list of
things I'd like him to get back to, but since I ain't him, all I can do
is sit here and yearn.

> Not only should they be available in paperback, the first two can also
> be downloaded for free (and perfectly legally!) from the Baen Free Library -
> http://www.baen.com/library/defaultTitles.htm

Huh. Didn't know that, thanks. Though I think I'll hang onto my dead
tree copies.

Baird

--
Bumper sticker: "If you can't operate your turn signal,
what makes you think you can drive the rest of the car?"

Allen Wessels <awessels.RemoveThis@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <slrnglqc6h.614.keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org>,
> Keith Davies <keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>
>> That's an extremely satisfying stage. It's even better when you get
>> enough character engagement that *they* turn the crank, and all you need
>> to do is make sure things don't get out of line.
>>
>> Note that this has *nothing* to do whatsoever with them going where you
>> expected. When they have enough to work with to say "we'd rather...",
>> that's a *good* thing. Even when it's a pain in the ass, and even
>> that's not too bad if you've got your structure in place well enough.
>
> Sure, and you can always throw a few things at them showing developments
> in other parts of the world. There is an area in our adventuring
> campaign that the party has been meaning to go to for about 10 levels.
> Other stuff just keeps being more important.
>
> It's the Superman problem.

"Superman problem"?


Keith
--
Keith Davies You know you're working too much when you
keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org receive spam with
keith.davies.RemoveThis@gmail.com "Subject: Erection issues resolved!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ and you go looking for the trouble ticket.

In article <slrnglu1g9.33t.keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org>,
Keith Davies <keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org> wrote:

> Allen Wessels <awessels DeleteThis @EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article <slrnglqc6h.614.keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org>,
> > Keith Davies <keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org> wrote:
> >
> >> That's an extremely satisfying stage. It's even better when you get
> >> enough character engagement that *they* turn the crank, and all you need
> >> to do is make sure things don't get out of line.
> >>
> >> Note that this has *nothing* to do whatsoever with them going where you
> >> expected. When they have enough to work with to say "we'd rather...",
> >> that's a *good* thing. Even when it's a pain in the ass, and even
> >> that's not too bad if you've got your structure in place well enough.
> >
> > Sure, and you can always throw a few things at them showing developments
> > in other parts of the world. There is an area in our adventuring
> > campaign that the party has been meaning to go to for about 10 levels.
> > Other stuff just keeps being more important.
> >
> > It's the Superman problem.
>
> "Superman problem"?

Being able to deal with anything starts you thinking you're responsible
for dealing with *everything*.

After an adventure, we handle local affairs and then meet and exchange
information about stuff happening around the adventuring area "The
Empire". Usually there are several things we need to look into, not
counting the little sidebars where our own holdings are threatened or
have significant events occurring.

It usually means that thing we've been "meaning to get around to" never
seems to pop to the top of the queue.

- Allen

bigcozybear.DeleteThis@gmail.com wrote:
> Greetings --
>
> I've been on and off playing DnD and other games for some years now.
> The problem I have is that I have always wanted to play a paladin but
> am unable to because there is always the one player that wants to be
> neutral in an evil kind of way. That always causes problems. So my
> question is this. What classes are there for an 'evil/neutral'
> paladin (non-prestige) wannabe?

Is there any chance of saying to the group "Hey guys, I've been wanting
to play a paladin for a while now, but a paladin would have issues with
the way we normally roll. Would you mind playing neutral and/or good
characters in this campaign? I'd really appreciate it."

That way you might actually get to satisfy your wish to play the
original paladin!

Cheers,
Grant

Baird Stafford wrote:
> In article <slrnglonpu.k3q.keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org>,
> Keith Davies <keith.davies.RemoveThis@kjdavies.org> wrote:

>> Personally, I'd point at them and say "paladins, be like that".
>
>> As Sea Wasp says, when rules and world disagree, rules lose.
>
> Which seems to have been a continuing discussion since I joined, with
> some upholding that old-fashioned (i.e., largely 1E) view with others
> espousing the "rules uber alles" view. Me, I'm (rather obviously) with
> Sea Wasp.

Well, of course, all the sane people are.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com