>>48087737
People don't like being constrained by rules, even if they were going to follow them in the first place.

You are literally playing the walking rulebook.

>>48087737
Because the unrightious don't like to be kept in check.

>>48087761
>>48087770
it's starting to sound to me like alot of people don't know how to play Paladins well

>>48087783
Typically, yeah.

>>48087737
No, I'm playing one right now with no problems with my group at all.
You kind of just have a shitty group that actually buys into dumbass bullshit that they hear on the Internet without bothering to verify or formulae their own opinions because they think it's funny or it gives them a sense of belonging to a subculture by doing so.

Doesn't mean they're bad people mind you (I don't know enough about them for that), just means they're flawed RPers.

>>48087737
Because people are salty faggots who like to get upset by things and if their isn't something worth getting upset by then they will find something and be upset by it anyway.

Considering all the ways there are to play paladins it's not even constricting of a class.

I noticed about 8 years ago, the general feel of campaigns some gms wanted to run and players to be in involved either walking the line or being evil.

Just wait about a year and the rise to play good aligned,big damn hero games will swing back into popularity.

I got tired of it as a player years ago and started running almost constantly because every other dm wanted you to be in a world of shit, punching up and the very bottom of the bad guy totem pole while rape demons blocked the sun's rays. It comes in cycles, the anti hero phase is about to be out and we will be back to playing adventuring guilds and heros soon.

>>48087737
Paladins literally only exist to cause intra-party strife. They sit there the whole game, foaming at the mouth, just waiting for the opportunity to maim or kill their fellow party members.

Alignment, the absolute worst part about D&D, is only actually important if your party has a paladin. Everyone else can get along without problems, but paladins just won't have it.

File: tumblr_inline_nvirv8MP8v1(...).png (460 B, 102x76)

460 B PNG

>>48087850
You're a shit player and you should feel like a shit player.

Who the fuck taught you how to Paladin

>>48087878
I don't play paladins, only shitbirds do, because they are in love with killing their party members. It's all they live for, the fucking braindead murderhobos.

>>48087737
Because paladins are borring and actually one of cancer of fantasy genre.

>>48087737
Because paladins require strict adherence to a shitty alignment system which causes more problems than it solves.

I like playing as a paladin.

I can't tell if everyone in this thread is memeing or I'm the only person on /tg/ without crippling autism and a group of friends who also all have crippling autism

File: 1432593698596.gif (2.09 MB, 383x204)

2.09 MB GIF

>>48087737
I've never encountered this problem. I play Paladins a lot, but I play them as highly serious, ideologically motivated people with strict principles and no compunctions against violence, not whinging moralists.

If we're fighting something, it's because it's fucking with the realm or with the gods or with regular people. That's evil. If you do evil things, you die. Literally all you have to do NOT to die is not do evil shit. Maybe it's just my group, but none of us lolrandom kill people out of the blue or rob regular folks for their two copper pieces or whatever. The rewards of honest adventuring are enormous, the rewards of petty banditry are pretty pathetic. If you're having problems with the party's Paladin and he isn't a total sperging retard, it's because you think it's fun to kill people at random like you're in Looking for Group or some other gay comic about random violence.

You don't have to do the right thing all the time--you just have to avoid doing the capital W Wrong thing.

>>48087801
I think that people forget that you can have genuine heroes even if you're running a world of ultimate suck.

I know it may not be the best example, but even in W40k, a setting that brings suck to a ridiculous level, you have Salamanders who may as well have their own G.I.Joe-style animated series, with moral lessons and all.

>>48088338
>I am ABSOLUTELY COMMITTED to killing my party members!
Yep, that's a paladin.

>>48087737
>I like to play D&D to win
The Paladin restricts you to only chivalrous, deeply unoptimal strategies. He stops you from looting things. He makes you take prisoners, a liability to your eyes. He makes you spend loot on the local poorhouse. He's not a Tier 1 class. You hate him.
>I play for the deep story aspects
The Paladin has a black-and-white view of the world that forces you to take one side of any ambiguous situation, or makes it all about him. He's one-note, he's predictable, and the DM usually doesn't want to split a player off or appear to be playing against one person (the forced fall meme). In the event the DM has a spine, the Paladin is a magnet for unexpected consequences to all actions, making a mockery of your roleplaying. You hate him.
>I just want beer and pretzels gaming
The Paladin sermonises the whole fucking time, and adds a note of morality to your goblin slaying. You hate him.
>I'm playing a dickbutt rogue
The Paladin polices the shit out of your character and you'll self-destruct the group if you do too much in defence of your actions. He wears heavy armour and denies you any advantage from sneaking. You hate him.
>You're playing a cleric.
The Paladin gets all the glory, while you're now pointless as a secondary combatant and throwing the heals at him. Alternatively, you're using your Tier 1 power to outshine him and the fucker whines constantly. You hate him.
>You're playing a wizard.
Half your summons are fiendish and therefore off-limits. You can't exactly use any morally-grey but powerful casting either. The fucker's high saves mean you can throw pie-plate debuffs around him much more safely, but he refuses to use much of the advantage given by them. You're dependant on your gold income and he keeps spending it on indulgences and orphans. You hate him.
>You're the DM and you wanted a unique-feeling world
Too fucking bad, we knightly Middle Ages now. You hate him.

>>48087737

It's a class that's designed to be a stick in the mud and that gets in the way of adventuring duties.

>>48087737
The average paladin player plays paladins as a walking rulebook, or at least they supposedly did in the old days. As a result, most players have an immediate dislike for paladins as they expect a walking rulebook.

In my experience, the issue is much less prevalent in people who get into the hobby young and manage to avoid asshole paladin players. None of my current group have an issue with paladins, for example.

>>48088607
>The Paladin restricts you to only chivalrous, deeply unoptimal strategies. He stops you from looting things. He makes you take prisoners, a liability to your eyes. He makes you spend loot on the local poorhouse. He's not a Tier 1 class. You hate him.

Wrong and retarded.

>The Paladin has a black-and-white view of the world that forces you to take one side of any ambiguous situation, or makes it all about him. He's one-note, he's predictable, and the DM usually doesn't want to split a player off or appear to be playing against one person (the forced fall meme). In the event the DM has a spine, the Paladin is a magnet for unexpected consequences to all actions, making a mockery of your roleplaying. You hate him.

Even more wrong and retarded. You sound like the type who have had retarded GMs confuse Paladin with a Constable/Magistrate. He's the fucking arm of god, not the judge of man. At the worst paladins and clerics may need to atone for making a bad decision in an "ambiguous situation" while everyone else can just move on.

>The Paladin sermonises the whole fucking time, and adds a note of morality to your goblin slaying. You hate him.
Personal problem teach your shitty player how to actually play a fucking paladin then.

>The Paladin polices the shit out of your character and you'll self-destruct the group if you do too much in defense of your actions. He wears heavy armour and denies you any advantage from sneaking. You hate him.
If you were remotely good at your job the Paladin would never know, obviously you go off on your own when sneaking/scouting what kind of noob brings a large group of people that are going to be easily spotted with him?

>The Paladin gets all the glory, while you're now pointless as a secondary combatant and throwing the heals at him. Alternatively, you're using your Tier 1 power to outshine him and the fucker whines constantly. You hate him.

Either way you're a secondary combatant to him with 3/4 BAB.

>>48088797
>>48088607
>Half your summons are fiendish and therefore off-limits. You can't exactly use any morally-grey but powerful casting either. The fucker's high saves mean you can throw pie-plate debuffs around him much more safely, but he refuses to use much of the advantage given by them. You're dependent on your gold income and he keeps spending it on indulgences and orphans. You hate him.

There's no reason a Wizard has to give his share to the Paladin, you must have the shittiest group ever. Summons are shit, and you using morally-grey but powerful casting dosen't have anything to do with his moral code.
And refusing to attack an enemy because you "debuffed" them? Holy shit kill your GM. Then yourselves.

>Too fucking bad, we knightly Middle Ages now. You hate him.

>GM is so shit he can't re-purpose the role and general concept of the paladin outside of the typical middle age fantasy setting.

>>48087737
Paladins may not be the worst class, but they have immense potential to be the worst - as comments in this thread already prove, it's really easy (and easily justifiable) to be a huge dick as a Paladin - by introducing yourself to a group that doesn't know you well with a character with that much potential to be a drag on the party I'm not surprised they don't like you - how would you feel if a new player said their character was Kender?

Also, the fact that you love subverting tropes and playing "rather unique" versions of things would make me wary as fuck

File: 1466024678188.jpg (64 KB, 900x900)

64 KB JPG

>>48087737

Sigh. Sadly, most of /tg/ doesn't know how to play a Paladin, or played with assholes who modded the Code of Conduct to become fucking sticks in the mud.

A paladin isn't supposed to be stupid. If the enemy is stronger than you, nobody is going to slap your deity-blessed arse if you throw sand in his eyes. Fuck! It's a giant fucking demon! You're not supposed to give yourself handicaps!
You have no obligation to oaths like "oath of poverty" or "oath of chastity" or whatever else. You can fuck, drink, and whatever you like. Spending your gold in a better armor or in a magical sword may be more useful for the "greater good" than throwing it all away to some orphans, anyway they're going to die by the hand of the fucking Lich, in the case you didn't win against him.
Don't be an ass to the backstabbing rogue, to the demon-summoning wizard, or to the necromancer. Be an example. This is how you paladin.

>>48088287
This.

What the fuck is wrong with some of you

>>48087897
>>48088242
I feel sorry for you - you've only ever played with That Guys and they've turned you into them.

>>48088607
>He's not a Tier 1 class.

>>48089971
I'm just saying, a whole gamut of different player types have reasons to hate the Paladin. I'm not a powergamer, but I know why powergamers don't like paladins.

My personal reason? Been playing RPGs since 1999 and I have never seen a good paladin in person.

>>48090031
Ive heard this reason so many times but I always wonder have you tried paladins yourself? I know its not your job etc etc but it hardly seems logical to dismiss a class because of other people.

On the other hand, if you have and didnt like it then carry on. Paladins aint for everyone after all.

Playing as a Hell Knight can be just as bad. Players just like playing as chaotic shit bags without any rules to follow.

>>48087737
>trope subversion
Fuck you

>>48087801

It's mostly because in most settings, you don't really get recognized for being Good. Your standard D&D campaign has players being wandering adventurers.

I've run games where the players get a lot of status for being holy knights (There are literally only thirteen in the entire world) and everyone fawns over them whenever possible.

File: notsureiftroll.jpg (13 KB, 480x360)

13 KB JPG

>>48088392
Get out

File: tumblr_nierjwicG31scmnfuo(...).png (1.37 MB, 1099x849)

1.37 MB PNG

>>48088607
Dude what fucking Paladins have you played with

Is roleplay dead?

>>48088607
You're That Guy aren't you?

>>48088864
>as comments in this thread already prove
Just because you say it doesn't make it so

File: rage2.gif (1.11 MB, 320x240)

1.11 MB GIF

>>48088864
Why is subversion and being unique terrible? Do you always play cookie cutter "dashing rogue" and "heroic knight" stereotypes?

Attacking OP just becasue you're a shitty player...has tg come to this?

>>48090607
/tg/s been like this for at least a year m8

File: sad.gif (57 KB, 392x200)

57 KB GIF

>>48087761
>>48087850
>>48087897
>>48088242
>>48088277
>>48088607
>>48088684
>>48088864
>>48090158

/tg/ I'm fucking disappointed.

God fucking damnit, man. Have you all come from 9gag?

>>48087761
There is nothing in the Paladin code that commands that they must constrain their allies.

The Paladin is more than just 'a walking rulebook' the Paladin is interesting, they have a reason to fight beyond themselves or beyond mortality,
>>48088607
The Paladin does not force you to do anything, if he does, he's playing a Paladin of the Catholic Church. Any decent roleplayer will ask other party members to donate and be kind, but will not force them. Yes, a Paladin may tell someone "No, we are not murdering innocent people", but that's any actually good character.

Paladins are not black and white, they simply have their ideals and are committed to them. There are emotional times that can try a Paladin, questions they must answer, 'I am a Paladin of X, and I must turn away from the fight because this is wrong." The Paladin offers a unique aspect to roleplaying that isn't just 'Let's supermurder anything" Especially since the entire argument otherwise for your bullshit is "The Paladin is a killjoy who doesn't let me murder innocent people"

What's wrong with adding morality to Goblin slaying? Usually that morality expands to simply "They're evil, murder them"

If you're being a dickbutt Rogue, you should get out of D&D

By that logic, a fighter hates the Barbarian for dealing far more damage than him.

Again, no Paladin forces anyone to use their money for anything they don't want to. Secondly, what's the issue with morally-grey casting? And what is 'he refuses to use much of the advantage given by them?'

You can play a Paladin who isn't knightly or middle-ages.

In short, I think you're an idiot. And I hate you, and everyone who looks at shit like you. Get the fuck out of D&D and play some Skyrim, mod the game so you can murder children or something, maybe that'll help.

>>48088864
So the Rogue that decides to TPK the entire party isn't the worst?

The Barbarian who just wants to kill every important NPC for being 'annoying' isn't the worst?

The Wizard who decides he really doesn't like you so he casts a spell that just sends you to another plane isn't the worst?

The Bard who literally fucks everything in sight isn't the worst? He's most certainly not, because that's how all the half-breed templates of D&D exist, you should thank him while playing your half-giant.

Every class has a way to be abused and make the entire game annoying and stupid. If anything, I've run into far more annoying Barbarians than I have Paladins.

But hey, maybe it's just because I'm not an asshole who only play D&D like a typical hack&slash video game.

>>48088607
>The Paladin has a black-and-white view of the world
I object, it's a common misconception that Paladins can only see in black and white, but in all actuality, they are capable of seeing every color that anyone else of their race can see.

File: Lake of fire hell mark of(...).gif (1.11 MB, 400x210)

1.11 MB GIF

>>48090769
>>48090701
Paladins are fun police at best, intent on stopping their party members from actually doing what they want to do at all costs and gleefully engaging in fratricidal slaughter when they don't bend the knee, and actively homicidal fanatics at worst. In either case, they are there to cause, participate in, and actively provoke party conflict, and in either case they will be the ones who destroy the group.

Paladins are alignment given form, and alignment is by far the worst part about D&D.

You get a party without a paladin, it can have anyone from any alignment getting along. CE rogue wants to sell drugs to children, the CG bard isn't going to stop them, but neither will the NE sorceress care that the LG fighter is helping out at an orphanage.

A paladin gets in that mess and he's highly likely to straight up kill the non-good PCs as soon as he detects evil on them, and at the very least he's going to put a sword in someone's face for doing things he doesn't like them doing.

>>48090701
Seriously man. What happened to this place?

>>48090888
If what you want to do is just kill everything in sight, you aren't playing D&D, you're hack&slashing it up.

Also, a Lawful Good fighter will absolutely stop a CE Rogue from selling drugs to children, so will the CG Bard, you know why? Because that's fucking evil and if I was playing either class I wouldn't want to travel with someone who did that. I played a Neutral Good Brawler once before and I snapped the neck of one of our party members for trying to kill Civilians, yo know why? Because I was a fucking good guy and he was evil. If you want a party to get together, don't play CE. Holy shit, it's almost like Good and Evil characters don't get along.

And if a Paladin puts a sword in someone's face for doing something they don't like them doing they're not playing a Paladin right, or that thing you're doing is brutally evil and you deserve to be killed by it.

File: 1432098899132.png (232 KB, 463x375)

232 KB PNG

>>48090888
haven't seen anyone this delusional for a while, now

>>48087737
>>48090968
>the CG bard

Naw, son.

3e or 5e CG: "As his conscience dictates." He may very well sell alongside him. CG = wishy washy ANYTHING.
AD&D CG: "Laws, tradition and social norms are wrong, and threats to freedom are as serious as threats to life." CG = libertarian etc, as in "boo anyone who says we shouldn't be free to sell heroin to kids."

Chaotic is a hell of an alignment.

>>48090888
I've literally never seen party conflict by a Paladin except for the time our Chaotic Evil wizard decided to murder a family of three and our Paladin killed him for it. We all agreed it was only fair - a Good Fighter would have done the same thing.

>>48091039
No, Chaotic means you disregard the social norms, it doesn't mean you sell drugs to kids. Most people would agree that is evil as fuck. Chaotic Good is Batman. Selling drugs to children is at best, chaotic neutral.

You cannot be chaotic good while breaking the law simply because they're social norms. Or simply because your conscience says it's ok. By that logic, Joker's conscience says killing civilians is good so Joker is Chaotic Good.

File: 1445107864191.png (307 KB, 600x860)

307 KB PNG

>>48090968
>If what you want to do is just kill everything in sight, you aren't playing D&D, you're hack&slashing it up.
I didn't suggest that at all. The example I gave was dealing drugs to children. That's very far removed from a hack and slash mindset. The one operating with that thought process is you.

This is literally how you think: [THING I DON'T LIKE SPOTTED] -> [ENGAGE MURDERMODE]

And the reason an LG fighter or CG bard won't threaten to kill the CE rogue for dealing drugs is that they are not batshit crazy murderers, so when they see something they don't like, they have a lot of avenues to address it, including ignoring it altogether. You have a conflict about morality between a regular class and another regular class, that conflict will be resolved in a sensible fashion - one party compromises to the other party and there's no way in hell it escalates into a deathmatch.

With paladins in the equation, however, you can expect an immediate smite attack and relentless chase to hunt down and kill everything that hurts his widdle fee-fees.

Why is that? Because paladins cannot compromise. If they do, they lose their class features, they stop being able to play the game at the same level of competency. For them, giving any ground to evil party members is basically the same thing as being killed in battle, so they react the same way they otherwise would - by pulling out their sword and hacking everything that "pings" incorrectly to bits.

>>48090888
Just so you know, you're wrong on the internet.

File: wtf3.gif (5.35 MB, 300x244)

5.35 MB GIF

>opens thread
>sees all of the Paladin haters in this thread
>mfw

>>48091118
Paladins don't randomly kill people who don't deserve it.

If you're mad that a Paladin is killing you, you deserve it.

This is of course assuming the Paladin isn't That Guy.

>>48091118
If your CE Rogue is dealing drugs to children, he deserves to be murdered. That's not sensible behavior now, and it never was.
I'd murder the shit out of your Rogue on any character.

File: 1461780441198.gif (1.85 MB, 250x188)

1.85 MB GIF

>>48091179
>you're selling drugs to children!
>you deserve summary execution!

File: Common Sense.jpg (133 KB, 664x900)

133 KB JPG

>>48091118
So you think that a good person wouldn't at all object to selling drugs to children?-Pic Related

Yeah, it won't escalate into a deathmatch, the Fighter just asks the Rogue to stop, Rogue rolls bluff, and then just slices the Fighter's throat later.

There's also the fact that Paladins don't just attack anything, they attack evil things. You know what the word evil means right? It means that you do terrible things such as, but not limited to; murder, rape, pillaging, genocide, etc...

If you're evil, then a Paladin has every right to kill you, unless there's some serious reason for a Paladin to work with you, like when Doctor Doom works with the Avengers against some Earth-destroying event. Neither of them like it, but there's a bigger problem that will kill them both if they don't.

Even defending people playing evil characters and saying a Paladin is 'ruining their fun' means you condone people playing evil characters, that alone means your opinion probably comes from someone who loves to play D&D so he can be a sociopath without getting arrested and gets butthurt when someone with a conscious actually steps in and stops your bullshit.

>>48091209
Execution is probably the answer, since you're not likely to turn yourself in or surrender quietly.

>>48091090
>it doesn't mean you sell drugs to kids.

For example, it means you might be fine selling drugs to kids.

>Most people would agree that is evil as fuck.

That's because humans generally are lawful as fuck.

>Chaotic Good is Batman.

Pretty terrible example considering he's firmly on the side of the police, likes law and order and fights criminals all day. The one time a D&D product stated Batman's alignment, it was lawful good.

>You cannot be chaotic good while breaking the law simply because they're social norms.

Yes you can. That's chaotic good's whole schtick.

>Or simply because your conscience says it's ok.

If you're going to have a discussion on D&D concepts like alignment, familiarize yourself with the fucking section on alignment.

>By that logic, Joker's conscience says killing civilians is good so Joker is Chaotic Good.

Joker does more than break the law, and he impinges upon other's freedom to do it.

You're still thinking of lawful good, by the way, when you say "you can't break the law just because your conscience says its okay."

If chaotic good sounds like its pretty villainous, good, because chaos was largely designed to be antagonistic. The soulless elves and fey in Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions were largely a straight translation and they were Chaotic Good, and Zeus was also cited by Gary Gygax as Chaotic Good.

CG doesn't mean "he obeys the law, except when the just must become outlaws xD" it means the best of a very bad lot. They largely do whatever they feel like it, and selling drugs to kids falls squarely into the territory of what a CG character is capable of approving.

They won't *necessarily* improve but hard core libertarians etc. are probably primarily CG.

>>48091209
Yeah, selling drugs to children is one of the things you should be executed for.
Selling drugs to adults is fine. But children? No. You don't get to ruin someone's life before they're capable of ruining it on their own.

>>48091209
Yes.

File: tumblr_static_tumblr_stat(...).png (261 KB, 640x360)

261 KB PNG

In this thread: People accuse Good characters of murder for killing evil characters.

What the fuck, /tg/

>>48091298
Yes, killing people arbitrarily may very well be unlawful killing, hence murder, where the PCs are.

File: Captain America Really.gif (439 KB, 500x281)

439 KB GIF

>>48091261

If you're fine selling drugs to kids, then you're neutral at best.

Humans are not at all lawful, they're chaotic.

Except Batman is also a vigilante, you don't need to say "Fuck da police" to be chaotic. He uses fear and constantly plots against his allies in case they ever turn, sounds pretty chaotic to me.

No, breaking the law for the lolz is not chaotic good's whole shtick. It means you do what's right, but you don't care whether or not rules stop you from it. You're treating alignments like a straightjacket.

Allowing shitty things to go down through inaction is no better than partaking in it yourself.

Something tells me you're That Guy.

File: facepalm.png (26 KB, 487x380)

26 KB PNG

>>48091261
>actually defending being CE in a fully good party without having a good reason

>>48090607

Trope subversion is a step up from strict adherence to the trope, but it's better to build a character independent of tropes entirely. You will, by happenstance, end up fitting some tropes and subverting others, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that your character is someone you are interested in and want to roleplay not because of some meta "it's a commentary on paladins" bullshit, but because the character itself is interesting to you.

>>48091261
>If you're going to have a discussion on D&D concepts like alignment, familiarize yourself with the fucking section on alignment.

The section on alignment is contradictory between and sometimes within editions.

>>48091380
I think that's what he meant, anon

File: 1419658870676.jpg (496 KB, 671x1100)

496 KB JPG

>>48091235
>So you think that a good person wouldn't at all object to selling drugs to children?
They will object in the sense that they will find it unpleasant, may complain about it, may even call the cops on it, but the chances that they go up to the dealer and shoot him, and that I still consider them a good person for having done it? Pretty fucking slim.

You see, sensible people don't play games of instant escalation into binary violence. Even good people - even good people who respect the law - don't actively try to stop criminals, and certainly don't actively try to kill or wish death on those criminals.

What they do instead, is they live their own lives and do good where they actually can do good. They might confront the problem, but they aren't going to confront the problem with summary execution. No, they're going to use the system, they're going to reason with the other party, they're going to try to stop what's happening, or remedy the negative consequences of what's happening.

But paladins are psychopathic killers, and the only thing they know is how to put people in the ground, so the only response they ever have is to escalate all situations, no matter how nuanced or multifaceted, into life and death struggles where they act as judge, jury, and executioner. Because if they don't, they lose their magic powers that let them kill, and lose the entire purpose of their being in the process as well. They live only to kill, and especially to kill their closest allies, who fall under their most severe scrutiny.

Paladins are cancer, they are simply terrible, and they should be removed from the game.

>>48091324
>If you're fine selling drugs to kids, then you're neutral at best.
Neutral Good at best, you mean.
Remember, we're talking about alignments? Not your pwecious feelingz?

>Humans are not at all lawful, they're chaotic.

In the opinion of the guy who wrote the alignment system and has a more constrained view on CG, they're largely lawful. In the source material for alignments, they're absolutely prone to being lawful.

And if you want to go with WotC alignments, then you're going to have to argue how selling drugs to kids is necessarily against the conscience of all drug enthusiasts and libertarians.

>you don't need to say "Fuck da police" to be chaotic.

No, but alignment is what side of the cosmic conflict you're on, and he's unquestionably on the side of law. He fights criminals, he supports the police, and is necessary for Gotham to exist at all. The game is written with vigilantes in mind, not town guards and law men. In his very worst incarnations, Batman is Neutral Good.

>No, breaking the law for the lolz is not chaotic good's whole shtick.

Yes, the whole schtick of Chaos is that its in a primal conflict against Law. Any reason or no reason is fine.

>You're treating alignments like a straightjacket.

Are you serious? You're the one who is saying that the forces of Chaos would never do anything that hurt your feelings.

>Something tells me you're That Guy.

If you will not read the alignments themselves, read some of the source material for alignments.

>>48091393

Sure, but my point is that CG started with a VERY expansive mandate and became only more expansive over time.

>>48091372
Never defended being CE, try again.

File: Heresy 2.jpg (63 KB, 625x500)

63 KB JPG

>>48091401
>Paladins are cancer, they are simply terrible, and they should be removed from the game.

No, you should be removed from the game. Get the fuck out and get over yourself, maybe play an actually good character and the Paladin in the group won't try to murder you for being a dickhead.

>>48088864

By the same argument, Rogues have enormous potential to be the worst fucking class because they attract dickbags who like trying to force a CE character into a mostly-good group or steal from the party because "lol dickass rogue."

Or the barbarian, who is a siren song to players who want to solve every situation the party gets itself into with violence no matter how much shit it gets the group in.

Or the goddamn wizard, who at this point is taken as a license to have no sense of right and wrong. Every wizard I've ever encountered has been a self-centered, condescending prick because that's how people tend to roleplay the high-int class with magical powers.

I don't know, maybe it's just individual table experience, but the paladins I've played with have usually been the reasonable members of the party and the people who actually want to go on an adventure without the GM waving a bag of sweeties at them to bribe them into giving a shit about what's going on. I've never actually seen a wizard who wasn't True Neutral leaning heavily towards Neutral Evil or a non-CE rogue, but that's apparently just bad luck on my part.

>>48091469
>you can't play a character that isn't good!
>how dare you do that thing I don't like!
>stop hurting my fee-fees!

File: Heresy 6.jpg (60 KB, 600x600)

60 KB JPG

>>48091434

How the fuck do you not think selling drugs to kids is evil? Seriously, that alone just breaks down your entire argument.

Today /tg/ has shown me that they cannot play paladins.

>>48091497
I think the cocksucking faggot is disputing the chaotic part.

File: Heresy 5.jpg (469 KB, 694x960)

469 KB JPG

>>48091507
Don't you have a party to TPK, or innocent civilians to kill?

>>48091497

Its in line with TSR and WotC takes on CG, and sounds like something Andersonian fey or Zeus would do.

>How the fuck do you not think selling drugs to kids is evil?

Nothing about my view of alignments has to do with my real life views. No need to have your feelings hurt.

>Seriously, that alone just breaks down your entire argument.

The rules > your irrelevant feewingz.

And since in 5e, again, they went with the most expansive definition of Chaotic Good imaginable I don't think its going to change any time soon.

>>48091497
>How the fuck do you not think selling drugs to kids is evil?
Not him, but "selling drugs to kids" is a fairly broad thing (not to mention being a very emotionally charged topic, given how strongly people feel about drugs and kids)
I'd be perfectly fine selling a 17 year old (or even a 15 y/o, to get it firmly in the "kid" age range) a little bit of weed, but selling a 6 year old meth would be completely immoral

File: 1466192529787.gif (971 KB, 270x252)

971 KB GIF

holy shit this thread is fucking cancer.

>>48091534

I'm not bringing feelings beyond "This guy is a retard" into this argument. All you're trying to do is twist the rules to your whims, the classic sign of a That Guy.

Please, get some common sense and come back.

>>48091583
It really, really fucking is.

>>48091576
Well at least in Pathfinder you're an adult as soon as you hit 15. So 'children' would incorporate anyone 14 and under. Yeah, I was referring more to like, 10-11 year olds, and usually 'drugs' indicates something highly addictive and terrible for you.

>>48091619
>All you're trying to do is twist the rules to your whims

Pure projection, and there's no rule "twisting" going on.

Why not just have Good, Neutral, and Evil if the Law/Chaos axis hurts your feelings so much?

>>48091478
Yeah it really depends on the player.

To me nothing is as destructive to a party like the kleptomaniac rogue.

I do dislike paladins somewhat, but mostly because they're boring and predictable, like you're playing a predefined role rather than an unique character.

>>48091478
Yeah, true - like I said, not automatically the worst by any means, but there's seemingly an inclination to take the paladin's code as a "No Fun Allowed" licence and go around being Lawful Stupid.

You're absolutely right about other classes having similar potential - dickass rogue being the most obvious, but I guess "wizard, no sense of right or wrong lol" is also one.

Experience/anecdote-wise though, I don't know I've never played D&D, so that's purely down to the group

>>48091656

Literally everything you're doing is just twisting the idea of chaotic/law.

Seriously, you used a CE Rogue as an example for doing this, now you're trying to say it's not an evil thing to do. Selling drugs can ruin people's lives, and can kill you, especially if you are a child.

>>48091722
You're being rused here m8

>>48091722
>Literally everything you're doing is just twisting the idea of chaotic/law.

I already told you what the ideas of chaotic/law were, and your only argument is "no, chaos/law should be twisted to suit my feelings."

>Seriously, you used a CE Rogue as an example for doing this

Reading comprehension problems, friend? I used a CG Bard as an example for doing this.

>Selling drugs can ruin people's lives, and can kill you, especially if you are a child.

You know what can also ruin people's lives and kill them? Getting rid of social norms, tradition, law, and anything that restricts freedom.

>>48091778
Ugh, yeah I'm just an argumentative piece of shit, but I think I'm fairly done with his stupidity.

>>48091533
...nigga, read what I fucking actually said. I was agreeing with you that he's a fucking idiot.

>>48091722
Selling drugs to children is hardly the most evil thing you can do, it's actually very common. For one thing, you're not using violence or force to compel them into doing anything - they're buying the product of their own volition.

More importantly, there's no rule that says you have to do good deeds. You want to have your little safe space full of like-minded autistics, incapable of doing anything you wouldn't find on a Saturday morning cartoon, then run your own damn game and ban evil alignments.

But the vast majority of games have no restriction on alignment. There's not a need to even worry about alignment. Unless a paladin is playing. Then the issue of alignment becomes an issue of party cohesion, because as soon as the dense motherfucker playing SmiteBot 4000™ finds another character engaged in [THING I DON'T LIKE] there's going to be a deathmatch.

Because paladins are a stupid fucking class that is incapable of reason and compromise.

>>48091815
Oh my bad, I thought you were just talking in the 3rd person and calling //me// a cocksucking faggot. Apologies my friend.

>>48091834
You're a dumbass, braindead, attention whoring namefag. Please terminate yourself as soon as possible.

>>48091814
Sorry you got triggered, friend.

>>48091583
>>48091625

You cannot mention the following...

>Women
>D&D (3.PF especially)
>Paladins
>That Guy
>Alignment (and Morality)
>Politics
>Religion
>Roleplay
>Rollplay
>GURPS
>Dungeon World
>TCGs
>Indie Games
>Homebrews

Without the thread going to shit.

This place has gone to the dogs. I legitimately see more discussions on /v/ than I do on this place, not even kidding.

When /v/ stays on topic more than you, you know you've fucked up.

>>48091817

You do realize that mechanically speaking pretty much the only class better at talking people around to their point of view than the paladin is the bard?

>>48091834
's alright.

>>48091862
Also Clerics.

Paladins are amazingly terrible for what /tg/ wants them to be (Batman+Jesus who can redeem everyone and never have to resort to killing)

File: density overwhelming.png (521 KB, 720x528)

521 KB PNG

>>48091783
chaotic and lawful just mean how willing a person is to verstep outside boundaries to do what they want.

What they want to do is the good/evil part of alignment

AND IF WHAT THEY WANT IS SELL DRUGS TO CHILDREN THAT MEANS THEY'RE FUCKING EVIL

>>48091877

Clerics usually don't have very good charisma unless they're weirdos who focus on channeling.

>>48091401
I DO imagine Paladins would react the same as you say Good characters would.

File: 745.jpg (27 KB, 600x600)

27 KB JPG

>>48091261

>Humans generally are lawful as fuck

Nobody could be that retarded.

>>48091860
I guess it's time for you to leave then. Enjoy /v/.

>>48090888
If you're playing a CE rogue in a party with a Paladin, you deserve to have that character killed.

>>48091881

>chaotic and lawful just mean how willing a person is to verstep outside boundaries to do what they want.

No, chaotic and lawful are opposing sides of a cosmic conflict. Read the fucking book.

Speaking of WotC alignments, the distinction in the three Chaotic alignments is:

CG: Follow their conscience
CN: Follow their whims
CE: Follow their anger, hatred, lust for destruction, etc.

Read the book if you don't believe me.

>AND IF WHAT THEY WANT IS SELL DRUGS TO CHILDREN THAT MEANS THEY'RE FUCKING EVIL

Cool opinion, bro, but I prefer to keep personal opinions and feelings out of game debates.

>>48091881
BUT THEY WANT TO EARN MONEY TO SUPPORT THEIR DYING BROTHER. IN THE HOSPITAL YOU EVEN MORE DENSE MOTHERFUCKER

>>48091913
>follow their concience
>sell drugs to kids

Please explain to me Anon, how are these two not mutually exlusive?
Concience implies morality, and selling drugs to children objectively isn't moral. Look it up.

>>48091907

No, because I love tabletop more than I love video games.

It's just a shame that every other decent sounding thread goes to shit once anybody ITT mentions 3.X or start spouting their personal definition of a CG character.

I remember when blatant troll threads got turned around into legitimate discussion, now legitimate discussion gets turned into troll threads.

It's just sad, like watching someone break down from Alzheimer's after knowing them for most of your life.

>>48091925
>>48091925
>dying brother in hospital
>lets put even more innocent people and potentially their families in hospitals/gutters/graves
>being aligned good
sorry, what?

>>48091911
Rather, the paladin in the party of Neutral and Evil characters is the one who deserves to be killed. Conflicts get started by paladins, not by their targets. After all, paladins are out for the blood of their allies, plain and simple.

An evil character won't give a single fuck if there's a paladin around so long as the paladin leaves them alone. The paladin could go around rescuing puppies all day for Jesus, and it's a fair bet that the evil character even helps them out if asked.

A paladin can hardly even tolerate the presence of an evil character, let alone work alongside them or allow them to do what they want. They are there to police, and ultimately to kill their comrades for doing things that the paladin doesn't like.

File: 1453599811503.gif (191 KB, 500x375)

191 KB GIF

>>48091954
>Concience implies morality, and selling drugs to children objectively isn't moral.

>>48091925

>I want to save my dying brother
>By putting more innocent people into a hospital.

If I was the brother, I'd use the last of my strength to choke you to death for being an evil bastard who ruined futures, families, and children.

>>48091987
>After all, paladins are out for the blood of their allies, plain and simple.

Nah, that's retarded and you should kill yourself or at least go back to whatever shit hole you crawled out from.

>>48091954
>Please explain to me Anon, how are these two not mutually exlusive?

The morality of libertarians (and similar ideologies) are very, very different.

>and selling drugs to children objectively isn't moral. Look it up

"Moral objectivism" doesn't have much relevance outside of D&D. You're probably thinking of moral absolutism or divine command theory.

What is objectively moral in D&Dland for a CG person is either:

1. Freedom is as valuable as life, and anything that infringes upon freedom, such as social norms, traditions, or law is wrong (TSR);
2. Follow your conscience yay! (WotC)

CG was created in homage to deranged soulless fey and perverted deities, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that they are, at best, cosmically irresponsible.

>>48091987

Maybe you should not be an obviously evil cunt who sells drugs to children and maybe the paladin won't be on edge around you.

I mean, you think anyone with a conscious is going to work around someone who goes out of their way to get people hooked on drugs when the average dungeon crawl already gives you a small fortune?

>>48087737
>Why is it that whenever I decide to play a Paladin, everyone at the table gets pissy?
Because this leaves them with two options. Either do everything the way you like doing it or have you turn on them on first given opportunity. Paladins just attract those kind of players.

>>48091118
>if they do, they lose their class features
As of 5e this literally does not happen unless a Paladin does something radically against their Oath, such as the typical LG Paladin directly murdering an innocent family for no reason, and even then there's Oathbreaker for that.

>>48091981
Nah all boards have ups and downs, and /tg/ hasn't become particularly worse recently you're just being a drama queen because some people are passionate about some topics.

>>48087737
man, this whole thread is full of Those guys and moralfags getting their jimmies collectively rustled

>>48091984
>>48092020

Im sorry, in whic part am I guilty for voluntarily selling things to people who voluntarily buy it? And why Im also responsible for what they do with rhat?

Gee, if I dont like the cake better sue the evil baker before he poisons more people with his shit!

>>48092136
Well, I can see the baker getting sued, what with the poison he puts in his pastries.
>voluntarily
>children
this, like the rest of the thread is philosophically murky at best

>>48091860
>>48091981

>This place has gone to the dogs.
>It's just sad, like watching someone break down from Alzheimer's after knowing them for most of your life.

It used to be much, much worse. I remember when I got banned three times for saying I liked the new Grey Knights (5e)*; and before that, when there was literal shitposting, art dumps of fairies getting fucked to death, tranny porn dumps, and even a very muted reference to trannies not being women would get INCANDESCENT levels of rage.

>>48092064
>conscious
It's conscience you fucking dimwit.

Being evil is part of the fucking game, get over it. You're not obligated to be a little bitch, by the rules or even by convention. Only insecure, small minded rodents like yourself get upset that not everyone plays Lawful Good beta faggots all the time.

As I said previously, an evil character will have no problem with letting a good character do good. They might even help them.

A good character will tolerate an evil character, let them get away with most stuff and talk to them about the more serious violations.

A paladin will kill his party members because they're stepping out line. There's probably a 50% chance that he straight up kills anyone who detects as evil, without any action on the offender's part, but at the very least he WILL kill you for doing something he doesn't like.

Why? Because paladins are not allowed to sit back and approach the issue like reasonable people. They are bound by their shittily-designed class to never compromise or bargain. They are designed to kill evil things, and only to KILL evil things. And if they decide to be adults, step up and talk a situation out, well then they Fall, they lose all their paladin powers, and they may as well have put a dagger in their own heart. So they have to be children, they have to be the fun police, and they have to kill their party members. It's an essential part of their class.

Only a certain breed of toxic player is attracted to that class, and it's the one that's going to start fights and kill other players.

>>48092094

There's being passionate and then there's being an asshole forcing your passion down everyone's throat when your opinion was neither requested nor required for the subject at hand.

Just yesterday, I saw a thread asking how a level 5 PC would fit into a world of level 0 peasants get derailed into yet another edition wars just because the OP mentioned 3.5 being flawed in passing.

I've also seen threads derailed just because someone said they enjoyed 4e or 5e too, which were generally things that were also mentioned in passing.

I mean fuck, there's a THAT GURL thread, right now, that got derailed into the typical tumblr vs. /pol/tard debates because it's apparently sexist to hate cunts who would most likely be just as bad if they were men, but I digress.

This place has gone to shit.

>>48092136
>Im sorry, in whic part am I guilty for voluntarily selling things to people who voluntarily buy it? And why Im also responsible for what they do with rhat?
You're retarded or trolling and either way you should kill yourself.

>>48092209

>And if they decide to be adults, step up and talk a situation out, well then they Fall, they lose all their paladin powers, and they may as well have put a dagger in their own heart.

Either you are a liar or you have played with an unimaginably shitty GM who does not understand how the fucking code of conduct works.

>>48092136

Because you're selling drugs to individuals who cannot make informed decisions and don't realize the gravity of what they're doing.

There's a reason why children can't do shit like take out loans or marry someone.

>>48092219
You can do more by going into these threads and arguing your own point in a reasonable manner instead of whining about it.

>>48092243
While most GMs are far more grown up than the average paladin player, the fact is that paladins believe they /might fall/ if they abide evil. This is because the people who play paladins are the assholes who love alignment and meme about smiting - like that faggot who posted 40k reaction images, that's your paladin players. They play the class because their interpretation of it is such that it permits them to go ape on anyone who doesn't agree with them.

And even when they don't believe it, they use it as an excuse. The paladin class attracts people who love to feign righteousness and abuse authority. They WANT to kill their party members when they believe they've stepped out of line. That's why they initiate the confrontations. You just don't see "Evil Party Member X feels upset by the good works of Paladin Y, so he wants to kill him!" ever, at all. Very rarely you might have a situation where Evil Party Member X feels threatened by the intimidation of Paladin Y, and desires to get him before he gets got, but again, that's very rare.

No, by far the most common occurrence is that Paladin Y sees Evil Party Member X doing something that upsets Paladin Y - now that could be something legitimately evil, like torturing slaves for fun, or it could be something as simple as spotting an evil aura on Evil Party Member X. Either way, Paladin Y reacts by attempting to kill Evil Party Member X as soon as he can, because his class is designed to encourage him to do so, and might punish him if he doesn't.

File: house of cerberus part 1.jpg (1.62 MB, 826x3382)

1.62 MB JPG

>>48092168

Even then, it's still not nearly as great as it was a few years ago.

I remember reading pic related in a storytime thread and getting so blown away that I tried LARPing for a weekend.

Nowadays, if anyone tried posting a story like this, they'd be called a liar and the rest of the story would get swallowed up by the arguments on both sides until the thread hit the bump limit.

>>48092299

That only works if your opponent is operating off of logic and is willing to acknowledge your points.

What really ends up happening is the troll will go "your issues are subjective and opinions" even if you explain your points and show your proof.

Y'know, kinda like what >>48092209 is doing right now.

>>48092354
>Even then, it's still not nearly as great as it was a few years ago.

Gotta disagree.

>I remember reading pic related in a storytime thread

Random subjective feels can be had across the entire timeline of /tg/ and chances are someone else is having subjective feels right now, and in a few years they too will get nostalgic and think /tg/ has gone to shit.

>>48091848

Point on the doll to where OP touched you.

>>48087737

I like playing my Paladins as the pompous but well-meaning, surprisingly-competent buffoon with just the right mix of tunnel vision, gullibility and absent-mindedness that the less scrupulous party members have an easy time manipulating him into amiable cooperation in all but the most blatantly-immoral actions so long as they advance the primary objective. At the same time, I provide flashes ofcharacterization that suggest the paladin may not be quite so oblivious as he appears, leaving it open to others' interpretation whether or not he is actually letting the party think he's easily-led for the purpose of enabling their morally-dubious-but-efficient actions in pursuit of a greater goal. I typically try to make sure that any collateral damage from such actions is minimized or counteracted by the paladin's actions in such a way that it appears to be fortuitous coincidence. Regardless, I make sure the paladin remains there to shoulder the moral responsibility of the party, setting him up in situations where other party members could easily have him take the rap for their actions if they so wanted - and in the event they do, is it not in some way his fault all along, for enabling their behavior? Perhaps he wants to accept the blame in their place, to burden himself with the party's collective guilt in lieu of those members who could not bear it. Or maybe he's just an easily-duped windbag who's all-too-willing to believe that the rogue has turned over a new leaf this time, really, no fooling. You decide!

File: house of cerberus part 2.jpg (1.54 MB, 826x3226)

1.54 MB JPG

>>48092400

>Gotta disagree.

When was the last time we even had a story time thread or a good ol' THAT GUY thread that didn't get derailed because some dickhead got offended?

That alone shows how far /tg/ has fallen, especially when the oldest tenets of /tg/ was "/tg/ always loves a good storytime" and "/tg/ is untrollable."

I'm just going to post the rest since nothing of value is happening ITT anyways.

File: 9975e93c6c3ee50b2d59d5d50(...).jpg (34 KB, 500x544)

34 KB JPG

>>48091434
This guy's head is so far up his ass that I think he's gay

>>48092397
>What really ends up happening is the troll will go "your issues are subjective and opinions" even if you explain your points and show your proof.
You haven't explained or given proof about a single damn thing. You've literally just responded with shitposting, mostly just saying to "LEAVE, REEEE!" because I'm disagreeing with you. I don't think a single one of the responses I've received has said anything more than "Don't play evil characters lol"

>>48092346
>You just don't see "Evil Party Member X feels upset by the good works of Paladin Y, so he wants to kill him!" ever, at all.

Yeah, they usually don't wait for justification to be a campaign-destroying dick, and spread it around to everyone instead of just the people they might have a reason to fuck with.

File: house of cerberus part 3.jpg (1.64 MB, 826x3490)

1.64 MB JPG

>>48092464

>>48092509
Evil characters are selfish, they're not inclined towards promoting the cause of evil - at least not any I've every seen. They're usually the ones most interested in maintaining party cohesion because the party is their shield, and they have literally no reason to beef with people who are doing good deeds.

>>48092506

People cite descriptions from the PHB yet you'll still see trolls and faggots spout their own interpretations on the rules because it fits better into the narrative they've constructed for their bullshit to work.

For example, the troll ITT who goes on about how a LG paladin only exists to murder the party while excusing the CE drug peddler who the paladin inevitably smites for being a bastard who sells drugs to children.

File: house of cerberus part 4.jpg (1.69 MB, 826x3432)

1.69 MB JPG

>>48092522

>>48087737
Think about it like this: think of all the people you know who have a really strong code of ethics/morals/whatever and are very passionate about them. It could be religious, political, whatever, this isn't just THOSE DAMN CHRISTFAGS, it could be a really dedicated atheist, a liberal, a libertarian, whatever, who cares, just as long as they have strong opinions and view those strong opinions as intrinsic to their person.

Some of them come across as legitimately dedicated people confident in their convictions and genuinely working to bring about what they consider the right thing. Most of them just come across as obnoxious and preachy.

Most people, when roleplaying, aim for the former but oftentimes fall short and end up portraying the latter. This, like before, isn't explicitly aimed at Paladins: the "one with nature down with civilization" barbarian/druid often falls into the same trap, as well as the edgy Chaotic Good rogue revolutionary, as well as the "I'm In It For The Money And Myself" character. The thing is that Paladins necessitate trying to play a character with a strong code of ethics/morals/whatever with an unwavering sense of their own moral rectitude, and when roleplayed badly this can easily become obnoxious.

>>48092576
>For example, the troll ITT who goes on about how a LG paladin only exists to murder the party while excusing the CE drug peddler who the paladin inevitably smites for being a bastard who sells drugs to children.
The issue is with the fact that paladins (and the people who play them, I suppose) are the only people who are going to do that.

There is no need to "defend" the CE character doing CE things. It's an evil character, they do evil shit.

As mentioned several times already, doing evil shit is not just cause to summarily execute your party members. Indeed, good characters are not ever going to escalate to that level unless there's a paladin involved. Instead, you're going have a civilized discussion about the issue and work something out. Paladins are there to stop that from happening, they're there to KILL and KILL /alone/.

Playing evil characters is not against any rule, and players are not obligated to do good deeds, no matter how much your desire for control over them says otherwise.

>>48092136
Well if the baker poisons the cake he sells to you then yeah you're entitled to retribution.

>>48092638

Pretty much every table I've ever seen the evil players are the violent shitheads who play to kill everything that gets in the way. Paladins I've seen are usually more the knight eager to go out and have an adventure, and, all too often, the only adult in the party.

>>48087737
The only thing /tg/ donesn't hate are Wizards, because 90% of the board is composed by them. And since paladins can clearly stop magic realms with his alingment alone, /tg/ get frustrated and angry.

>>48092665
Your anecdotes are trumped by mine - oh wait, none of that shit matters because we're on the internet discussing a concept. Paladins are mechanically driven towards fratricidal behavior, because they are in the game to police, punish, and kill their fellow players.

No other class has such an antagonistic directive as paladins, no one else is so compelled towards ruining the experience of other players.

Playing evil characters is not playing the game wrong, despite what your childish notions of the game tell you.

Your "adventure" is not better than whatever the other characters want to do, and if there's a problem with the direction of the campaign, then that's something to resolve with conversation OOC, with the GM's input, not a cause to go smiting like a passive-aggressive faggot.

>>48092464

Not really getting it, sorry. /tg/'s always been a place of bitter spergy rage.

>>48092209
>They are designed to kill evil things, and only to KILL evil things. And if they decide to be adults, step up and talk a situation out, well then they Fall, they lose all their paladin powers
>they lose all their paladin powers

I'm not sure what system you're referring to, but as of D&D 5e a Paladin isn't bound to be LG or even Good at all. Even a CE Paladin is theoretically possible. And even if a Paladin breaks their Oath, if your GM isn't absolute garbage then they get shunted into Oathbreaker Paladin and become straight evil.

>>48092638

Yet there are plenty of people out there who would want to string up a dealer by their intestines for getting their children hooked on drugs, to the point where they either ended up homeless, crazy, or dead.

People don't give drugs the kind of weight it deserves, especially in ttRPGs where most people's experience with them don't go beyond celebrity gossip and Breaking Bad.

IRL, that shit ruins lives, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who wouldn't want to kill a dealer who got someone they knew and loved addicted to drugs for no reason than to make cash.

But I digress.

>Playing evil characters is not against any rule, and players are not obligated to do good deeds, no matter how much your desire for control over them says otherwise.

If that was true then most people wouldn't ban evil alignments for being cocks who derail campaign just to show off how evil and edgy they are.

>>48092754
>I'm not sure what system you're referring to
3.pf, as should be obvious from my description of the class.

>>48092638
>players are not obligated to do good deeds
Nor are they obligated to tolerate explicitly evil characters. You can't go around spreading chaos and death in an otherwise mostly Good party and expect to not get your ass PK'd at best or kicked out of the group at worst.

File: house of cerberus part 5.jpg (1.9 MB, 826x3333)

1.9 MB JPG

>>48092605

>>48092756
>If that was true then most people wouldn't ban evil alignments for being cocks
1) Anecdotal claim.
2) Circular reasoning.
3) The rules in every edition clearly state that characters may play any alignment they choose.

The rules trump your unsubstantiated anecdotes every day of the fucking week, chump. Try not to let yourself get so upset that other people play the game in a different way than you.

>there are people ITT who think 5e Palas have to be LG at all times or lose their class
>there are people ITT who think 5e Palas have to be good at all

>>48092780

So the only edition where this kinda crap is a major problem and the worst interpretation/implementation of the alignments to date?

I guess that explains why there are so many THAT GUYS ITT.

>>48092814
Literally the only people discussing 5e have been stating how it is different to the editions that people are actually discussing. No one believes what you think they believe.

>>48092823
Hm? Alignment is less problematic than ever before in 5e (except perhaps 4e) and it is tied with BECMI and 4e in terms of the best interpretation of the paladin. Losing powers because the DM's feelings are hurt = bad.

>>48092718
I'm starting to see the problem.

You only play shitty, horrible people, and get assmad when the paladin smites your ass for being a game disrupting shitter, and then come online to cry about it.

Fuck you.

>>48092813

You misinterpret the rules for paladins and somehow I'm using unsubstantiated anecdotes?

I feel sorry for you since it's obvious you've never played a game with people who weren't shitters and spergs who existed to one-up one another within the context of game.

For the record, you're also assuming that nobody else in the party would take offense to the CE shitter selling drugs when all they want to do campaign shit.

>>48092209
ow the fucking edge

File: house of cerberus part 6.jpg (1.8 MB, 826x3866)

1.8 MB JPG

>>48092794

>>48092863
>adhom
>>48092875
>You misinterpret the rules for paladins
False claim. Never once have I made a statement about the rules surrounding paladins that is untrue.
>For the record, you're also assuming that nobody else in the party would take offense to the CE shitter selling drugs when all they want to do campaign shit.
1) I've already addressed the fact that non-paladin good characters who have a problem with something evil going on may confront it and work something out - that kind of thing happens all the time. But with paladins there is an immediate escalation into a violence binary.

2) As I said, if people are concerned about the direction of the campaign, then that is an issue to talk about OOC with the GM. It is not an excuse to passive-aggressively attack other player characters.

File: 1467105182642.jpg (132 KB, 575x348)

132 KB JPG

>>48092780
So the argument here is based on a system that's rapidly falling out of favor? A system wherein a Paladin's alignment issues were nowhere near the most obviously broken and shitty thing about the system as a whole?

>>48092934

It's not actually in the rules that a paladin is obligated to respond to a PC doing evil with violence. Not even in 3.pf.

Hell, paladins are allowed by their code of conduct to work alongside evil characters in the service of a greater good or to fight a greater evil, although they are advised to seek guidance from spiritual leaders regularly if they engage in such an alliance and should end the alliance if they believe it is doing more harm than good.

You have no leg to stand on here but anecdotes.

File: 13466287_1145294495521189(...).jpg (25 KB, 431x450)

25 KB JPG

>>48092209

"Why? Because paladins are not allowed to sit back and approach the issue like reasonable people."

Class skill: Diplomacy

How can one be so edgy and retarded at the same time? A paladin is supposed to explain why what's happening is wrong, and then, in case of violent response, attack.
Then again, you're probably one of those asshats who don't allow Diplomacy checks between allies because they don't want the party bard to explain them they're being retarded and that they should stop.

>>48092990
Rulebook explicitly states that interaction skills don't work on other PCs, mate.

>>48092934

A CG Barbarian is more likely to mash evil into little bits than a LG Paladin with high Charisma and Diplomacy as a class skill, you dimwit.

>>48092209
>Being evil is part of the fucking game, get over it
>You can never object to any aspect of someone else's character

So if I make an anime character ripoff with a Japanese name who uses katanas and broods all the time, and everyone else in my group is a typical fantasy character like a brave knight and a wise wizard, should they be obligated to accept me?

>>48092934

>False claim. Never once have I made a statement about the rules surrounding paladins that is untrue.

Except for the part where you claim that paladins can fall because they didn't kill an evil creature and the part where you claim that LG paladins are the only ones who would take offense to a CE shitter derailing campaign.

>1) I've already addressed the fact that non-paladin good characters who have a problem with something evil going on may confront it and work something out - that kind of thing happens all the time. But with paladins there is an immediate escalation into a violence binary.

Realize that most PC's are mentally ill and prone to violence because most of the bullshit they encounter are violent, horrifying creatures with even less concern for humanity.

Even if that wasn't the case, you'd be hard pressed to find a party of good/neutral characters who would work with CE in the first place due their reputation of being Joker wannabes.

>2) As I said, if people are concerned about the direction of the campaign, then that is an issue to talk about OOC with the GM. It is not an excuse to passive-aggressively attack other player characters.

You're the one disrupting game and doing evil bullshit. If the party kills you for being a shit then that's their prerogative.

>>48092990

>How can one be so edgy and retarded at the same time?

Because he's CE.

>>48092971
>wow, are you like, talking about something other than what I'm talking about
>are you /serious/?
>>48092979
>It's not actually in the rules that a paladin is obligated to respond to a PC doing evil with violence.
I didn't claim it was. In fact I quite deliberately stated that it's a result of the people who are attracted to the class in the first place because of its antagonistic mechanics. Paladins initiate violence. They actively attack PCs who they believe are evil. You don't need my anecdotes to know that much, just look at this fucking thread, a bastion of paladin players:
>>48091179
>If you're mad that a Paladin is killing you, you deserve it.
>>48091191
>If your CE Rogue is dealing drugs to children, he deserves to be murdered.
>>48091235
>If you're evil, then a Paladin has every right to kill you

This kind of attitude is extremely common among paladin players because it's what drove them to play the class in the first place. No other class so readily justifies their killing of party members for disagreeing with the paladin. No other class has a built-in mechanic to punish the paladin for stepping out of his alignment.

Paladins are cancer.

File: house of cerberus part 7.jpg (877 KB, 826x1678)

877 KB JPG

>>48092922

File: wat.png (1.43 MB, 1920x1080)

1.43 MB PNG

>this thread

Ya'll play with some shitty people to think Paladins are objectively bad

>>48093024

And that's retarded. Luckily, it's something done only in a system like D&D, where the social battles highly suck and a 8 Wisdom thug can just tug his ears and "decide not to listen" to a 18 Charisma player who spent feats and skills into being good at Diplomacy.

File: 1466883622272.jpg (220 KB, 1280x1242)

220 KB JPG

>>48093103
Well nigger if you're trying to act like any D&D other than 5e is still at all relevant then we might as well bring FATAL into this too.

>>48093103

>Paladins initiate violence.

Yet this all started because the CE character sold drugs to children.

You're like those faggots from BLM who cry about police brutality while filming themselves fucking with cops and vandalizing property. Even if there was a point, you initiated the conflict by being a shitty human being who thinks that they shouldn't be punished for their stupidity.

>>48093157
You're a fucking imbecile if you think 5e is the only game of D&D people still play. 3.pf is still insanely popular.

>>48093103
I am somewhat impressed with your patience with good old /tg/-paladin-funwank circle.

>>48093117
I like paladins but you gotta admit that they are the only class punished for the behavior of other PCs, thus requiring other people's business to become theirs

>>48093171
>Yet this all started because the CE character sold drugs to children.
That's not initiating violence, chief. The paladin is inevitably the one to draw his sword first, to take the first swing, because he's there to KILL not to reason.

>>48093173

Which is why Paizo is shilling "not!Pathfinder...in space!" Just to remain relevant.

People still play OD&D too but you don't see anyone starting arguments because of THAC0.

>>48093190

No, paladins are the only class punished for having a shitty GM and/or playing with shitty players.

If anything, paladins are a lightbulb that exposes cockroaches who shouldn't be playing ttRPG's in the first place.

>>48093206
Whatever, man, I'm not interested in debating the prevalence of 3.pf with you - I don't even like 3.pf, for this reason and many others - just know that a LOT of people still play it, especially from this board.

File: 557.gif (127 KB, 600x338)

127 KB GIF

>>48091656
can we stop responding to this guy as if he's done or said anything intelligent?

I'm pretty sure he's got kids to bully or somethin

>>48093234
I couldn't make this shit up, you are literally saying
>everyone else is wrong and only I'm right!

Fucking pure That Guy logic right there.

>>48093193

You're initiating conflict for no reason other than "muh alignment lets me do it."

By that logic, the paladin who cuts you from groin to ear is only doing it because his alignment allows him to do that too, which according to you is A-Okay.

So it basically comes down to don't be a shitter and don't derail game for stupid bullshit that has nothing to do with campaign.

>>48093272

You never hear about a GM who forces a paladin to fall because of a catch 22 where ever option was wrong, that was actually worth playing with.

You also never hear about people who play evil characters who do stupid shit to cause unnecessary conflict with their party members who are actually worth playing with either.

Like I said, it exposes shitters who you shouldn't be playing with anyways, and from personal experience and listening to other people who dealth with shitters like this, it's a fool proof method that has yet to be wrong yet.

As evidenced by this thread.

>>48093277
What the evil is doing doesn't harm the game experience of any other player. He's not breaking any rules, he's not ending your ability to interact with the game world, he's not telling you what you can and cannot do.

If there's some problem with what he's doing from a campaign perspective, then that's an OOC issue that is worked out with conversation, like adults. It is not your license to go and "cut him groin to ear".

What you want, and what nearly every paladin player wants, is for everyone to have the "right" kind of fun. To do what the paladin allows them to do and nothing more or less. What you want is to police your fellow players - not just their characters - and that's why when an issue comes up, you're going to KILL their character, and end their ability to play in the game, their ability to do what they want to do. Because that's not the RIGHT kind of fun they're having, now is it?

>>48091848
OH SHIT HE ISNT AN ANON KILL HIM

>>48091889
or if they roleplay?

File: 13046223_1132353190148403(...).jpg (11 KB, 295x355)

11 KB JPG

>>48093334

It's a fantasy game where people throw fireballs, swing around magical swords and face demons.
And you expect people to fight evil by... conversing like adults.

A paladin sees the evil. A paladin talks to the evil. The evil continues shitting around. The paladin smites the evil.

It's a risk that you took by deciding to have an alignment that isn't True Neutral. People with opposing ideologies could take that very, very badly. A Lawful Neutral Cleric telling a Chaotic Neutral Rogue to stop stealing might as well get a knife between his ribs. A Neutral Evil Fighter murdering children in front of a Neutral Good Sorcerer will get a Dominate Person in the face.

>>48091987
Guys, he's obviously fucking trolling. Either that or he's fucking retarded. Either way, ignore him

>>48093334

>What the evil is doing doesn't harm the game experience of any other player.

He's forcing the GM to play two different sides of the campaign and causing a rift between the other members of the party through his actions.

The time that the GM dedicates to seeing how well you get orphans hooks to drugs was time that he diverted away from the rest of the party who were actually interested in following leads and completing quests to move the story along.

You're not breaking the rules but you are being an unnecessary distraction to the other player's enjoyment.

>If there's some problem with what he's doing from a campaign perspective, then that's an OOC issue that is worked out with conversation, like adults. It is not your license to go and "cut him groin to ear".

1) The issue at hand is an issue that goes IC and OOC
2) you're causing issues by selling drugs to children while also disrupting game for your bullshit.
3) How the party chooses to deal with your character's antics is their choice, not yours.

>What you want, and what nearly every paladin player wants, is for everyone to have the "right" kind of fun

Actually, most paladin players just want to be big damn heroes, slay demons, and save the world from total destruction, just like any other player involved in a story of heroes defeating evil.

Your goal seems to be drawing attention to yourself and showing off how edgy your character is, while not being man enough to accept the responsibilities for your actions.

>>48093130
Most systems that do allow for such skills to be used on PCs offer a very simple "Fuck off" point pool, like willpower in Exalted.

If you want to convince the character, you pretty much always have to convince the player.

Otherwise you get a system where you knife someone the moment they try and talk to you, because otherwise they risk the integrity of their character.

>>48093432
>it's the "lol it's a fantasy world, things don't need to make sense" argument
Really jumped ship on this thing, eh?
>>48093456
>He's forcing the GM to play two different sides of the campaign and causing a rift between the other members of the party through his actions.
Unfounded assumption. The campaign may well be a sandbox in which character interactions and goals form the basis of the plot. Furthermore, there's nothing wrong with the GM devoting some time to specific characters and their personal exploits, even in a game focused on some greater mission. Lastly, he cannot FORCE the GM to do anything. The GM is in control of the game. He divides his attention and time as he sees fit. If there is an issue that one player is causing at the level of the game's direction, then the GM will talk to his players about it, and how to resolve it.

>1) The issue at hand is an issue that goes IC and OOC
The IC issue is something that can be handled in the game, but the OOC issue that you're claiming as justification for ruining another player's experience should be dealt with in OOC. In the example here, if there's a paladin player who has the intention of killing the CE rogue for selling drugs, then that's something that the players ought to discuss with the GM, to resolve without ending either player's character unnecessarily.
>3) How the party chooses to deal with your character's antics is their choice, not yours.
True, I don't think I've indicated anything to the contrary. But of course intra-party conflict is generally not an intended consequence of play, and so it's good to talk about it OOC in order to understand how everyone thinks it should be resolved, instead of just ending one player's fun altogether.

>Actually, most paladin players just want to [have the RIGHT kind of fun]
>Your goal seems to be [having the WRONG kind of fun]

>>48093234
>>48093330

Again, the paladin is the only class punished for the behavior of other PCs. That in and of itself is amazing. One could say that the other players owe him not to play something that would upset a paladin; but one could also say that the paladin player owes the rest of the gaming group a character that will not be upset by theirs.

>>48093571
The IC issue is you are being a literal bag of shit.

I don't even play paladins, and at BEST if I caught your ass drug dealing to kids, you'd end up hogtied and dropped on the guard's doorstep.

The best is very unlikely to happen. You are, in fact, trying to have the wrong kind of fun if you are trying to force people to accommodate you when no one else wants to.

You're a fucking That Guy, and your walls of text crying about how your being persecuted for wanting to have fun don't change SHIT.

>>48093621
>YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PLAY EVIL CHARACTERS
>STOP DOING THINGS THAT UPSET ME
>STOP IT
I think we're done here.

>>48093571

I thought you hate anecdotal evidence.

>>48093571

No, you cockmongler, it's the "if you want a game where moral and ethical "alignment" is treated in a mature and introspective way, don't play fucking D&D" fact.

>>48093647
I agree for the most part, except that when I play D&D, I don't feel compelled to let its innate stupidity ruin the game.

>>48093642
>I WANT TO PLAY EVIL
>WAIT, WHY ARE YOU STOPPING ME?!
>STOP IT WHAAA

No, do the things that I don't like.

But you don't get to bitch when I pry off your kneecaps, cut the tendons in your arms, and leave you to bleed out for being a drugdealing motherfucker.

Two way street, cunt.

File: GOOD IS GOOD.png (16 KB, 309x266)

16 KB PNG

>A paladin can never kill anyone or he'll fall.
>A paladin has to take foes prisoner.
>A paladin is just black and white.
>The alignment system is bad and paladins are bad because they fall within an alignment.

This is a meme, right?

We're not kids who still confuse DnD ethos good with real world good, right?

>>48093696
The average paladin player, ladies and gentlemen.

File: op9PWrr.gif (2.19 MB, 388x218)

2.19 MB GIF

>>48092346
I can't take this retardation

I have ascended to the Astral Plane

>>48093680
There we have it, the real feeling behind all that bluster and bullshit - if you play with a paladin, you better not do something he doesn't like, or he's going to kill your character.

>>48093676

Me too, but you know, if you want to play a, let's say, "chaotic evil" character who has become like that because of a series of vicissitudes in his life and expecting the other characters to react realistically about it, first expect that other evil people with a particular code of conduct may take that back. My current LE Warblade would chop into pieces a peddler selling drugs to children, first off because he's dirty, secondly because it's dishonorable.
What do you expect then from an holy knight with an holy armor, a holy sword, and a literal holy aura that screams "I'M HOLY"?

>>48093696
>We're not kids who still confuse DnD ethos good with real world good, right?

Yes, pointing out the discrepancy will get you labeled a troll and cause much rage.

>>48093601

>Again, the paladin is the only class punished for the behavior of other PCs.

Show me in the rules where it says that you must slay all evil as a Paladin.

If there is, in fact, any issue with a paladin in the party, it's due to shitters who feel it is their duty to either force the paladin to fall or to push the paladin's boundaries until it comes to a head and they end up as a pulpy smear on the wall due to being evil bastards who should be put down for the good of society.

Being evil isn't something to brag about mate, especially in a fantasy realm where peasants hate Tieflings just because of their connotations with devils.

>>48093729
>What do you expect then from an holy knight with an holy armor, a holy sword, and a literal holy aura that screams "I'M HOLY"?
Piety, devotion to a particular faith and its tenets. A desire to spread and defend their beliefs.

Not indiscriminate, anti-rational, murderous vigilantism.

File: Reallynowfaggot.jpg (85 KB, 500x500)

85 KB JPG

>>48093726
You literally can't read, can you, you dense motherfucker?

I don't play paladins.

I don't even play D&D that much, anymore.

But yes, if I catch your stupid bitchass dealing drugs to kids, I'm going to bleed you slow.

Maybe next time try an example where you're not a literal monster whom the world is 100% better off with you dead.

>>48093726

I cannot think of any situation where a drug peddler wouldn't be killed off once he was found out.

Whether or not the person holding the weapon is a Paladin is irrelevant, especially when even evil characters know when to draw the line and have less compunctions about murder than a justified Paladin.

File: Gotta smite all the evil.jpg (185 KB, 1100x950)

185 KB JPG

>>48093704
Lemme break it down for you, Hoss. Word of Gygax, which means if you disagree you're just homebrewing and your anecdotal fanfic doesn't mean shit.

A paladin can't torture or use poison.
A paladin can draw-and-quarter a criminal or other badguy.
A paladin can't lie.
A paladin can intimidate and threaten.
A paladin is not obligated to force his party to do anything they don't want to.
But he is obligated to smite them if they're openly edgelords.

That's it. Those are the confines. Specific dogmatism is dependant upon the deity or oaths (depending on edition) and some of them validate or invalidate some of these rules as necessary.

These are in no way more constricting than your average non-CN character. They're predefined 'heroic' character traits, that can be subverted and played as a hero antagonist even.

Either you, your DM, or both are bad if you don't understand FR morality. It's not complicated. Good is good in the sense that Walmart is Walmart. It is a brand. It operates a certain way. You enforce that cosmic ideal but it is not a real world thing and therefore doesn't make sense if you view it as morality instead of what it is: Which is being supervised by angel bosses.

You may as well complain about blackguards by the same token. They can fall for feeding orphans.

>>48093704

The average CE Rogue, ladies and gentlemen

>>48093785
What, you think you have some kind of moral superiority because you won't tolerate the behavior of a fictional character?

What kind of deluded fucking loon are you?

>>48087737
OP you are the most likely cause of the problem. If I had to guess I'd say you are bad at playing Paladins.

If every time you've done something in the last 2 years, with changing sets of people, it has ended badly then you are problem.

>>48093749
>Show me in the rules where it says that you must slay all evil as a Paladin.

Talking about the associates clause.

>brag

Didn't say anything about bragging, the paladin has Detect Evil and may use it one day.

The paladin is unique due to the fact that he cannot live and let live, and must abandon friends. Sometimes its the paladin's fault, sometimes its the evil character's fault. But players have no more duty to play nonevil types to please the paladin player than the paladin player has to not play a paladin.

If anything, and I say this as a paladin fan (of the vanilla sort), the paladin player is more to blame in most cases since evil PCs can tolerate a paladin, but the reverse is not true.

>>48093781

Me too. So? Paladins are supposed to talk first, attack second, even more than the other classes.
Maybe you're thinking about a vengeance-driven Gray Guard, friendo?

>>48093812
Stop crying that people don't want to play with you, you fucking baby. Maybe there's a reason.

>>48093832
They don't need to talk first at all. They have a built in radar to detect people they have license to kill, at least from their God or Non Denominational Cosmic Force, and depending on what rules of engagement the "legitimate authority" they follow (God or King) has given them.

>>48093832
Again, this hypothetical "diplomatic paladin" you're discussing is just that. Look at the responses of everyone in this thread to the example situation posed - every one of them supported the paladin slaying an evil doer on sight, without any knowledge of the paladin's specific faith, or any indication that they were interested in trying to resolve the situation without violence. You're speaking to a specter, I'm talking about right here and now.

>>48093851
"On sight"
Yes, shockingly, when we catch you in the middle of selling crack to kids, there's not much need for any talk.

>>48093889
See, you're a right goddamned sociopath. You don't belong at any gaming table, you belong in a mental institution.

>>48093904
You're applying modern rehabilitative ethos to a medieval law concept, broseph.


A cop isn't going to shoot someone unless they personally feel threatened, or otherwise need to do it to save more lives.

But a shire reeve would've hung a man he caught red-handed, historically.

>>48093904
Cry more, fucker. You're only showing everyone here that you should be banned from every table.

>>48093824

>Talking about the associates clause.

I'm not talking about your homebrew anecdotal bullshit, show me the page where it states "the paladin must slay all evil, lest he fall."

I'll be waiting.

>Didn't say anything about bragging, the paladin has Detect Evil and may use it one day.

You realize that alignment doesn't even crop up until you're like level 5, and only if you're purposefully being an evil bastard whose aura bleeds evil energy, right?

I mean, the only other creatures who show up as evil are shit like devils and demons who are creatures made of evil energy, you don't just wake up one day as a CE character unless you did some truly horrible shit.

>The paladin is unique due to the fact that he cannot live and let live, and must abandon friends.

Where does it say that?

Oh wait, it's anecdotal evidence again.

>But players have no more duty to play nonevil types to please the paladin player than the paladin player has to not play a paladin.
>If anything, and I say this as a paladin fan (of the vanilla sort), the paladin player is more to blame in most cases since evil PCs can tolerate a paladin, but the reverse is not true.

They do have a duty to play characters that can play well with the other members of the campaign. If you play an evil character in a party with a Paladin, you're the one at fault because you fall under the shitter who pushes the paladin's boundaries until he's a red smear for being a cock.

There are situations where a paladin is a necessary and welcome addition to the party, the same cannot be said of an evil character.

>>48092863
THIS

>>48093846
>>48093851

So you think that a paladin can "detect evil" in the middle of the street, find a Lawful Evil peasant who thinks that dwarves should be gassed, smite him and expect not to fall or end up in jail? What is he going to say to the city guard?
"Nah, friends, it's alright, I'm a paladin, I detected a spectral aura of evil from him and slew him, no need to thank me."

What the fuck is wrong with you guys?

>>48093904

People would get their arms chopped off for stealing and get hung for being accused of witchcraft.

Just saying.

>>48093938
You say that like it's unbelievable, but frankly I can't even remember the last time I was in a D&D game (that I wasn't running) that featured paladins who weren't sanctioned as legitimate authorities, licensed to summarily execute evil doers.

>>48093935
And he's only kept proving it ever since, what with the bitch tears about how he should totes be able to get away with dealing crack to kids.

>>48093932
>I'm not talking about your homebrew anecdotal bullshit

I'm talking about the fucking code of conduct, genius, not your strawman.

> show me the page where it states "the paladin must slay all evil, lest he fall."

Never said that and I even pointed out that I wasn't talking about that.

>You realize that alignment doesn't even crop up until you're like level 5,

Your memory is off, evil humanoids of 1 HD or less still ping as evil.

>Where does it say that?

Associates clause.

>They do have a duty to play characters that can play well with the other members of the campaign.

As does the paladin, so its an impasse. Again, if anyone is at fault, its the paladin player, as evil can tolerate paladins, but paladins can't tolerate evil.

>There are situations where a paladin is a necessary and welcome addition to the party, the same cannot be said of an evil character.

Of course there are plenty of situation where an evil PC will be welcomed, namely whatever he brings to the table. So long as he's less disruptive and controlling than a paladin.

>>48093956
Oh, those delicious anecdotes you are so fond of.

>>48093938

>your whole post

Did you miss "respect legitimate authority?" Bad reading comprehension I take it.

>>48093938
Most paladin orders are chartered within cities for this reason. Knight-Errant PC paladins are the exception, not the rule.

"Why the fuck did you kill Dave!?"
"He's evil. The King allows this. Have a nice day, citizen."

The inverse is also true in places like Zhentil Keep, or Thay.

>>48093956

It's pretty anecdotal, counting that in the games I played it never happened, except in theocracies where it would be logical.
I mean, why would you give any authority to a guy that could magically perceive foul play and lies (at high levels), uncovering every problem in the kingdom and bringing absolute fear into the peons' lives?
I'm not even being a tinfoil-hatted conspiracy-obsessed. It's just that medieval societes were often cripto-oligarchies.

>>48094008
That's the most important and flavorful element of the paladin, the legitimate authority clause. Paladins desperately need context in a campaign.

>>48094026
I agree with your sentiment, and I don't ever run games in D&D where paladins are granted license to kill by any legitimate authority, but I've damn near never played in a game where it wasn't the case.

>>48093981

>I'm talking about the fucking code of conduct, genius, not your strawman.

>Associates clause.

Still waiting for that page number.

>Your memory is off, evil humanoids of 1 HD or less still ping as evil.

Because they're usually imps, goblins, and orks who go around raiding villages, ofc they're going to come up as evil.

Even then, I was talking about peasants, not monsters.

>Again, if anyone is at fault, its the paladin player, as evil can tolerate paladins, but paladins can't tolerate evil.

You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would tolerate a drug peddler who deals to kids, regardless of alignment.

>Of course there are plenty of situation where an evil PC will be welcomed

Such as?

>namely whatever he brings to the table.

Anything the metaphorical evil character can bring to the table can easily be done as a non-evil character.

File: WHY ARENT YOU CRUSADING.png (373 KB, 544x614)

373 KB PNG

>>48094060
>>48094026
Imagine you're a king.

Imagine there's an entire legion of fanatics who just want your blessing to kill all of the criminals who are hurting your people, income, and everything else that makes you money.

They don't want pay.
They don't want quartering.
They don't want anything from you.
They want to solve all of your problems because Jesus told them to.

What medieval Monarchist is gonna look at this and go "Nah. The peasants have rights."

Compound this with dragons, for-real necromancers, and other shit that a standing army of spearmen can't handle and you'll begin to understand a fundamental difference between DnD and the real world.

>>48094157
Or...not, that's fucking stupid.

You don't give someone judge-jury-ex powers just because they reallly want it. That makes it way too easy for some fuck with a non-detection spell to slip in, start up shit, and now your kingdom's on fire because you were stupid enough to allow someone to just ice anyone they wanted.

>>48094116

>http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/paladin.htm
Associates

While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

>Because they're usually imps, goblins, and orks who go around raiding villages, ofc they're going to come up as evil.

Hm? All evil beings, peasants or not, come up under Detect Evil. That's why its called Detect Evil.

>Such as?

Any class that has utility to allied party members (sometimes rogues, often clerics and wizards).

>Anything the metaphorical evil character can bring to the table can easily be done as a non-evil character.

And anything the paladin could do, could be done just as easily by a cleric. What's your point?

MY point is that the paladin is inherently the most nosy and controlling class in the game, as they must always monitor what other people play and their players feel they have a say in what other people bring to the table. I say this as a paladin fan, and there's no getting around it.

>>48094157
>Imagine there's an entire legion of fanatics who just want [to subvert your secular authority and] your blessing to kill [anyone they want]

>>48094179

Literally anyone who has the power to fuck around with nondetection and mid level magic could infiltrate less supernaturally gifted ranks with a weaker spell, and having the free paladins doesn't mean you aren't still going to want more heavy hitting subjects.

>>48094222
You avoided my actual argument, you stupid fuck.

Giving that sort of power out isn't in the king's interest. It's too easy to subvert and fuck up.

File: toh_cirno_anim.gif (12 KB, 62x84)

12 KB GIF

>>48093330
Some fucking truth in this thread

File: 13419132_1075077362557524(...).jpg (13 KB, 313x254)

13 KB JPG

>>48094157

And then, in the moment you decide that a morally opinable action is what's going to save your kingdom, an army of angry paladins is at your doors armed to the teeth. Maybe they just want to talk you out of your choice, right, and kick you outta your throne without harming you, but it's not going to end well.

>>48094189
While I generally agree with your point that paladins are fucking awful, this

>Hm? All evil beings, peasants or not, come up under Detect Evil. That's why its called Detect Evil.

is not true.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/d/detect-evil

>An evil aura's power depends on the type of evil creature or object that you're detecting and its HD, caster level, or (in the case of a cleric) class level; see the table below.
>Aligned creature (HD): 4 or lower
>no aura

You don't show up on a Detect Evil spell unless you're an evil cleric/paladin or you're level 5.

>>48094235
>You avoided my actual argument

Your actual argument was that a powerful wizard could pose as a paladin (quite possibly the most inconvenient class to pose as) to start shit. Of course, he could just as easily use Change Self to infiltrate paladin-less ranks or Invisibility to ditch the requirement to infiltrate anything.

>It's too easy to subvert and fuck up.

Massively harder to subvert and fuck up than not having them. In other words, its an upside with no drawback.

>>48094245
I really want to play a combat meido gunslinger in my next game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmVr67BI0jQ

>>48094304
No. It's not.
Mass amounts of power out of your hands IS NOT AN UPSIDE WITH NO DRAWBACKS.

How are you this fucking stupid? There's a lot less intrest to infiltrate those ranks, although it's still a risk.

Know why? Because they don't have the fucking authority to execute people in the goddamn street, you dense fuck.

>>48094189

>While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

So basically.

1) Paladins cannot associate with shitters who are obviously evil
2) Paladins cannot associate with shitters who obviously do evil shit in front of them.

Which wraps around with "don't be a plot derialing faggot," which what I've been saying for the last few posts.

>Hm? All evil beings, peasants or not, come up under Detect Evil. That's why its called Detect Evil.

Your average peasant won't show up as evil unless they're HD 4.

>Any class that has utility to allied party members (sometimes rogues, often clerics and wizards).

Okay, what part of these class's utility cannot be performed by a non-evil character?

>And anything the paladin could do, could be done just as easily by a cleric. What's your point?

Not true.

In a party of lower tiered classes, the paladin is invaluable due to having a healing power, an ability that detects undead/demons/devils/etc. an ability that adds CHA to saves, and an ability that deals extra damage to undead/demons.

Paladins are one of the best martial classes in the game, especially in a campaign where the most common enemies are fiends and aberrations.

>MY point is that the paladin is inherently the most nosy and controlling class in the game, as they must always monitor what other people play and their players feel they have a say in what other people bring to the table. I say this as a paladin fan, and there's no getting around it.

Due to anecdotal evidence that, honestly, was probably caused due to you playing characters who sells crack to children.

>>48094252
>While I generally agree with your point that paladins are fucking awful

I don't think paladins are fucking awful, paladins are perhaps my favorite class. But they are the most insufferable class, kind of the Chaotic Neutral of classes.

>is not true.

http://www.d20srd.org/search.htm?q=detect%20evil

Nobody stipulated X homebrew RPG, so there's no need to assume they're talking about it.

>>48094344
>Mass amounts of power out of your hands

But its not mass amounts of power out of my hands, its mass amounts of power in my hands. Not many troopers have a class feature that requires them to obey me.

Any rules appended onto said execution (strange out of towners without a clear reason for being there for example) are okay.

>>48094393
Enjoy getting overthrown like the stupid sack of shit you are.

You probably won't even see it coming, with your head shoved so far up your ass.

>>48094350
>1) Paladins cannot associate with shitters who are obviously evil
>2) Paladins cannot associate with shitters who obviously do evil shit in front of them.

Or
3) Paladins cannot associate with people who are evil. Read the fucking book.

>Your average peasant won't show up as evil unless they're HD 4.

http://www.d20srd.org/search.htm?q=detect%20evil

Nope.

>Okay, what part of these class's utility cannot be performed by a non-evil character?

As much as the paladin can do that the cleric can't, virtually nothing.

>Due to anecdotal evidence that

The class's writeup is not anecdotal.

>playing characters who sell crack

As I have mentioned several times, paladins are among my favorite classes.

>>48094413
>Enjoy getting overthrown like the stupid sack of shit you are.

Considering their class requires them to obey me, that's a risk I'm willing to take.

Only thing more trustworthy than a paladin would probably be a lawful good cleric of the lawful good god of nobility (specifically of whatever noble bloodline I follow), and that's a bit more ambiguous.

>>48093812
Well, he kinda does.

>>48094547
Real outrage over imaginary crimes isn't moral superiority so much as being unable to separate fact and fiction.

>>48094427

>3) Paladins cannot associate with people who are evil. Read the fucking book.

It states that the paladin cannot KNOWINGLY associate with evil creatures.

Which means that if the Paladin knows that you're evil, either you fucked up and got caught or you were dumb enough to do obviously evil shit in front of them and somehow expect them not to get into your face.

>As much as the paladin can do that the cleric can't, virtually nothing.

Except for Smite, adding CHA to their saving throws, immunity to fear/disease, the ability to grant a bonus vs. fear to allies passively, and lay on hands; a heal that allows them to heal multiple targets and doesn't consume a spell slot to do so.

I mean, Clerics are better as a class but Paladins still have a niche that justifies their existence in a party of martials.

Plus, you still didn't explain how the utility is lessened by a class being non-evil.

>>48094582
Detect Evil determines presence or absence of evil creatures when used, and then determines the position. Ergo, if you are ever evil with a paladin using detect evil, you will be found out.

There are paladin abilities that are nice for the paladin himself to have, but paladins are not remotely as much of a help as a cleric.

>Plus, you still didn't explain how the utility is lessened by a class being non-evil.

If "it would be just as good if you were nonevil" is an argument for monkeying around with what other people are playing, then "it would be even better if you were a cleric" is an argument for not playing a paladin to begin with.

And none of this has come even 0.1% to dealing with the problem with that you are still laying out how everyone should change their characters to please the paladin, AS AN ARGUMENT THAT THE PALADIN DOESN'T MAKE PEOPLE CHANGE THEIR CHARACTERS!

>>48087761
And Barbarians are always lawless bloodcrazed psychos who listen to no man's word.

>>48094782
Barbarians haven't had to follow rules for, what, four editions now?

>>48094452
>Considering their class requires them to obey me, that's a risk I'm willing to take.
>Legitimate authority
A few Diplomacy checks later and your Bard brother who feels like he's a better king is having your door smashed in by Paladins.
Goodnight, Vienna.

>>48091483
the hypocrisy is overwhelming

>>48094682

>Detect Evil determines presence or absence of evil creatures when used, and then determines the position. Ergo, if you are ever evil with a paladin using detect evil, you will be found out.

Get a ring of unalignment you whiny cunt.

>There are paladin abilities that are nice for the paladin himself to have, but paladins are not remotely as much of a help as a cleric.

Well yeah, clerics are T1 while Paladins are like T3.

In a party where T1/T2 aren't allowed though, they're invaluable, which is what the argument was about.

There are situations where paladins are necessary but the same cannot be said of evil characters.

>the rest of this shitty post

Here's the thing mate, your argument basically comes down to "paladins are shit because they don't let me get away with being evil," when there's no good reason that you've provided that would justify an evil character's presence in a party.

If you're playing evil well, nobody should ever find out that you're evil, at all. If you play evil in a party of mostly non-evil characters and you get punished for being evil, it's all your fault and you deserve it for being stupid enough to get caught.

Especially since you can buy (magic) items that prevent alignment detection for relatively cheap early on.

You whiny cunt.

>>48094802
Hence legitimate authority, not to mention them having to keep their word.

And if you're taking diplomacy strictly, and interpreting "helpful" as doing a 180 in your life, then to the surprise of no one the bard can do that on anyone at any time, even on me, the paladin's god bonus feature: he's probably always watching and listening so he can't not be hit by diplomacy, etcetera etcetera, so the discussion is moot.

>>48093815
he DID also mention it's happened with groups that haven't played with him before

>>48094861
>which is what the argument was about
Not even that guy, but this is a lie and you know it. You slipped "a party of martials" into your own post, and moved the goalposts underhandedly. Way to Paladin, bro.
>There are situations where paladins are necessary but the same cannot be said of evil characters
Ends-justify-means types aside, there's two points here. Frequently Chaotic characters will be constrained by Paladins, not just evil ones. Plus, there's plenty of spells and items which could solve a problem that are now verboten.
Plus, "offends their moral code" is in the Cod of Conduct. I've seen more than one Paladin who loudly stated this meant the Rogue sneaking up and eliminating sentries, using poison, attacking foes affected by paralysing or debuffing spells (the helpless, don't you know) etc.
A ring or other permanent item to hide alignment will be way too expensive for the first six levels and after that you have to buy it from - guess who - a shady bastard willing to sell such a thing.
More to the point, I now have to waste my share of gold, and thus some of the party's effectiveness, on an item to hide from an ALLY?

There's room to RP a truce with a Good fighter and even Good clerics seem to get wiggle room, but there's no getting along with one of these gold-pauldroned pricks.

>>48090607
Everything is horrible when it's done wrong.

Going with a stereotype can be fun for a bit of variance in a group that's trying too hard to stand out. Subverting a stereotype can be a good way to experiment with making a character interesting, without necessarily ignoring the original idea.

Subversion and being unique doesn't have to be terrible, but you can find so many examples of people who go way out of their way to make something exotic that barely has any substance, or in the case of entire settings, leaves players unattached. And you also have a lot of people longing for 'good ol' days' when fantasy seemed simple. Imagine that everyone you ever played with was trying to subvert a trope - wouldn't you want to make use of it for once? It's not like every trope became such because it was horrible or unpopular.

>>48094861
>Get a ring of unalignment you whiny cunt.

Yes, get a magic item so that I can play the character I want to. That's not even particularly probable in PF's 4 level limit.

>which is what the argument was about.

That's a brand new addition to the argument. The argument was simply about that paladins are the sole class that puts you into a position to make demands on other party members.

>There are situations where paladins are necessary but the same cannot be said of evil characters.

There are no situations (except maybe Fear and Disease: The Dungeon, which I have difficulty figuring out what it'd be populated with that would make those the only two threats) where a paladin is preferable to a cleric, but there are plenty of situations where the cleric of an evil god would be preferable to the cleric of something else.

For example, in a world overrun by evil dragons, they may be more willing to listen to someone given miracles by their goddess. At a minimum, an evil servant of X evil deity is likely to listen to you if you can call an Aspect of their god.

>Here's the thing mate, your argument basically comes down to "paladins are shit because they don't let me get away with being evil,"

Total projection as I've noted this isn't about me (and for the fourth time, paladins are probably my favorite class), its about the paladin.

Despite the fact that evil clerics are generally as or more useful than good clerics, you don't actually need justification for playing an evil character -- its an RPG. The only time your PC choice will always become subject to oversight is if someone rolls a paladin, but the paladin player is being no less disruptive.

To put it another way, if the paladin is justified in killing a PC he finds out is evil, then evil PCs are also justified for killing PCs they find out are paladins.

Non primary casters, who rely on heavy armor shouldn't bring a knife to the gun fight and shouldn't be assuming they'll be winning PvP like you.

>>48094799
The point I'm trying to make is that no class is just automatically one thing, without any variance or flexibility. A paladin does not have to be a rulebook, just as a barbarian can follow rules if he wants to.

>>48094866
Legitimate is a tricky thing. Paladins are both Lawful and Good. Unless you're a paladin yourself, you're almost certainly going to make some minor step against one in your rule. Accepting politics as the dirty business it is, it'll be more than one step.
Next stop theocracy.

Hell, what if it turns out he was the twin born a minute before you (the king) and should have inherited? What if your son and heir is executed for his indiscretions and you're left without a successor? What if you are actually Lawful Neutral and would rather build an empire of order than a self-limiting barony? What if you and the Arch-Paladin disagree on an ecumenical matter?
Well, you gone done fucked up handing the licence for force majeure to a knightly order and now you can't sweep this matter under the rug for the good of the land.
This all assumes your knowledge of Paladins and their infallibility is the same as the PHBs. If you just think this is some order of knights, the whole idea is kaput: they're insurgents.

>>48095080
Depends on a lot of things, but usually none of those things are up to the player.

>>48094987

>Not even that guy, but this is a lie and you know it.

see >>48094116

specifically, the part where I say,

>There are situations where a paladin is a necessary and welcome addition to the party, the same cannot be said of an evil character.

That's the part of the argument I was referring too, maybe you should read carefully instead of jumping to conclusions next time.

>Frequently Chaotic characters will be constrained by Paladins, not just evil ones.

You mean people who tend to treat chaos as a free license to play not!Joker or not!Deadpool and derail campaing for "wacky shenanigans?"

Yeah, no thanks.

>Plus, there's plenty of spells and items which could solve a problem that are now verboten.

Such as?

>I've seen more than one Paladin who loudly stated this meant the Rogue sneaking up and eliminating sentries, using poison, attacking foes affected by paralysing or debuffing spells (the helpless, don't you know) etc.

So because one guy played the class wrong and operated under flawed assumptions, it means the entire class is flawed?

I've seen power gamers who treated a high AC as a means of having practical invincibility and went into a fit when something casted a spell at him yet I wouldn't look at a Dwarven Defender sideways just because his AC is higher than most of the party.

>More to the point, I now have to waste my share of gold, and thus some of the party's effectiveness, on an item to hide from an ALLY?

That's the price (no pun intended) for willingly playing an evil character in a party of non-evil characters, with a Paladin.

Stop whining.

>There's room to RP a truce with a Good fighter and even Good clerics seem to get wiggle room, but there's no getting along with one of these gold-pauldroned pricks.

Usually, because the evil characters are shitters who push the paladin's boundaries until they end up as red smear on the wall for being an evil bastard.

You think you just wake up Evil one day without doing something to earn it?

>>48095098
Being legitimate authority does not depend on me being Paladin Jr., it depends on whatever context paladins have in the given setting. This may be 'be perfect at all times' but its probably 'your dad was king' or 'get 38% of the population to like you' or something like that.

But yes, depends on the setting and depends on your knowledge.

>>48095235
Keep in mind its a two way street, and if the paladin is justified in murdering evil party members, then those evil party members are justified in doing it to them.

Virt, please leave.

>>48095235
>>There are situations where a paladin is a necessary and welcome addition to the party, the same cannot be said of an evil character.
Shit you're right. Luckily, this is also a lie and you still know it.
>You mean people who tend to treat chaos as a free license to play not!Joker or not!Deadpool and derail campaing for "wacky shenanigans?"
Characters who aren't Lawful by design (Barbarians and Bards), who commit chaotic acts like upturning staid order or defying the systems of Lawful Evil, or who cast spells with the chaotic descriptor. Fishmalk behaviour purely optional.
>Such as?
Summons with a fiendish creature (i.e. the best ones), animating dead (your milage may vary, but the spell itself is Evil), deathwatch, Symbl of pain: all Evil and thus Evil acts to cast. Chaos Hammer, Cloak of Chaos, Dispel Law, Magic Circle against Law are all great against Fiends and various monsters. But TOO BAD they're Chaotic.
>more than one
>one guy
I know you might think it's one player, several paladins, but nope. Also, it gives mistaken players LICENSE to be fun police, which is a problem in and of itself.
>that's the price
What a barrel of laughs you must be at the table
>usually, because...
If I'm not allowed anecdotes, nor are you.
>You think you just wake up Evil one day without doing something to earn it?
Be a monster race and keep your alignment, cast evil or chaotic spells, be evil or chaotic but not necessarily a bad guy (D&D morality is a weird thing), alignment change by magic... You're right, genocide is appropriate in all these situations. Wait, no, the OTHER thing.

>>48095050

>Yes, get a magic item so that I can play the character I want to.

The character you want to play conflicts with the party and if you play it, do so at your own peril.

A paladin provides a mechanical benefit to the party, evil characters only exist to add conflict and has nothing that provides a unique mechanical benefit that cannot easily be converted to a non-evil character.

>That's a brand new addition to the argument.

see >>48094116

That's where it originated from.

>There are no situations where a paladin is preferable to a cleric,
>Except for the situations that I just mentioned in passing

Next

>To put it another way, if the paladin is justified in killing a PC he finds out is evil, then evil PCs are also justified for killing PCs they find out are paladins.

Nobody said he wasn't, just realize that you're going up against a class that's designed to tank threats like a beast and the rest of the party could just as easily be against you than with you.

That's a risk you take as an evil character in a non-evil party.

>>48095298

Nobody said he wasn't.

>>48095446
>The character you want to play conflicts with the party

The reverse is true too.

>nothing that provides a unique mechanical benefit that cannot easily be converted to a non-evil character.

What does this even mean? So evil spells/evil deities can be 'converted' to a non evil context? Well okay, but the paladin can be converted too, what's your point?

>That's where it originated from.

Again, it was brought in late to the argument. You don't get the move goalposts.

>That's a risk you take as an evil character in a non-evil party.

Well no, that's a risk you take with a PvP loving paladin in the party. Heavy armor + poor magic is not a combination I would suggest PvP to either.

So since you seem to have made what, 5-7+ posts indicating you think its okay for paladins to kill evil party members, remember they can do the same in return.

>>48095430

>1

Just because you can't accept it doesn't mean it isn't right.

>2

non Lawful != chaotic

>3

For most those examples though, there are still many more situations where an obstacle can still be overcome without using those spells.

You don't have to use fiendish creatures or undead in any situation, especially when mages are just as powerful without using spells of the [evil] or [chaotic] descriptor.

>4

Only if nobody corrects their behavior, same as the lolsorandumb shitter or the rogue who tries stealing from other party members.

>5

I said the pun wasn't intended.

>6

Monster Race alignment describes the average creature of that race, you can easily be a good drow or an evil aasimar if you want.

It's not an excuse.

>>48091860
Actually, I've had several really good discussions of religion here recently. But yeah, this thread is in a sad state.

>>48095618
Animate Dead + Command Undead (the spell) is exceedingly powerful, and THOSE are real good at tanking.

More importantly, at this part we're trying to justify a class that:

1. Abandons and murders friends unpredictably
2. Prohibits far more useful party members from using some of the more powerful spells in their arsenal
3. Could just have easily been a member of a non-PvP class

>>48095430
>be evil or chaotic but not necessarily a bad guy
If you're Chaotic Evil then you're a bad person pretty much by necessity unless everyone at your table is a sociopath.

>>48095618
This is all weak shit now. You might as well climb down off your horse.
>1
It's definitely wrong. Decent melee, a horse, and a smattering of spell-likes are all deeply replicable and middling. Even in a T3 martial-focused group Paladin's only a good-ish choice, and far from irreplaceable.
>2
And? What, so you're happy ensuring, through your unilateral decision, that the other players must stick to four of the nine alignments and if they're not LG you'll still lecture them? Well Jiminey Cricket how am I going to explain the problems with that?
>3
As opposed to the Paladin's irreplaceable slight save boosts. You don't HAVE to, but good tools are thrown by the wayside, to say nothing of useful methods that the Paladin finds unsavoury.
>4
Bad players are bad. Classes will give them tools to misbehave, by their nature. The class that gives them /license/ to be worse should be changed.
>5
I more meant that your "I don't give a fuck" attitude sounds like a badly played paladin, the pun didn't register at all.
>6
>and keep your alignment
Still doesn't address my wider point: valid party-supporting characters exist in that area. There's plenty of grey area in the Chaotic and Evil alignments, and plenty of live-and-let-live room with the classes most associated.

>>48095528

>The reverse is true too.

That's true, and I wouldn't recommend a Paladin in a non-good campaign either.

>What does this even mean?

It means that the CE Rogue, the NE Wizard, and the LE monk have all the same mechanics as a CG Rogue, NG Wizard, and LG monk.

>Well no, that's a risk you take with a PvP loving paladin in the party

No, that's a risk you're taking if you're in a party with mostly good characters mate.

If you do evil shit that the party doesn't like, they may gang up on you rather than risk you stabbing them in their sleep one night.

>Heavy armor + poor magic is not a combination I would suggest PvP to either.

Heavy armor+Great saves+Heals are a great combination if PvP becomes a thing.

>So since you seem to have made what, 5-7+ posts indicating you think its okay for paladins to kill evil party members, remember they can do the same in return.

Of course they can, I never said the paladin wasn't immune to retaliation.