Alright, this probably has already been tackled before.. but id like to get a dm's view on this. For example, take player X who makes evil char Y, evil char Y does not wear black armor with skull helm. Player X has plans regarding char Y, he wants to make him a fun villain to play against when he 'grows' up as long as not everyone in sanctuary knows he is a villain.

Alright now comes Paladin A, who says : "oh this one is tainted by evil.. blah blah blah meh hates him, never met, but he EVIL... EVIL I tell you." // I mean just the phrase 'X has a tainted heart' means EVERYTHING to the eyes of the OOC player. (i put why i think this is problematic at the end of the message)

Is that how a paladin is supposed to act? just going into town with his evil-radar and saying who is evil and who is not?

*** For once, I thought the detect evil.. was like a lot more blurry.. like i sense somethin' wrong.. but cannot put my finger on it about you... bah its probably just a bad vibe , but ill still be careful about you. (and find reason X to not travel with party containing character X,) ***

and NOT going 'alert' 'alert' 'evil char detected, must tell everyone'... cuz the drawback of that is:

the metagaming it creats=

although the IC has no reason to trust the paladin on that, because first, ye dont know he has that power, could be a lie, could be anything!! but OOC, the player goes 'ok now i know for sure this guy has his alignment on EVIL,' which means he might not heal me on a scripted quest!! oh noes!! and man, does the party always favour the paladin? most of the time, it does, kick out the evil char.. based on just that 'vibe'.

and hell, I have done that.. too.. when my char is weak I am more reluctant to travel with dudes who have 'tagged' as evil... i dont do it on purpose, any tiny reasons to dislike em because enough to not party with 'em.

and i feel that most of the time, that judgement is based on 'mechanics' .. default paladin = 'lawful/good' with a evil-radar, and people just trust em based.. on mechanics...

I thank dearly those who dont do that, and tell the paladin to go to hell with his 'mumbo jumbo', lockwood style.

Oh and this is a semi-rant, but its more something that stings my eyes everytime i see it, I played only one evil char who wanted to hide it, and he never met a paladin i think, so that's good. but I see it happen everyday... and I think its not the 'right' way to play the 'detect evil' ability.

There, now your opinion matters! Convince me why you do it, and why should it be done this way.

thank you!

Hi There,

There is a very good reasons why paladins do this - if they travel or work with anyone of evil alignemnt they can be stripped of their powers - so they need to be constantly looking for those people they can travel and work with and those that they can't

Detect Evil according to the DnD mechanics is very specific right down to individual people and the degree of the taint in their Soul.

Now some peopel will listen to paladins soem people won't. I played an Evil lady that used to wrap Paladins around her finger and had them protecting her at one point - long story seek me out some time I will tell you.

A Paladin's doctrine in most cases is to warn peopel of those of Evil intent and is perfectly within the scope of the games IC and OOC and without metagaming.

If you want to play an Evil character and keep it hidden learn who the Paladins are very fast and if you are around them at all Drink Potions of Protection from Good.

Paladins are a balancing force in the game - Evil characters can usually do what they want on a whim and do not obey laws and have no compusion about killing peoepl in their way - Good characters are bound by their moral codes and do not ususlly have such options - Paladins help to balance out this inequity.

There are a large number of threads on this issue - i would recommend doing a search and reading back over them.

Cheers

Paladins have the ability, its up to them how they use it. Its not metagamish unless you make it that way. Generally, its considered to be fairly lame to run about spamming DE and screaming 'He's evil!' or 'Her heart is tainted!' though.

A smart evil character will do the best they can to avoid paladins, if they wish to remain publicly accepted as a kindly, well-intentioned figure. That, or use the IC methods to mask their nature from them. I did a DM quest once with three paladins who had sent others packing, while I stood there and smiled sweetly, using these methods.

An evil character could also just kill them, threaten some innocent life (if the paladin tell others of the 'taint'), or operate without holding a great public reputation.

My opinion is that simply it's lame to say straight out "He's tainted", "He's evil", whatever. There are many different ways to approach it. Just walking away, saying you feel uncomfortable, saying you've got a dentist appointment all of a sudden...

As a courtesy though when I play an evil guy and he's in a very pro-good group with a paladin, I just walk out to save the paladin all the trouble.

As I see it, it's not just some rumour that a paladin is indeed graced by their deity and can do things like asking their patron if someone is having bad intentions or not, so, their word actually should mean a lot more than it actually does.. I mean, what reason does anyone have to trust their own opinion more than a nearly omniscient god's? Also it is a known fact that a paladin can not lie without violating their code. But trust me, not even when you're a 16-charisma 14-persuade level 8 Aasimar paladin noble, will most people believe you when you designate someone as evil unless they finally got killed/wronged by said person..

And just walking away/ignoring evil person is indeed the wrong approach. I'm not saying a paladin should right out kill them but they should definitely warn others and try to expose the evil of the person. So I don't see why it's lame to tell people who is evil... where would be the use in being a holy warrior who is directly blessed by a god/ess if I'd just use this knowledge for myself.

And I might want to add once more there's some way to evade detection. You can even find out in game..(D'oh, nevermind, nestek spoiled it :oops: ), have fun, but I think paladins should be a major PITA for secrecy evil. :P

Bottom line: My own characters really always fully believe paladins - they might just not care, or hope to help the evil person to better themselves, but not believing a paladin seems as pointless to me as not believing in any god in the FR setting while it is known they exist. Furthermore this means my evil PCs do not see much use in denying the word of a paladin ("Oh what can I say, maybe I have been a bad girl.."), but then I don't really try myself at "secretive" evil... since, I don't think many who are evil really think they even are. They just have different world views and other morals. Some might even -genuinely- surprised when a paladin accuses them, and then start to ponder what they have done wrong and how they can make up for it. Only a few evil persons probably accepted this fact willingly and all along.

Okay, while we're on the subject, I hate booting people out of a quest, but its somthing a paladin has to do. But there is one thing I don't understand... ...If I make a sending declering that I am clearing a temple from undead, any evil characters that come would not be able to right? But they shouldn't be there in the first place! Evil characters should NOT go on quests to purge monsters or the like, it should be either for their own personal gain or the favour of their god, working with a paladin or even majority good characters helps with neither. The defination of evil is not simply being gready or being a total *too rude for EFU* to people, the defination of evil is being a person the god goods do not agree with (in fact, the word good comes from the word gods). If the good gods do not agree with you, thats reason enough for any paladin or good character to not trust you. If not being aloud to go on a quest is so annoying try somthing! There are ways to block an evil aura

Then there are ofcourse the evil PC's that don't look at themselves as evil. I mean, sure they've killed and maimed little children and whatnot but it was for the greater good of their people. I've been playing a character that doesn't look at himself as an "evil" person and when a paladin decides to cram his ideals down the throats of people around him by saying that my PC is "evil" or "tainted" it's as easy as pie to discount this nonsense. Why should someone be "evil" just because he doesn't live up to the pansy ideals of the paladins god? Why should you be marked as evil simply because he does not resolve matters in the same manner as the paladin's god wishes them resolved? It's easily handled IG and even though a paladin wishes to run around and make a fool of himself by shouting "Danger Will Robinson! Danger!" then that doesn't mean that your character has to live with that stigma for the rest of his life. Handle the matter IC'ly, it's not as hard as you think.

Delgado for one has serious doubts of this supposed power of the paladins, I mean. . . they're wrong about him, who's to say they're not wrong about everything else?

-YourFriendlyNeighbourhoodDruQks

no I disagree with that Evil tends to be as bigger purge of Evil as good is - most evil wants dominance over other evil or doesn;t care about it so long as they get what they want now.

Evil character have no hesitation in wiping a temple full of evil creatures if it gets them closer to their own goals.

All paladins have the same code that they must adhere to even before their god's dogma. So if you are deemed evil, it is not just by that one god but sort of in-general. And everyone who carries a femur around and does not think they are evil is just.. Oh well youuuu know it :P

Linelle, while you as a player might be entirely clear on a paladin's code and where they get their powers from, not everyone in the Realms is. Given that paladins can be played without special approval in EfU (and given that this means there are a lot of paladins), your attitude on how this issue should be handled is unfair in the extreme.

Besides, who's to even say that the guy in shiny platemail even really is a paladin? Maybe it's just a fighter living in his own delusions of grandeur after getting kicked from the paladin college.

Nothing wrong with carrying the femur bone of a drow as a club. <_<

Like DruQks said before, when is evil actually evil? I consider myself a good guy, but when it comes to certain topics I see myself capable of inheritantly evil and horrible acts.

I consider it a good act to protect your family, and I see little disagreement coming from anyone on this point. I care about my little brother more than anything in this world, and if someone would attempt to harm him, I will retalliate with more than the same amount of force. If someone would threaten my brother's life, or God forbid, actually kill him, I will strike back with all the fury I have, killing probably both his assailant and everyone he loves himself, just to protect my family/ avenge my brother's death.

However horrible that may seem, it is still a good act to protect your family, but the means by which that is done, is less than so. A Paladin, however, would detect these 'horrible' things I did, while I am convinced myself that I serve the greater good. And given that I know (I think) most of DruQks' character's background, there are more than a few examples of how this actually works.

There's nothing evil about carrying a bone as a weapon. Think simple CG barbarian picking up a large animal bone and clubbing stuff that attacks him with it.

On a more related note, I just want to highlght a passage in Mort's initial post. A Paladin knows exactly who is evil when they detect. It's not blurry unless they are overcome by the evil and dazed.

On a less related note:

I think as a Paladin you have chosen to play the class and therefore must accept the drawbacks that come along with it. This, in my opinion, includes not being able to quest with evil people in a party. It should not be the other way around. I think it's an OOC courtesy matter that you leave a party you've been invited into instead of holding a massive coup and ousting the evil person from the party. I've also had this done to me and it basically meant I couldn't quest at all, ever, so I stayed at level 9 while all these Paladins and their evil bashing chums got to double figures. Where's the challenge?

On a more related note:

As previously stated, your character, no matter what their alignment, doesn't know truly if the Paladin is a Paladin at all or has DE. Even good aligned characters, particularly CG, may not believe a Paladin. And I'm of the opinion that neutral characters really generally shouldn't take heed of a Paladin's cries of "He's TAINTED!". You're netrual. Why would you care?

And whilst we're at it, I just want to say that Paladins shouldn't be going around telling anyone who will listen that such and such is evil. Not only is it just poor tactics to let potential enemies know what you know but Paladins see even CG and neutral characters as upstarts with poor moral fibre. Possibly such information would be reserved for their closest friends of a LG/NG alignment. Just remember, DE is not the only manner in which your Paladin judges people. It's not a "He's passed the DE test, that's the seal of approval" kind of thing. Paladins would generally have little to do with neutral characters as they are as evil as they are good. Your Paladin can dislike non evil people, and infact, in my opinion, should. He is not obliged to like anyone that doesn't show up as evil.

There are plenty of reasons why an evil charactor would help goodie goodies. First and formost is that they may not think themselves evil they might just think that power over others shows that they are good leaders or some thing along those lines. Another reason would be that they are trying to build trust from good charactors to make the betrayal all the more rewarding to them other reasons are indeed greed or perhaps they have a hate for that type of creature, alternativly they maybe a LE charactor in which they believe that job violates their code and needs to be delt with. There is also the fear that they may eventually be upstaged by the threat and feel the need to deal with it then and there. There are always plenty of reasons an evil charactor will work with good charactor, besides whats saying that those other "good" charactors arn't providing a facade to the fact that they are actually a secret underground assassins guild that does work for whoever provides coin all the while providing a smiling face so that they arn't found out lol

There is a line i heard once i believe is usefull here.

"The possiblilities are endless"

If you can think of a reason your charactor would do it than go for it if not then dont. Its like thinking like a player looking for XP rather than your charactor roll playing. If you do something that your charactor would refuse to do and arent RPing your charactor's persona. I saw a perfect example of a charactor following their tennets the other night when a human male went to work with a party untill he found out that it was for the grey dwarves in the mines which he refuses to work with for what ever reason. Now his charactor is a good charactor and the cause was just but because he has a hate for the grey dwarves for what ever reason he refused to work with the group for the Durguar. I know its the opposite end of the scale and slightly different but its an example of why a just cause may not be taken up by just people the same works in reverse i do believe.

Any way thats my two bob on the situation.

(edit: dont know if what i have said has already been covered but im at work and got interupted while posting so i apologise if im repeating what someone else has said

edit 2: added punctuation ;)... i hate laptop keyboards lol hence why there wasnt any the keys are too close and i spent more time pressing backspace than anything else lol)

First, its just rude to say "This guy I just met is not good of heart but actually tainted by the worst kinds of evil."

Do that to Dungal, and he'll fight you over it. An honorable duel since you insulted his good name.

You know I always use this as a rule of thumb. If you want to be evil, hidden secret evil, stay the hell away from paladins. They are so easy to spot a mile away it's not even funny. Do NOT even put yourself in that situation.

Also, I always find it amusing how paladins are all SMITE DOWN EVIL!! But they should also distrust any chaotic aligned character because they are infact lawful beings out to uphold some sort of law. ((depending on your dogma)) Yet almost no paladins I see even give a crap about that.

its an interesting thread, and clearly lots of people have opinions on it.

I also agree that too many paladins run around telling people willy nilly that this or that person is tainted. but I also play a paladin who RPs his detect evil as something that isn't like a direct message from his god, but more of a intense gut feeling about that person.

I think it all depends on the God of the paladin, the tactics they as a warrior might use, and their particular order.

having said this, I do feel OOC issues surround the detect evil ability, and even alignment in general. While I agree that good and evil etc. exist in the FR setting as concrete and almost tangible forces... I don't think the MAJORITY of the population would "know" their alignment.

So as has been mentioned, having an evil alignment does not equate with a self-awareness of evil. Neither does being good, or neutral, or chaotic or lawful....

So while, yes, some people might believe paladins because of their holy connections... others might choose to ignore them or refute them based on the fact that most normal people cannot "see" an alignment. And especially in a place where trust is hard to earn, this "paladin" could EASILY be a fraud.

edit --> and I think people who are accused of being evil are very much within their rights to refute it because of this lack of "self-awareness". Whether its they believe they do good, they do not understand good/evil, they know no other way to live or they simply lie and have a great persuade/bluff.

Summary: IMO, alignment in general should be kept as ooc knowledge for the player of that PC, just like character classes, levels and other mechanics. The detect evil ability should be RPed IC for both accuser, the accused and the onlookers.

A righteous and just paladin who goes around saying “YOUR EVIL!” to every evil soul he detects is probably committing a sin depending on the deity, I know when I have a friend in game who is accused of being evil I usually go BALLISTIC on the paladin

“What do YOU mean he is evil? Who the hell are you to judge? Oh Lathander told you? I guess Lathander is busy telling you who is good and who is evil, while letting infants die of plague?”

Etc.

Paladin detect evil sense can be refuted IC.

That said…. people knowing your “evil” is not the end of your character, by ANY means. I think if we took the total average alignment, and scaled it by player levels, the average alignment would be neutral leaning towards evil(there may be more low level good characters, but as you increase in level, the alignment tree takes a distinctive shift towards neutrality and evil).

This is not like “that other server”. You can have a long and successful career even if everyone knows your “evil”. Lots of PCs don’t put any stock in what paladins have to say anyway.

And to add to what DruQks said..... lots of evil PCs do not see themselves as evil at all. I played a red wizard who was neutral evil and had been trying to contact a demon so he could trade the souls of the innocent to get a portal to the surface. He was convinced he was a good guy. Just because you have an evil alignment, does not mean you THINK your evil.

Amen.

It depends alot on the god. If you worship Tyr or Hoar you'd probably go on demanding justice and such. Torm or Lathander, you'd probably be alot less uptight and try to suade these people towards good intentions. Sometimes there's even paladins for neutral deities. I played a paladin of Kelemvor. Evil people will sometimes even run a temple of Kelemvor, so the paladin has to tolerate it on some level to accomplish his ultimate goal. I didn't care as much if someone was evil, but anyone who was involved in any sorts of necromancy was an outright heretic who needed to be brought to whatever justice there is.

Paladins are free to do as they want in regards to detecting evil.

Doesn't mean they're particularily smart for how they go about it though. I personally think a KNIGHT OF SELFLESS AND HOLY GOODNESS wouldn't be ranting about himself being such in the Underdark where creatures feast on paladins for brunch.

Inquisitor Paladins are free to do as they want in regards to detecting evil.

Doesn't mean they're particularily smart for how they go about it though. I personally think a KNIGHT OF SELFLESS AND HOLY GOODNESS wouldn't be ranting about himself being such in the Underdark where creatures feast on paladins for brunch.

Well Paladins are sort of a WIS based class. I think they should be smart enough to know that it's best not to give away your knowledge of your enemies to just anyone.

And as for being secretive over your disposition, I think Paladins should be open about their nature even in the Underdark. They're just that uncompromising.

I think we arrive at a similar conclusion, though for the exact opposite reasons.

The normal way for my paladin to handle detecting an evil party member, was to excuse himself, and then if any close friends of his were going on the quest, he would warn them to be careful around the person before he left. It usually worked pretty well, and seemed very IC.

Ladocicea And as for being secretive over your disposition, I think Paladins should be open about their nature even in the Underdark. They're just that uncompromising.

Also, paladins should take more action on chaotic characters, including CG chars, as evil and chaos is easily mixed up. To a radical paladin evil and chaos are the same thing and he will strive to eradicate both.

A righteous and just paladin who goes around saying “YOUR EVIL!” to every evil soul he detects is probably committing a sin depending on the deity, I know when I have a friend in game who is accused of being evil I usually go BALLISTIC on the paladin

“What do YOU mean he is evil? Who the hell are you to judge? Oh Lathander told you? I guess Lathander is busy telling you who is good and who is evil, while letting infants die of plague?”

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen on the board.

Thanks Vesa!

Why is that ridiculous? The "is proboably commiting a sin" is poorly stated, what I meant was to say, you can accuse the paladin of that IC.

Also, paladins should take more action on chaotic characters, including CG chars, as evil and chaos is easily mixed up. To a radical paladin evil and chaos are the same thing and he will strive to eradicate both.

If you don't like paladins pointing out the fact that your chaacter is evil don't play an evil character.

And as for being secretive over your disposition, I think Paladins should be open about their nature even in the Underdark. They're just that uncompromising.

If an evil character is going on a quest, I do the smart, IC and simple thing, I explain that I will not work with him/her, if the group trusts my paladin more, then they will tell the evil character he cannot come, if not, the paladin leaves. I know this may sound a little unfair for evil players, but news flash, it applies to paladins too, we also get booted off of quests because of this.

A righteous and just paladin who goes around saying “YOUR EVIL!” to every evil soul he detects is probably committing a sin depending on the deity

Arcaia Also, paladins should take more action on chaotic characters, including CG chars, as evil and chaos is easily mixed up. To a radical paladin evil and chaos are the same thing and he will strive to eradicate both.

This is not true. CG is upstart, E is mortal enemy. A Paladin would not try to eradicate a chaotic person, but perhaps to educate and civilize them. CG characters can be seen by Paladins as misled, creatures of habit, ignorant or innocent. This is not a warrant for their death, but at the same time, just because they don't show up on DE, it doesn't mean the Paladin must auto-like them.

Paladins have to be lawful. They uphold laws and such appropriate to their god. They would indeed find a chaotic person untrustworthy even if he was good aligned. Now, they wouldn't deal with it as they would an evil being. They would shy away from grouping or being around they no doubt because they do not uphold laws, they go around them and shrug them off.

A paladin probably views a CG character as the good-intentioned fool, who always manages to botch things up despite his apparently sincere efforts to make the world a better place. A reckless, potentially dangerous individual who is too confident in his own judgement to be a trustworthy ally. These are the people who arouse great annoyance, frustration and occasionally even anger in the paladin, the people who "just don't get it".

I'd imagine the paladin would first try to educate the CG character, and failing that, simply avoid their company, perhaps warning some others of their recklessness when the CG character is again about to do something stupid.

“What do YOU mean he is evil? Who the hell are you to judge? Oh Lathander told you? I guess Lathander is busy telling you who is good and who is evil, while letting infants die of plague?”

Then explain why clerics get spells... The gods do not move from a cleric to another, to grant them the spells they pray for, nor do they do a line-up to grant the prayers.

I just found it silly as an argument.

Wow, that grew up fast.. Let me do a summary of things,

A Paladin knows exactly who is evil when they detect.

It should not be the other way around. I think it's an OOC courtesy matter that you leave a party you've been invited into instead of holding a massive coup and ousting the evil person from the party.

I've also had this done to me and it basically meant I couldn't quest at all, ever,Where's the challenge?

If you want to be evil, hidden secret evil, stay the hell away from paladins. They are so easy to spot a mile away it's not even funny. Do NOT even put yourself in that situation.

And especially in a place where trust is hard to earn, this "paladin" could EASILY be a fraud.

*** My main point in this thread was : How to deal with the metagaming aspect of it, which surfaced quite often, I think it should be use with a little more 'class'; it's VERY good tool to know the 'intention' and 'motivation' behind a character's alignment straight away without talking to him, 'use it reasonably' ; I mean i hate the fact that people need to divide into groups; especially based on alignment!!!-!

having said this, I do feel OOC issues surround the detect evil ability, and even alignment in general. While I agree that good and evil etc. exist in the FR setting as concrete and almost tangible forces... I don't think the MAJORITY of the population would "know" their alignment.

Then explain why clerics get spells... The gods do not move from a cleric to another, to grant them the spells they pray for, nor do they do a line-up to grant the prayers.

I just found it silly as an argument.

Sorry, I haven't read much of this, on account of the answer being pretty simple, and not really worth debating.

The fact: Paladins can detect evil, unambiguously.

My opinion (and note that opinions among DMs differ - I obviously disagree with Lado here. We DO NOT ENFORCE "opinion". It's one of my favorite things about this server.):

Were I playing a paladin, I would absolutely oust evil people from any party I could. As Oro pointed out, it's rude. But, by ousting said evil people, you're saving your friends from possible corruption, and from possible backstabbing, and you're preventing the evil guy from gaining gold to fuel his nefarious plots.

Were I playing an evil person bent on remaining secretive, I would use Protection from Good, Clarity, Lesser Mind Blank, Mind Blank, and various other sundry tools that we've got on this server to foil Detect Evil.

We believe in OOC courtesy here, but if your character would do something, like kick evil out of a party, by all means go ahead and do it.

-Cross

yes. having discussed this on IRC, I have one more thing to add...

Paladins should be HARD to play because of the very reasons Crosswind mentioned above. The more dogmatic the paladin the less friends they will have. Its just something that comes along with the class. Just because you are a champion of good and righteousness, doesn't mean the average neutral aligned citizen or even other good characters, will like you.

first of all... what is EVIL? and what is GOOD?

you cant say, an EVIL character wont help GOOD one, and visa versa...

imagine two brothers, one good and one evil, (any of you read dragonlance?) i cant see a general reason for any case why they wont work together.

i will attend to some of the subtopics emerged here:

firstly, evil chars may want to purify their name (i know it was said already), as my char, for example (not evil, but it makes n diffrence), meldor, is a graverobber on the hidden hand, and protector on the exposed one.

secondly, he respects the paladins and their power to feel evil, thus, he more like, using them, to detect those who might threaten his safty... (he is cunning, and wouldnt like to take risks)

and how you can know one is really a paladin? simply: take one paladin, laying hands, and turning undead, and here is your proof for his true nature. besides, if you afried of one claiming being a paladin, what stops you from creating a false one? take one of your evil chars, to do it, claim you are a paladin, and trust about paladin will fall fast. this is the way of evil :P

My paladin went to lengths to keep his powers secret. He'd don gloves and treat them as if they were magic when he'd heal people, he'd turn undead but it was also a clerical power aside from a paladins.

My character had his reasons for keeping himself secret, but you can't simply see a character turning dead and know he's a paladin.

REMEMBER, paladins are supposed to be rare and unique, just like blackguards, their powers shouldn't be common knowledge, if they are, they should be grossly exagerated as if they were myths or fairy tales.

Staring Death

“What do YOU mean he is evil? Who the hell are you to judge? Oh Lathander told you? I guess Lathander is busy telling you who is good and who is evil, while letting infants die of plague?”

Then explain why clerics get spells... The gods do not move from a cleric to another, to grant them the spells they pray for, nor do they do a line-up to grant the prayers.

I just found it silly as an argument.

Right.

Except to everyone present except the paladin, all you have is the paladins word to go on. This is meant to instil doubt in all present about the paladin.

alogen first of all... what is EVIL? and what is GOOD?

you cant say, an EVIL character wont help GOOD one, and visa versa...

imagine two brothers, one good and one evil, (any of you read dragonlance?) i cant see a general reason for any case why they wont work together.

Perhaps, but let's remember; good and evil in FR aren't as we know them. People's real life motivations can be seen as complex and conflicts can be based entirely upon unfortunate circumstances rather than true malign intent.

That is not how FR good and evil works. Good and Evil are like elemental forces that battle constantly. Let's not get too carried away with good helping evil and evil helping good as if good and evil didn't exist as forces.

The alignment system is unrealistic, rigid and doesn't much allow for too much flexibility or change, and characters can't really be seen in a one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter way. It's not a great way of doing things, but it is the way we have to do things to make sense of the game.

REMEMBER, paladins are supposed to be rare and unique, just like blackguards, their powers shouldn't be common knowledge, if they are, they should be grossly exagerated as if they were myths or fairy tales.

And in which sourcebook does it say this? Blackguard is a PrC, Paladin is a base class. I think Paladins are more well known than you give them credit for.

That said, their powers shouldn't really be common knowledge, no, but the same can be said for Wizards in that a commoner would have no idea what a Wizard would be capable of.

My paladin went to lengths to keep his powers secret. He'd don gloves and treat them as if they were magic when he'd heal people, he'd turn undead but it was also a clerical power aside from a paladins.

My character had his reasons for keeping himself secret, but you can't simply see a character turning dead and know he's a paladin.

Ladocicea And in which sourcebook does it say this? Blackguard is a PrC, Paladin is a base class. I think Paladins are more well known than you give them credit for.

That said, I think it should be fairly obvious that paladins are a minority compared to most other base classes, wherever you go. They are champions of Good. Few people have what it takes to become one, even fewer actually train as paladins.

That is decietful though, lying is a breach of a paladins code, and even then, why would you go to lenghts to hide it. I can understand not making a sending declaring yourself a paladin for all of sanctuary to hear, but intentionally trying to hide it is not somthing a paladin would do. You forget that paladins do -not- fear evil.

Ivandur treaded a careful line with deceit, and I often got chaos shifts for it. He never outright lied, but he had no qualms with letting people think what they wished, even if it was wrong. In anycase, this really isn't about my character even though I could go on and on about him. My point is; People will play their characters differently.

Mort My main point in this thread was : How to deal with the metagaming aspect of it, which surfaced quite often, I think it should be use with a little more 'class'; it's VERY good tool to know the 'intention' and 'motivation' behind a character's alignment straight away without talking to him, 'use it reasonably' ; I mean i hate the fact that people need to divide into groups; especially based on alignment!!!

I've seen non-evil characters telling off a paladin because she brought attention to the evil auras of other present characters, and I've seen characters sending off a number of present evil characters because of a few words from a paladin. It's not an OOC issue.

Ladocicea wrote :

This is not true. CG is upstart, E is mortal enemy. A Paladin would not try to eradicate a chaotic person, but perhaps to educate and civilize them. CG characters can be seen by Paladins as misled, creatures of habit, ignorant or innocent. This is not a warrant for their death, but at the same time, just because they don't show up on DE, it doesn't mean the Paladin must auto-like them.

Sorry about that, I had the chaos harbinger in mind when I posted that.

I think a lot about this thread depends on the time and place when it happens, and the character's mentality, state of mind and that of those around him.

Anthee

I'd have to disagree with that. Fighter is a base class too, but are you honestly saying paladins are as common as fighters?

I don't know. You tell me. Did I say that?

Anthee

There may be fewer blackguards than paladins but that would be mostly because blackguards do not sit well in organized society, for rather obvious reasons. Not because the path to become a blackguard would be more demanding than the path to become a paladin.

But it just is. Look in your manual and check out all the prereqs for each of these. Paladins don't need feats, skills or BAB bonus levels (basically, levels). This means that anyone becoming a Blackguard has to first be a certain level for the BAB (about 8 I think? That's a lot of people out already. If we're taking EfU as a microcosm of the FR universe, 80-90% of people out already), have the feats and possibly be a multiclassed rogue/fighter for comfortable hide points, or be an even higher level fighter. Paladins can start as a Paladin at level one.

Obviously if a PrC demands a certain level, certain feats and certain skillpoints a lesser number of people will be able to take it than a class that demands LG and a Paladin Deity.

This has gone horribly off topic now. Partly my fault. If the person below me can't add anything to the initial post and point of this thread, I'll just lock it since we've clearly discussed this to death.

STELLAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

sorry, it was too perfect.

Its not that Paladins are outright "you are evil, you die, you are chaotic, submit to the law or perish" types. I don't think paladins are really suppose to actually kill any sentient creature unless truly neccessary. They simply can't group with these people because it would lead to things breaking their code. If a chaotic good character started using torture on one of the enemies or destroying property, then the Paladin should confront him about this as well, and if the person doens't comply then the paladin should force out the character or leave himself. Much like the police officer vs. the vigilante.

I hope that helped the "chaotic" questions.

Lado and I -do- agree that Inquisitor is way off base here. =)

There are dozens of Paladin Orders in FR. Paladin schools which crank out neophyte paladins. A dozen deities all of whom have their own paladins.

There are no equivalent Blackguard organizations.

-Cross

But then again with their reputation do you really think they would want it public knowlage that they have a "monestary" dedicated to churning out evil do'ers? If you look at the past editions of D&D there are heaps of bits and peices that wernt in them then as to now, whats saying the next edition wont have Black guard monestaries. Just because you cant see something dosnt meen it dosnt exist. Myself personally, i believe that black guard should be made a starting class as the anti-palidin but thats my thoughts.

{read over it and i appologise for continuing with the slightly off topic debate}

I did say I'd lock this if no one could add anything meaningful to the initial post.