A paladin guide I found

[Thomas_Not_very_wise]

It's not Easy being Good

by Roger E. Moore

There is a custom-made T-shirt in my closet that depicts a Red Dragon, clutching a full stomach and in some distress, with the caption “Paladins Cause Heartburn.” This phrase has more meaning for me as a Dungeon Master and as a player in AD&D™ games than just as a sight gag. In my three years of gaming, it has been a rare thing to see a properly characterized Paladin, or even one that’s done at least reasonably right most of the time. Unlike other character classes in AD&D games, the restrictions on the Paladin class give it a wealth of special problems in play.

Certainly no one would enjoy being a character that is so hemmed in by regulations and restrictions that he or she comes across as humorless, dry and nitpicky about minor details. Paladins can be friendly, jocular, and basically happy people (and probably should be), but there are limits. It’s in the nature of the game. People who don’t care to play Paladins (or other Lawful Good characters) as the rules outline them should really choose another class more suited to them, and consider the reasons for doing so. Few people respect and like to game with persons who cheat (and a Paladin who is greedy, refuses to take risks, lets danger fall on everyone else, and has twenty-eight types of Holy Swords is definitely cheating). DMs should, can, and (most of the time) do penalize this sort of behavior. In my time as a DM I’ve removed three or four Paladinhoods, encouraged two to retirement, and even removed one Anti-Paladin from his status for committing a good act.

Some of the basic questions about using Paladins as player characters involve what sort of things should be approved of, what should be avoided, and what kinds of actions constitute evil or chaotic acts. Perhaps the greatest enemy of Paladins in the game is cultural relativity. Maybe anthropologists can study a tribe of cannibals and find their culinary practices reasonable, at least for the cannibals, but Paladins of any religion would have to disapprove. The killing and eating of human beings or any other intelligent beings, even orcs, is not a good act by AD&D standards. It at least borders on being evil, depending on the situation.

Please remember, too, that this is a game, and it postulates the existence of fundamental absolutes like Good and Evil, Law and Chaos. There are few “gray areas.” Smoking or taking hallucinogenic substances, indulging in casual sex, and going against the grain of society, regardless of what the person playing the Paladin thinks of those actions, are in no way a part of the world of Paladinhood in the game. They shouldn’t be no matter who is the DM, either. Using hallucinogens destroys the clarity of the mind and its attachment to reality, leaving the Paladin open to inadvertently committing an evil or chaotic act, or being unable to deal with an emergency. Casual sex, of course, is chaotic and to be avoided (though I’ve known several Paladins who would give their Holy Swords to get away with it).

Law implies permanence and few changes, and it further implies long-term relationships and love when connected to good. Law also implies obeying the rules of society and working within a system to make things work out for the better. Paladins can and should break laws that violate the tenets of Lawful Good, like slavery and the “right” to torture prisoners. In basically good societies, though, Paladins would be expected to go along with the rules of their church and state, as long as they don’t conflict with each other.

There is a small chance that a Paladin character will be confronted with a situation in which many of the members of his or her church actually turn away from being Lawful Good; the Paladin is not then obligated to follow the rules they hand down that aren’t lawful or good, but is still required to be Lawful Good himself or herself. In all cases like this, the Paladin’s deity can and should back up the Paladin’s actions as long as they are correct, though the deity’s help might prove to be indirect.

There are lots of other ways in which Paladins can become ensnared in chaos or evil. Conceit is one (“Boy, I’m hotter than a Salamander’s pitchfork now! I’m really something else!”), and it’s one of the most common pitfalls. Humility is the virtue that should be nurtured. Paladins may be more powerful and more effective than most other members of an adventuring party, but they should have a sense of their own limitations, and their place in the Scheme of Things. Related to this is the tendency seen in a number of Paladins to become arrogant (“Get outta my way, peasant! Do you know who you’re dealing with?”) An excessive display of either conceit or arrogance is a transgression and merits severe penalties.

The hunger for power and more material wealth is another of the many deadly temptations in Paladinhood. There’s nothing wrong with desiring a better sword; demons and devils, to name just a couple of types of traditional Paladin adversaries, cannot be hit with non-magical weapons, so acquiring magical ones is important and necessary in the long run. But having magical weapons for their own sake, just because one wants to look as decorated as a Christmas tree in front of all the local peons, is wrong. It’s what one intends to do with what one has or wants that counts.

A related problem that will be run up against by nearly all Paladins is the limit on the number of magical items that may be owned by them. This rule gets violated all the time. I looked over one person’s character sheet (for a Paladin) and noted something on the order of twenty-odd magical items. When I asked him why he had so many when he was only allowed so few, he replied, “I only use a few of them. The rest are out on loan.”

No dice. I gave him five minutes or so to dump all but his “legal” amount of magic, or else become a normal Fighter. Things worked out after that. Excess magic should be given to other Lawful Good players or donated to the nearest temple of the Paladin’s religion. Lawful Good NPC’s may also receive excess magic, whether they are the Paladin’s henchmen or not, but the Paladin cannot go around borrowing things afterwards.

Constant association with Neutral characters is an abused area; sometimes an entire party, with the exception of the player bringing a Paladin, may be Neutrally aligned. In cases like this another character should be substituted for the Paladin unless there is something really extreme going on (like a quest to save a church, High Priest, or holy artifact). This is part of the breaks of being a Paladin. The company you keep will reflect on you.

Associating with evil characters in any way in a friendly manner is EVIL. If a Paladin character becomes aware that one of the party members is actually evil in alignment, then a confrontation is inevitable. The Paladin will be required to have nothing to do with the evil person or persons, with the possible exception of taking the person into custody if an evil act is committed by that person.

Paladins meet evil persons all the time in their daily business, even just walking down the street, but don’t associate with them. There’s nothing wrong with compiling all the information one can get on local evil sorts, and on other evil-aligned player-characters, for future reference in crimefighting. One can use informants, direct questioning, and judicious surveillance and spying (though this last endeavor might prove questionable if done too often).

Note again that a confrontation will be inevitable for a Paladin and another evil player. Once a Paladin is aware that evil exists, he cannot turn his eyes away from it; that’s not just cowardly, it’s wrong. On the other hand, a Paladin cannot just slay every evil person he or she meets. That’s wrong, too, unless every evil person one meets is trying to kill the Paladin or someone else. Somehow, in one way or the other, the ends of evil must be undone.

Killing is a difficult topic to address with regard to Paladins. This article does not deal with the question of whether killing in real life is evil or not. In an AD&D game, however, there are many creatures whose whole existence is evil and cannot be undone by any means short of a Wish (and even that may not be possible). Undead of any sort, evil dragon types, and all demons, devils, and daemons deserve (from a Paladin’s point of view) no other fate than utter and absolute destruction. Sparing them is evil. Sometimes little more can be done than to send the creature back to its home plane, in the case of the demons, devils, and daemons, but if the situation permits they should be slain by whatever means are at hand so that no further harm may be done by them. There is no quarter and no prisoners are taken.

Other beings, like Beholders and Mind Flayers, will also fit pretty well into this category. No amount of polite talk and reasoning will convince an Intellect Devourer to be a nice guy. The sword is the only answer. When orcs, trolls, and so forth are encountered, the same applies. They are evil, there are deities who make a living at keeping them evil, and there’s not much more to say. Perhaps the only exceptions one could make to killing evil monsters would be if they surrendered; the Paladin could then tie them up or whatever and march them off to the nearest authorities to stand trial or be imprisoned.

Not all of the problems Paladin-players encounter in this area of whether killing is right or not are the player’s fault. Sometimes a DM will set up a situation in which, for example, the Lawful Goods have slain all the males of a tribe of Werewolves, and all that’s left are the females and young, who cower in the rocks and refuse to fight. Civilization is hundreds of miles away and no means exists at the moment to render the captives free of lycanthropy. If released, the young will grow up and terrorize the neighborhood again. If they are kept as captives, the party will be severely hampered and may meet new monsters at any moment.

Killing the captives could well be the only alternative the Paladin is left with, yet if done the DM might say it was evil and remove the player’s alignment and status as a Paladin. A touchy situation, right? The DM should keep well in mind how he or she would react if placed in the same situation in the game, essentially trapped with no way out. It isn’t fair, and the players will know it and resent it. If captives must be slain, it should be done quickly, without torture, and with the assurance that there was no way to avoid it.

If a Paladin does have prisoners and they can be disposed of by turning them over to other authorities, and this won’t unreasonably endanger innocent people, then killing them out of hand could rate as an ungood act. The DM is the final arbiter of such matters.

As far as using poison, killing innocent people or beasts, or torturing goes, any of that spells doom for Paladinhood. If a radically evil act is committed by a Paladin, I roll percentile dice for the deity’s reaction, giving a 5% chance that in addition to removing Paladinhood, the god kills the ex-Paladin as well. One Paladin has gone out this way while I was a DM, after butchering some Wereboars who were having a campout with the party. He vanished in a bolt of lightning. So much for that.

In dealing with Neutrals, it would be better for the Paladin to focus on using ways other than killing to accomplish goals. One Paladin in our group encountered a Dryad who tried to charm some of the players right after the group had rescued her from being ravished by a bunch of nasty, unwashed orcs. The Paladin punched the Dryad in the nose and she fled.

While the group (and myself, who was the DM) was shocked by this, in retrospect it might have been a little strong but it was right. She had her life and a bloody nose to show for attempting to kidnap party members. By Lawful Good standards she could have done a lot worse. Though I had the Paladin chastised for this, I think now I shouldn’t have and should have let it stand (perhaps I should have congratulated him; he had a Vorpal Sword and might have used it, but that response would have been too strong and not good). Of course, when confronted by a band of wild bandits or buccaneers (all Neutral) you can’t just punch them in the nose and settle things. Again, the sword might be a reasonable answer.

As for what Paladins do believe in and practice, they like friendships, law and order, charity, sharing personal dedication to high goals and standards, chains of command, obedience to orders, honesty and truth, and taking joy in being alive. Paladins want to find more allies of Lawful Good alignment and establish assurances of mutual aid in case of danger to one or the other. Permanence, tradition, and predictability are pursued. If you feel the need of a role model in figuring out what else Paladins might approve of, think of John Wayne (making some appropriate substitutions in taking him out of the Old West), or read Three Hearts and Three Lions by Poul Anderson. This book could have formed much of the basis for putting Paladins into the AD&D game; Holger Carlsen (Giants in the Earth, Dragon #49) is a Paladin if he is anything. Other examples, like King Arthur or Sir Lancelot, might help as well.

Finally, the DM can make use of several methods to bring Paladin characters into line with their alignment, if such nudging is needed. Reduction or withholding of experience points from an adventure, being unable to use Lawful Good-aligned swords without some difficulties (like back-talk from the weapon if it is intelligent), negative reactions from the Paladin’s horse, henchmen, or hirelings, or direct warnings from the Paladin’s deity can prove helpful if the Paladin contemplates an evil or chaotic act.

The DM should bear in mind the difficulties involved in being a Paladin, and should make an effort to not make things worse for the player by setting him or her up for defeat in some sort of morality trap. Remember that being good isn’t being stupid, either, and Paladins should not be made to take on more than they can bear. “Banzai” attacks without hope of accomplishing anything (like attacking a Type VI demon with a pocketknife) are ridiculous. Low-level Paladins should get challenging, low-level monsters to fight; retreating from tougher monsters is smart and good, if the player plans to come back and smash the villains when he/she gets tougher later on.

I’ve had a lot of misgivings in my gaming experience about having Paladins in the game at all, but in general a well played Paladin is about the best character that the AD&D rules have to offer. It is also the hardest to play, and it takes a lot of dedication to play it well. The guy whose Paladin punched the Dryad in the nose played the best Paladin I ever saw; though he would “toe the line” adjacent to Chaos or Neutrality from time to time, his Paladin was basically a good one.

And that is perhaps the highest compliment a Paladin can get.

I found this very helpful and insightful when I think about lawful good characters, as well as paladins.

[Egon the Monkey]

The guide makes it a lot clearer how you can avoid feeling obligated to duel everyone you get a Detect Evil result for, or having to pick fights you can't win. My biggest roadblock to playing a pally really has been "But how do I deal with all the Evil Lords etc there's no chance of wiping out, or with a necromancer taunting me to my face with a zombie, knowing I can't smite it without getting arrested?". Still though, the problem is obvious traps like that and the existence of slavery in the setting, and how to avoid that inevitably causing every paladin to get killed trying to stop such?

Players of successful EfU paladins, tips please.

[Letsplayforfun]

The advice given here is certainly sound, but paladins are a lot more easier to play in PnP than in a videogame setting.

PnP allows you to move 'out of the setting', ie not to stay in a town controlled by slavers or necromancers. PnP allows a player to chat with a DM more casually before the PC does an action, to make sure it's 'ok'. PnP allows detect evil to be interpreted by the DM, too. It allows the leadership aspect of pallies to shine with peasants, while it can't with NPCs when a DM is not around. I recall a time when pallies -had to- have 17-18 CHA, which is not a requirement in NWN. In PnP, my players had to do some holy quest to become pallies, not just 'claim to be'.

Etc.

I also think EfUA does not promote LG PCs like EfU could (democracy vs tyranny for example), but the sandbox is open for LG PCs to shine, too.

Divine classes also have a problem of being all gathered chaotically, while in PnP kingdoms more or less are 'aligned' with the local lord promoting one major religion, and outlawing opposite ones. I've yet to see a cleric or pally try to convert the duke ;)

Magic in general is not 'impressive' in EfU. Spells are common, and people using gods powers are just like mr next guy. No one even bothers to awwe upon using a raise dead scroll. On this note, i'm bugged when people acknowledge clerics casting without a doubt, but when a pally says he detects evil, everyone goes 'boooo, you can't know that'. Good PCs that know someone is a pally, but suddenly don't believe him just to be able to get on a quest train do irk me. Pallies accepting coins for helping children or poor farmers is just mehhh.

Personnally i'd have pallies app only, to keep them a rare breed, with a real divine eye upon them, just like Aasimars. I've even special events for them, which a few players have already tried, but all have failed till now. Come on try your luck ;)

My usual 2c

[GoblinSapper]

Having played good characters in darker settings (in Soviet Ravenloft, Evil is gouging you from shell!)I felt I was pretty ready to play a paladin here (Jason Cross) and thus far it has been tense but rewarding.
 
The magic item limit is a 2.0 rule and I don't think applies here, since NWN runs off 3.0. It's also hilariously unrealistic since a Paladin will never recieve the personal attention he would during a PnP game.
 
Limiting association with Neutral Characters is also laughable, as a Paladin has no way besides spending time with them to discern they are neutral. In general my Paladin will associate with anyone who is not evil to a point he can more closely discern their alignment. He will then attempt to redeem that person at any availible opportunity, as with - if I may use a real example - his constantly philsophical discussions with Baily Bhonn, or his debate over order v freedom with the Akadi priest Windbag.
 
In general, associating with evil PC's is completly out. Won't travel with them, won't buy goods from them. If given an opportunity he will try to redeem faintly evil people, or operate with faintly evil people on a quest of great importance to provide them an example of what to aspire to be. Confronted with anyone Moderatly evil or more he will depart, and anyone diametrically opposed to his ideals and god will be avoided and noted for further confrontation -  I.E., the Velsharans.
 
Thats one of the stickier parts of being a Paladin, right there. In a PnP setting, these characters would be antagonists - they wouldn't mix as PC's in a campaign, either everyone would be evil or everyone would be good. For the sake of common sense, as well as OOC consideration for the feelings of others, you can't run around PKing everyone whose evil, even if they're really, really evil. My own Paladin has engaged with public debates with the Valsharans, made it quite clear he's hostile to their goals, and generally avoids them whilst seeking a means to bring about their destruction in addition to his innumerable OTHER responsibilities. Outright attacking/pvping them would be a recipe for self destruction and a foolish waste of his life, but they can't be allowed to walk free unhindered. A Paladin has to be careful to always be positioning themselves for what they consider an inevitable confrontation with evil - there is no ignoring or co-existance, only delay for the sake of perperation. My own Paladin is constantly circling the many evils here, preparing for them to destroy him or for him to strike at them.
 
Self Destruction is something important to consider though. It may be because he is Kelemvorian, but my Palaidn has a strong fatalistic streak. Death in the service of duty is no failure - the righteous can never fail, for it is each of our responsibilities to hurl ourselves bodily at evil and attack it, stop it, make the shadows afraid. A Paladin, much like a Samurai, has to be comfortable with the idea that their death is inevitable. It is the ultimate extension or even goal of their profession. Very, very few Paladins live to a ripe old age, and it shouldn't even be considered. You are going to die, the how is up to you. With this in mind, My Paladin doesn't throw his life away, but must be prepared to gladly surrender it for his code, knowing that however ignoble his defeat seems, it is the wicked that truly lose. If a Necromancer taunts you with his Zombie, you destroy that zombie and damn the consequences - a Good Paladin shouldn't feel beholdened to the Dominions laws within about five minutes of studying them anyhow. If a LVL 10 Blackguard challenges your LVL 3 paladin to a fight to the death, you accept. What do you have to fear? You die in the service to your God, reward awaits you, and the people must know that evil is to be confronted not feared.
 
A paladin is never without things to worry about or do. Aside from adventuring to slay monsters, which is a holy duty for you, you must also contend with-
 
The corrupt, oppressive government
Slavery
Drug Smugglers
The financial depravity and suffering of the docks
The chaos of the docks
State Approved Necromancy
The Upcoming War on Nature
 
My Paladin is attemtping to bring together disparate goodly or at least Non Evil groups into an Alliance, manuevering himself to fight slavery, fight the necromancers, fight corruption and disorder and drugs in the docks, protect the woods, and break or redeem the Dukedom.
 
I'll have to add "Convert the Duke" to that list, Letsplay.
 
The biggest piece of advice I can give to any Paladin and any Paladin player is not to despair. Often it'll feel like the whole world is against you, that things are wholly given over to evil. You can't adventure with most, come into IC conflict many groups simply by existing, and are obligated by your code to be poor or of humble means - a Paladin is never wealthy or successful. But every time I feel like i'm screwed, that things are totally down and it's time to gear up for a Kamikazi ride on the forces of Darkness caus this shits going down, I run into other good aligned PC's who are like "A Paladin! Awesome! Lets go gouge evil from it's shell for great justice!" And my paladin is like "NO WAI! SWEET!"
 
General Paladin Tips not already covered in this long ramble:
 
Tithe. 10% of your income, every time you get some, donate it to the Hallway of Hope. I've tithed to the Hallway as well as the docks communal fund.
 
Be Real. Your paladin is not a stiff charicture. He/She has a softer, more human side. My own Paladin is stiff and unhumored towards evil, but jokes with those he knows to be good - for instance, about the worthy of virtues of Pie as a motivation to commit goodly acts ("FOR PIE AND GREAT JUSTICE!"), joking with another man about women ("It's always the pretty ones that radiate pure evil"). He also has a sarcastic, smartassed nature he rarely lets surface - only a Necromancer has really felt the sting of his tongue and taunt ranks. When depressed, he tends to become fatalistic and even pessimistic ("Lets see if anyone actually shows up." being a common phrase when waiting for anything) Remember to be all business when it comes to duty though.
 
Establish Motivation. Why is your paladin, a Paladin? What drives them to do these things? My own Paladin is driven by watching his parents die, and knowing the wicked escaped justice and possibly were never punished for it. That survivors guilt, the anguish of the injustice done to him, his own very human anger and bitterness he tries to deal with every day, drives him to be Batman in Fullplate.
 
In the end, Paladin is the class that most influences how the character acts. Fighters, Wizards, bards and others can all be very different from each other in values and motives. Paladins have different origins and different faiths, but share goals and values. You have to balance 'the character' and 'the paladin' together, because being too much of one over the other makes the character unrealistic, unfun, and frankly not a very good Paladin.
 
Remember. Your playing someone whose a goddamn hero. In real life they'de be in the army, or a cop, or a firefighter, putting their life on the line for total strangers who might even hate them, because it's the RIGHT THING TO DO.

[Barehander]

I'm naturally suspicious of any guides telling me how to play. Especially bothersome is that they give the air of authority by virtue of their format. If the same things were presented in a conversation you could reply to, I would be much more comfortable.

I've spent countless hours studying and writing about paladins. I just can't drop it when Somebody's Wrong on the Internet, so I'm not even going to start discussing paladins in detail here. If you're interested, though, I've written a bunch of short articles/descriptions on paladins of individual deities and how they are likely to react to specific situations. (Tyrrans enforcing legal slavery in Calimshan, Hoarrans having to accept their superiors animating Revenants, Oghmanytes having to let evil bards go on about their business, etc. All strictly based on canon sources and logical deduction.)

I'll say this much, though: remember that you're not playing a paladin who happens to have a personality. You're playing a character who happens to be a paladin. That's why I hate OOC discussions on how paladins "should" act. Your PC should act as his personality and situation dictates, to his own best understanding and effort. The player should not be concerned to make sure his paladin PC stays on the straight and narrow, that should be the PC's concern only. So be true to your character, not his class. If in the process your character fails to uphold his paladin duties, that's good character developement and up to DMs to decide. Embrace it if it comes, IMO.

[GoblinSapper]

I disagree that a Paladin, even a Tyran would ever tolerate slavery unless it was a very specific and highly regulated sort, where the slaves were all criminals and violent lawbreakers and were treated with a regulated amount of fairness whilst being forced to labor for the social good - IE, the ideal no system of slavery has ever lived up to EVER.
 
Hoar, being a diety of vengence, doesn't sound like great Paladin material either but the conflict makes sense. I don't think they'de just ACCEPT it though.
 
Oghma is a TN diety, can he even have Paladins?
 
I completly agree with your final assessment though. It's important remember for characterization as well as your own sanity that your not playing a Paladin, your playing a character that happens to be a Paladin.
 
PS: I'd be interested in looking at anything you had for Paladins of Kelemvor, to compare notes to.

[Howlando]

Nice post GoblinSapper. :-)

[Thomas_Not_very_wise]

Wow-

Goblinsapper, that was amazing.

[Winston Martin]

Thanks for the post TNVW I enjoyed it.

[derfo]

Thanks for the post TNVW I enjoyed it.

[TheImpossibleDream]

I'm glad this finally clears up the "alignment of casual sex" debate.

[GoblinSapper]

I'm glad this finally clears up the "alignment of casual sex" debate.

Thats another thing. The OHNOEZ CASUAL SEX IS EVIL thing is a very western, christian ideal. Something that doesn't exist in Faerun, because there's no Catholic Church (except the Church of Helm, BADUMPTSH).
 
Chaotic, i'm more willing to accept that. I do like that he didn't try to specify paladins had to be married and have a ring spotwelded to their gauntlets. In practice a Paladin is very unlikly to ever, ever marry because of the traditionally dangerous and errant style of life they lead - lots of travel, lots of certain death. Battlefield hookups with trusted companions and freinds are far more likly.
 
What a paladin DOESN'T do is hook up with some hotchick in a bar. If a Paladin shares intimacy, it's a sign of deep trust and care for that person. That doesn't mean a Paladin doesn't likey teh sexytimes, they may like thems very muches! But, the self control to not think with your winky is likly endemic to the discipline required to be a paladin. Also, no Catholic church, so self gratification isn't a sin. Which probably helps.
 
In the end, it probably varies highly by their faith. A Paladin of Sune is going to be a bit 'easier' then a Paladin of Helm, simply because of the dictates and values of the faith.

[TheImpossibleDream]

Word.

[GoblinSapper]

To add an amusing cap to this heroic story, my paladin was challenged to a duel by the forces of evil today and died.
 
It was kind of a kick to the gut, I won't lie, but at the same time it's something I was going to force myself to deal with, because thats part of living by the code, Make an example for others and all that wot.
 
 
 
 
 
He got better though!

[Meldread]

Just for clarification purposes, the article wasn't implying that casual sex was evil.  Rather, the article explicitly stated that casual sex was chaotic.  

Casual sex, of course, is chaotic[/u] and to be avoided (though I’ve known several Paladins who would give their Holy Swords to get away with it).

Although, I would offer a caveat for certain deities.  I don't think anything should be written in stone.  It might be possible, for example, for a Paladin of Sune to have multiple partners - especially if they are wives / husbands - and it's explicitly condoned by both the Church and the Deity.

Similarly, it might be possible for a Paladin of Horus-Re to own slaves, since the Church of Horus-Re condones slavery.  However, there are -very- high standards in how you deal with a slave.

Slavery is the act of depriving an individual of their freedom, and thus exists on the chaos - law axis.  However, the way you treat your slave exists on the good - evil axis.  Feudalism, for example, in which an individual is directly tied to the land is an act of slavery as well.  In feudalism a surf can be bought and sold along with the land as if they were a commodity, and if a surf attempts to leave the land without the blessing of the lord who owns the land it is fully within the lords right to capture and punish the surf.  (*  Note this is not true in Cormyr, in which peasants / surfs have various rights.)

While such an action may be condoned by Horus-Re and his church, such an action would be strongly opposed by Ilmater and his church.  It is little things such as this that allows a Paladin of one deity to be in direct conflict with another.  It allows Paladins, which largely have identical codes and standards which they must live up too (because in D&D good, evil, law, and chaos are absolutes), to have variations and even strong, perhaps even violent, conflicts with one another.

I'm largely in agreement with most of what is written in the article.  That which I pointed out above is the exception, not the rule.