|
Post by chaiguy on Feb 1, 2013 1:03:44 GMT -6
My first reaction to the paladin discussion was "I'm not playing a paladin, so I don't care", but then again as a druid player the way the alignment system works out will have a big influence on my character. On the Paizo boards there are many paladin alignment threads, less druid alignment threads though, but they still have an alignment restriction. I guess Orboros will have to spend plenty of time in the wilderness contemplating neutralness.
In closing to quote Zapp Brannigan: What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
|
|
|
Post by Frostrazor on Feb 1, 2013 1:20:22 GMT -6
while i dont disagree with you that killing is not good, i do believe that that the notion of fantasy rpgs when first conceived was to help erase that gray philosophical fine line. by introducing a tangible good vs evil premise of monsters and demons etc it allows for more acceptance that the destruction of evil is not inherently a misdeed.
if we harkon back to tolkiens writing, the orcs and goblins epitomized all things that were evil. they were incapable of love, compassion, empathy. they never created anything beautiful. their only creations were meant to destroy others. there were no "good goblins" that forced us to consider the philosophical ramifications of actions or the psychology of what creates evil: nuture vs nature etc. there were no drizzt orcs. in fact it was quite biblical kn this theme. D&D was definitely originally inspired in many ways by The Professor's writings
my point is that the lines have blurried over the years as we expanded the game from a pure, good vs evil simplicity to one involving more real world politics, philosophy, and rationalization. sometimes less is more. i think in many ways rpgs is another of those instances. it once was so much simpler. and the killing of evil was a good act in the structure of the game. in the real world this is not true
|
|
wyldethorne
New Member
Ambassador of Aeternum
Posts: 19
|
Post by wyldethorne on Feb 1, 2013 1:57:53 GMT -6
Ending a creature's life is never Good. It may be Neutral, at best (carnivore kills prey for food--that's Neutral), but more often in the context of what I see in RPG's I'd classify it as Evil. The "kill everything and take the stuff; they're the bad guys so it doesn't matter" mentality has numbed people to the concept that taking a life has meaning. Now, I eat meat (love me some tasty venison), so I'm not some hippy herbivore or some such. I do however have very strong feelings on how gaming/entertainment has really warped too many peoples' sense of right and wrong. That is a well thought out argument. I intend to play as truly neutral a Druid as I can, so for me, a lot of this is moot, but for the handful that wish to be "Paladins" it is something to consider. Paladins are supposed to be extremely rare, so maybe this is part of why they are gearing the system in the direction that they are?
|
|
|
Post by Erian El'ranelen on Feb 1, 2013 6:57:05 GMT -6
I definitely support any push that makes paladins more rare--they are, for me, a pinnacle class rather than just fighters with cleric powers.
There was absolutely a more black and white view of alignment in the early days. Now however, and probably at least since the rise of Vampire, many game companies push the gray areas. As I game with my son, I want him to understand that picking off human bandits "since they're bad" shouldn't be the easy go-to answer for Good. To assist in this, I do indeed use many Evil by nature creatures (outsiders, undead, etc.) so he has some targets, but also offer options for settling conflict without killing targets when necessary. He surprised me in a game two sessions back when they beat a Wolf That Walks (just a warg I made bipedal). One of the group wanted to kill it (one of my older male friends). My son said no, we should return it to the wolf pack that it had been attacking since they had the right to pass judgment. Maybe there's hope....
Also, as a RL note I wanted to say my grandfather was a Marine in Korea, my dad was in the Navy, and my father-in-law was an Air Force heavies pilot in Vietnam. I work for the VA and support our fighting men and women any chance I get. I say this as I don't want any of our military folks thinking I see their job in a negative light. Indeed, I think they have one of the hardest jobs on the planet, and my sense of right and wrong with regard to taking life was formed very much by my grandfather's direction and stories about Korea.
|
|
|
Post by Frostrazor on Feb 1, 2013 11:36:06 GMT -6
I definitely support any push that makes paladins more rare--they are, for me, a pinnacle class rather than just fighters with cleric powers. This is something I agree with - at least idealistically. The reality is that paladins have been reduced to mere fighters with cleric abilities by the game mechanics. I doubt PF online will make this any different - if character classes have any role at all. When first presented to AD&D, paladins were VERY rare; why? They needed a 17 charisma as a minimum requirement, as well as minimum wisdom, con, and strength. Plus they were restricted to Lawful-Good alignment coupled a whole host of permanent penalties if you do ANYTHING outside that alignment. Complete stripping of the paladins powers and reducing him to just a fighter who is never allowed to specialize in a weapon. Paladins were hard to qualify for, and hard to play. They were rare. Gone are the restrictions of the Charisma requirement (or any stat requirement for that matter), the alignment system is ignored by half of the gaming groups out there, and they've made it easier to atone for the problems if a paladin should make a bad move. Pathfinder took it a step further and removed the restriction that "Paladins may never collaborate with evil beings." This is because most of the APs written by Paizo require some measure of working with the 'lesser of two evils.'. Even going all the way back to Shackled City (Dungeon Magazine). Modern style of multi-media makes this type of having work with a corrupt/evil being to make a worse evil being lose power, a staplepoint in video games, RPG modules, comic books, movies, etc. In order for players who love to play paladins to be able to take part in the adventures written by Paizo, this restriction had to be removed - or the adventures would just unravel. 4th edition D&D then removed even the LG alignment restriction. So while I agree in my heart that I think paladins should be revered as you mention, and wish they were still consider the champions of all champions, they unfortunately are just another character class and are no longer "special." For me - it's been hard to accept for the paladin has always been my absolute favorite class. And as a huge fan of Superman, I identify them as quite similar. Unflinching in his morals, his ethics, his honor. There is no lesser of two evils in that mindset. Very black and white, just like the paladin, just like old school RPGs were designed to play as. Many would say that it's just not practical and is too naive to think that can still exist. Perhaps so - but just because it's easier to go with the lesser of two evils, doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
Post by Erian El'ranelen on Feb 1, 2013 12:44:58 GMT -6
That's definitely a good summary of the paladin "fall from grace" over the years. I also have fond memories of trying to qualify for the original Bard (I've always loved Celtic flavored bits in my RPG).
It sounds like Dancey, at least, is on board with pushing Paladins back into the Lawful Good paragon role, so maybe there's hope for the old-school concept in PFO.
|
|
|
Post by Frostrazor on Feb 1, 2013 13:07:15 GMT -6
That's definitely a good summary of the paladin "fall from grace" over the years. I also have fond memories of trying to qualify for the original Bard (I've always loved Celtic flavored bits in my RPG). It sounds like Dancey, at least, is on board with pushing Paladins back into the Lawful Good paragon role, so maybe there's hope for the old-school concept in PFO. Most likely the thing that will make them challenging to play will be a restriction alignment, that the game can and will enforce shifting of alignment. The player will have to truly consider his actions. So long as they're equipped with some nice powerful abilities to offset this restriction, I would still love to play one. But then again, it's suppose to be a class-less system, so I'm not so sure who that can be pulled off.
|
|
|
Post by Dario Tashavan on Feb 1, 2013 13:09:03 GMT -6
By placing the restriction on Paladin-archetype abilities, such that you lose access to them if you fall from LG.
|
|
|
Post by Frostrazor on Feb 1, 2013 13:12:13 GMT -6
By placing the restriction on Paladin-archetype abilities, such that you lose access to them if you fall from LG. And that would work - but the ability has to be slightly better than most other abilities (in the game) to warrant being restricted to possibly losing access to it. Which I'm okay with - I've played enough paladins to know how to portray the part; even in a video game.
|
|
clannagh
Junior Member
Human Cleric of Gorum
Posts: 60
|
Post by clannagh on Feb 2, 2013 5:35:18 GMT -6
The controversial parts of that thread are EVIL players wanting the right to attack anyone without consequnce (afterall they are evil) and LG players wanting the right to attack any EVIL player (even a non-combat merchant or crafter) without consequence. In my opinion these people just want a red versus blue battle server, a bit like WoW with two easily defined opposing sides that simply battle it out on sight. It is unlikely they will get that. Nevertheless it may be circumspect to make any crafting/merchant characters Neutral on the evil/good axis One interesting point with Paladins is whether we can train Paladin skills at all? It is not clear whether a NG settlement can train Paladins, potentially it may be limited to LG only.
|
|
|
Post by Dario Tashavan on Feb 2, 2013 7:22:23 GMT -6
I would say it wouldn't surprise me if, as a NG settlement, we can't train paladins. It also won't particularly upset me.
|
|
|
Post by Hroderich Gottfrei on Feb 3, 2013 10:07:02 GMT -6
I'd like to be able to train paladins (at least some of the way), but I wouldn't be surprised if we couldn't capstone them.
|
|
|
Post by Gintigael Gemweaver on Feb 3, 2013 10:52:39 GMT -6
Are we talking about having buildings that train NPC paladins like original Warcraft? or buildings where players buy training? cause I don't think players get training at buildings, I think they get training out in the field, doing what they are training for. Am I wrong about this?
|
|
|
Post by Dario Tashavan on Feb 3, 2013 15:34:22 GMT -6
They've constantly alluded to settlements having facilities for training certain things. Specifically how you won't find Paladin training in chaotic settlements, but you probably won't find much lockpick training or rage power training in lawful ones.
|
|
|
Post by Hroderich Gottfrei on Feb 3, 2013 15:51:56 GMT -6
A NG settlement will likely be able to train most skills to middling level - capstones for chaotic/lawful stuff will likely have to be paid for elsewhere. Maybe through an agreement with such organizations. Most other skills we should be able to train up to higher levels though.
|
|