The Problem With Paladins

Hello everyone, I have returned.  As promised today I have a post to share with you all.  It is something I have thought a great deal about over the years: paladins.  To me there is something inherently wrong with the way in which paladins are presented in games, especially with the willingness we have to look at the grey areas and the different points of view that may exit.  Don't get me wrong now, I love the paladin and what it is, but I think there is something holding back the paladin entrenched in tabletop gaming's collective mind.

Let me start at the beginning: the paladin.  A warrior for good.  The righteous hand dealing out truth and justice, astride a warhorse with as much mail as he.  Shining holy symbol proudly displayed to show all what he represents, an open challenge to evil creatures and those who would prey on the weak.  The paladin clearly stems from certain ideas, such as the tales of the Knights of the Round Table of Camelot who would quest for holy relics only to stop at every misdeed they saw to put an end to that evil.

In games, whether we are talking tabletop RPGs like Dungeons & Dragons or video games like Warcraft, the paladin is a crusader who takes up the power of a higher being to smite evil.  They are the pinnacle of order and goodness.  Similarly these games often have a polar opposite.  A dread knight, an anti-paladin, etc.  This is the fallen paladin, the dark champion of a darker god.  This too, I like as a concept.  The idea of what happens when a paladin falls is the type of question that makes the best stories and characters.

My problem starts here.  You are reduced to two choices the absolute adherence to law and good, and thus one or few gods, or the absolute adherence to the tenants of an evil god from which few choices allow any character which wouldn't stress the game beyond what such evil characters already do.  Those brave DMs.  Often we see paladins.  They are fun to play and, frankly, quite easy to get into as a roleplaying experience.  We can get into the role of holy crusader, it is the history of humanity to claim such things quite often, especially when it allows us to be that hero.  We wander the land in plate mail smiting evil, punishing the wicked, and miraculously healing the sick.

And here we find the impasse for the paladin.  Why are we restricted to this way of thinking?  When it comes down to it we have expanded upon the idea of the fallen paladin so much that we have the anti-paladin.  A specific class or prestige class where the character hopes to find redemption or punish those who discarded him.  It is a very fleshed out concept these days.  Pathfinder's Inner Sea Gods even includes details on what it would be like to be an anti-paladin for the appropriate gods.

But neutral gods are mysteriously lacking any mention of paladin or anti-paladin....

And that.  Right there.  Look up.  That has forever been my problem.  When we come down to it we know what makes a paladin a paladin.  Holy knight right?  Nope.  Anti-paladins are certainly evil, and paladin is even still in the name.  What makes a paladin a paladin is that essence of going beyond cleric.  Becoming fanatical in your adherence to your god, often to the point at which you have a whole order dedicated to it.  You are a traveller, a wanderer, spending as much time abroad as at home.  Your calling is the crusade, the bringing of your faith to others, your flock any who listen or need you.

Does this necessitate good?  Absolutely not.  Is holy knight the most obvious, likely, and cliche option?  Of course.  It is probably one of the funnest too.  But what of (as in my campaign) the one who is raised to worship the goddess of death and fate.  It is she who judges all souls and whether they have been made worthy to go to their god, regardless of who that deity is.  What happens when he takes up plate mail and goes to save those whose very souls are in danger from the path to ultimate judgement?  Seeking out undead whose own souls won't rest and move on.  Destroying demons who would devour and trade the souls of the dead.  Does it not make sense for a paladin to worship such a god and become a paladin for those reasons and not simply because these things are evil?

Why can't a paladin worship a neutral deity?

To me they can.  In every campaign I have ever run, they can.  A paladin is the fanatic, the crusader of a church.  It requires a removal of some of the strict alignment rules set within the mechanics of most paladins.  It requires an open mind and willingness to decide what would make a crusader of the god of magic, for example, unique.  Do they seek to advance down-trodden and oppressed people by teaching them arcana?  Do they simply seek to stamp out ignorance and superstition?

And it doesn't need to be overly complicated.  We have the classic paladin which is built as the holy knight.  We have the anti-paladin, his polar opposite.  Neutral gods are so easy to utilize, and makes for some interesting possibilities.  Perhaps the anti-paladin style is more to one god's liking, but compassion still exists within that god's sensibilities.  An anti-paladin whose negative energy and harming abilities are flipped to positive and healing.  Pretty easy.  Do the same for another god.  A holy executioner perhaps?  A paladin who does not heal but punishes with a touch?

The options are all there for us.  Sitting within whatever book or chapter holds the big list of deities and their purviews.  Just because the mechanics say that a paladin must be, can only be, the holy knight does not make it true.  Let a character roll the crusader of another god, perhaps the first of their order.  It will make for some interesting stories, I promise.