Paladins with no Diety?

[Knightmage Bael]

Aren't Paladins obligated to select a diety normally? Did they just decide Cause + Diety would be too specific of a customization option?

[Brady4444]

I'm okay with the removal of devotion to a deity as a requirement to be a paladin. To me, what makes a paladin a paladin is their devotion to an ideal. In old editions this ideal was 'lawful good' to an extent that they lost their class (and became a fighter) if they fail to follow their ideal.

5e has opened a new way to create a paladin character, but allow that character to evolve with less of a straitjacket in terms of penalties for character growth. On the other hand, in BG3, I still want to play my paladin as a Lawful Good defender of the good people of Faerun.

[Benenlin]

Originally posted by Brady4444:

I'm okay with the removal of devotion to a deity as a requirement to be a paladin. To me, what makes a paladin a paladin is their devotion to an ideal. In old editions this ideal was 'lawful good' to an extent that they lost their class (and became a fighter) if they fail to follow their ideal.

5e has opened a new way to create a paladin character, but allow that character to evolve with less of a straitjacket in terms of penalties for character growth. On the other hand, in BG3, I still want to play my paladin as a Lawful Good defender of the good people of Faerun.

They are lawful good because they follow strict rules that they won't dare to cross or they will lose powers/become oathbreaker/antipaladin. No? Alignment is just a short description of their behaviour

[Brady4444]

Originally posted by PEPEKING:

Originally posted by Brady4444:

I'm okay with the removal of devotion to a deity as a requirement to be a paladin. To me, what makes a paladin a paladin is their devotion to an ideal. In old editions this ideal was 'lawful good' to an extent that they lost their class (and became a fighter) if they fail to follow their ideal.

5e has opened a new way to create a paladin character, but allow that character to evolve with less of a straitjacket in terms of penalties for character growth. On the other hand, in BG3, I still want to play my paladin as a Lawful Good defender of the good people of Faerun.

They are lawful good because they follow strict rules that they won't dare to cross or they will lose powers/become oathbreaker/antipaladin. No? Alignment is just a short description of their behaviour

Well, in some fantasy literature, 'good' and 'evil' have energies in and of themselves. As such, in that kind of system, adherance to an alignment can grant powers. 5e is not one of those systems. But I'm still playing my paladin that way out of habit/nostalgia more than any other reason.

[Knightmage Bael]

Originally posted by PEPEKING:

Read oath of the ancients, to whom do you think paladin can swore this oath? I bet it has very druidic origins even.

If you pick Oath of the Ancients there's dialogue option with the druids where you can tell them that your Oath brings you close to Sylvanus at times.

Originally posted by PEPEKING:

They are lawful good because they follow strict rules that they won't dare to cross or they will lose powers/become oathbreaker/antipaladin. No? Alignment is just a short description of their behaviour

Your diety requires you to act on the side of Lawful Good. This is part of how you maintain favor. Oaths muddle that. If you do some disastrous thing just for the sake of the "Oath", you fall out of favor, because the price is too high, and the tenets keep you in line. Paladins are supposed to represent the best of us. Virtuous, just, protectors of the innocent, and if all you need to do is mentally justify "I did it for the Oath" then suddenly Paladins break that ideal they're held to.

If you argue its for the sake of lenience, well, that lenience was always there. Your deity always tells you to do whats right and protect the innocent to the best of your capabilities. S/he doesn't want to waste imparting their power to you just to have you die jumping into a death pit. If you die, you can't fight for good. Don't murder-hobo every potentially evil person you see just because they're evil, don't bite off more than you can chew. Take what you can handle. Your deity is supposed to understand this.

You're lawful good, not lawful stupid.

[Trap Queen 85]

jfc we're still talking about this? Oath of the ancients is probably the only oath that makes sense as is. Because nature is [duh] natural in the prime material plane as a power source. So as long as you know how then it's an abundant power pool to draw from and you wouldn't even need a deity as a conduit.

[Cat]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't divinity powered by faith in the DnD setting? Which if we boil it down to the purest form would mean faith in oneself (assuming you inspire it in others) could manifest itself as powers despite not coming from a deity?

[Trap Queen 85]

Originally posted by Sunricer:

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't divinity powered by faith in the DnD setting? Which if we boil it down to the purest form would mean faith in oneself (assuming you inspire it in others) could manifest itself as powers despite not coming from a deity?

Hahah no but nice try there. Divinity isn't faith though Divine beings can increase their power through worship [vast majority of them not all some of them don't need worshipers].

[Trap Queen 85]

Originally posted by Sunricer:

Why not? I am not trying to argue, I am genuinely curious.

Because Divinity is not faith. First of all Divinity is described as a spark [literally described as such in the rule books] so it's this special thing that either a god is born with, inherits, steals, or earns through say killing another god. Meaning no mortal being can have the spark.

Now if you think of that spark as a battery of power that does not exist on the Prime Material plane the only way to get that power from the spark over to a mortal being is if a divine being shares it. So no having faith has nothing to do with divinity. Even worshipers aren't granted divinity or divine power. Divine beings grant divine power to others as they see fit to do so.

[Knightmage Bael]

Originally posted by Trap Queen 85:

Because Divinity is not faith. First of all Divinity is described as a spark so it's this special thing that either a god is born with, inherits, steals, or earns through say killing another god. Meaning no mortal being can have the spark.

Which is what makes Aasimar so fun. They're touched by Celestials, either because an ancestor was an angel, or their lineage was directly blessed, or they were somehow blessed. There's a divine connection in their existence as a mortal.

[Trap Queen 85]

Originally posted by Archmage_Bael:

Originally posted by Trap Queen 85:

Because Divinity is not faith. First of all Divinity is described as a spark so it's this special thing that either a god is born with, inherits, steals, or earns through say killing another god. Meaning no mortal being can have the spark.

Which is what makes Aasimar so fun. They're touched by Celestials, either because an ancestor was an angel, or their lineage was directly blessed, or they were somehow blessed. There's a divine connection in their existence as a mortal.

Aasimar are the children of Celestials which themselves merely were or are the servants of deities. Celestials are creatures of the upper planes.

[Trap Queen 85]

Originally posted by Trap Queen 85:

Originally posted by Archmage_Bael:

Which is what makes Aasimar so fun. They're touched by Celestials, either because an ancestor was an angel, or their lineage was directly blessed, or they were somehow blessed. There's a divine connection in their existence as a mortal.

Aasimar are the children of Celestials which themselves merely were or are the servants of deities. Celestials are creatures of the upper planes.

Also only specific Aasimar are imbued with divine power [radiant energy]. The vast majority are not.

[Pup]

I always thought it was basically power granted by a deity, even if the paladin doesn't specifically worship that deity. Like if they take a paladin oath and go around doing things that some god or goddess out there approves of, they just lend them a hand by giving them a little holy power to continue doing their good deeds. Like they still get their power from a deity, they just don't have to worship or even believe in that deity to get the power, so long as said deity likes what they are doing and wants to help them out so they can keep going.

Then if they become an oath breaker, I looked at it as some infernal being having it's interest peaked by this once holy paladin drop their crusade for justice or whatever and break their oath and decided to give them unholy powers for giggles.

Basically, beings of power in D&D 5e just enjoy giving out powers to anyone who really aligns with them from my understanding, unless that's all just something I thought up myself and not what actually happens. It always just seemed to be like gods/demons/whatever were pretty much just always happy to grant a little power to anyone that peaked their interest just because they wanted them to keep doing what they were doing and figured giving them some help couldn't hurt.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Brady4444:

Well, in some fantasy literature, 'good' and 'evil' have energies in and of themselves. As such, in that kind of system, adherance to an alignment can grant powers. 5e is not one of those systems.

Yes it is, as long as the old planar cosmology exists. The upper and lower planes do not simply aspire to be places of good and evil, they are literally composed out of the metaphysical essence of what it means to be good and evil.

Those who spend too much time lingering within those planes will also find their personalities gradually shifting to something more appropriate for their environment. Law, Chaos, Good, Evil, these are tangible forces which have the capacity to affect and influence others.

Just because mortals from the prime material plane have the freedom to decide their own moral outlook, that does not mean that the alignment spectrum ceases to exist.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Sunricer:

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't divinity powered by faith in the DnD setting? Which if we boil it down to the purest form would mean faith in oneself (assuming you inspire it in others) could manifest itself as powers despite not coming from a deity?

Prior to the Time of Troubles, the gods were free to view mortals as nothing more than playthings and tools. They did not need mortals to sustain themselves, and pretty much everybody save for Helm neglected their portfolios in order to run around doing whatever they wanted.

After the Time of Troubles, Ao decided the gods needed a massive attitude adjustment, so he changed the rules of divinity to be fueled by mortal faith. Now even the most cruel and selfish deities could not afford to be so flippantly dismissive of their worshipers, as a god who lost the faith of the people would find their powers diminishing and their lives eventually snuffed out.

[Benenlin]

Originally posted by Trap Queen 85:

Originally posted by Sunricer:

Why not? I am not trying to argue, I am genuinely curious.

Because Divinity is not faith. First of all Divinity is described as a spark [literally described as such in the rule books] so it's this special thing that either a god is born with, inherits, steals, or earns through say killing another god. Meaning no mortal being can have the spark.

Now if you think of that spark as a battery of power that does not exist on the Prime Material plane the only way to get that power from the spark over to a mortal being is if a divine being shares it. So no having faith has nothing to do with divinity. Even worshipers aren't granted divinity or divine power. Divine beings grant divine power to others as they see fit to do so.

So divine being can share power with paladin that fits the concepts that this divine being represents without prayers and religious mysticism. Yes?