Jump to content

Qraces/classes


Twinblades713

Recommended Posts

No the Lawfull Paladin would chose be an Outcast rather than to break his convictions.

A Paladin that sacrifices his life to protect other does not does this just because his god tells him. He will prefer to sacrifice himself than to harm the children.

You can be a Godless Paladin, but you cannot be an neutral Paladin.

Also just because your god turns evil, it does not mean the Paladin has to follow through.

A chaotic paladin, however, will gladly sacrifice his name, his position and his reputation to carry out the will of the divine. For as a mortal how dare he assume he knows better than his chosen diety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Valsgarde, are any of those definitions you quoted to us from FL help files? No? THEN THEY DO NOT APPLY TO FL!

You say you recognize that FL is not D&D, but everything else you say counters that statement. FL ethos is NOT D&D ethos. They do not mean the same things. You want to see how things are meant to work in FL, read FL help files and definitions.

As for my paladin... a) undead/demons are creatures of pure darkness and have willingly been perverted by unholy magics... killing them is not racism, it's fighting evil given form; B) drow and elves have been enemies since the races split... killing them is not racism, it is continuing a war between the species that has gone on for thousands of years in which my character sees himself as a soldier in. He is good; he thinks of what is best for others before what is best for himself and acts accordingly, though he recognizes that sometimes you need to pull a few weeds to get a garden to grow properly. He is chaotic, in that he has no respect for Aabahranian authorities, only following his own conscience and what he believes to be the will of God. These are FL definitions. They are NOT D&D definitions. As I'm playing FL, only one of those definition sets matters at all. Guess which?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some may consider Abraham the original Paladin, as he was Gods chosen to lead his people in battle and theology, as I recall when asked to kill his own son, he was perfectly willing to go through with it. Given God changed his mind, yet, we can see the original template for paladins had no problem with the sacrifices of wayward children. Just conjecture....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember that when i read the Bible passage on Abrahan and his son to find that passages very fishy. It appeared to me that the person/angel stopping the sacrifice was quite different from the one that started it.

In fact it was nothing like they explained in church.

As most passages.

Reading the Bible from start to end is quite interesting and disturbing experience...

Anyway, Abrahan has nothing to do with Paladins.

And a Paladin does not needs to follow a god but a cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

problem is that 99% of people that make tribunals do so because they are afraid to die' date=' and like to use the whole "wanted" threat as a sortof protection in pks, because a lot of other people are afraid to get wanted. this playstyle coulpes quite nicely with less pk-friendly classes with high survivability, since they can use guards to do the work ;)[/quote']

Chuckle? Dont want to die? I doubt anyone is really lining up to fight Triathix to be honest. Not to mention the 3 other cabals filled with outlaws ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

problem is that 99% of people that make tribunals do so because they are afraid to die' date=' and like to use the whole "wanted" threat as a sortof protection in pks, because a lot of other people are afraid to get wanted. this playstyle coulpes quite nicely with less pk-friendly classes with high survivability, since they can use guards to do the work ;)[/quote']

This ain't AR sweetheart ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roykagh, thanks. Glad someone understands (even if there is a level of dissagreeance) and is able to give smart, viable arguements for the other side without resorting to dumbassery.

Oh. Thank you, Wayward Knight! I like to keep my wit with a harmful edge. :)

As for the first paladin? I'd say that'd probably have to be Michael. Or any of the Seraphim, for that matter...I'm not sure what the chronological order is of God making the Angels out of Light.

Anyway, they say name calling means you've lost...so I'll retire from this thread victorious. Thank you, thank you.

*takes a bow*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...