Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Specifically for 3.5 edition. Need a decent deity for the Black Templar-ish paladin I've been roped into. First ever time playing D&D, so I at least want to be able to answer a, "Who's your god?" question without a blank stare.

So one of the allowed paladin deities, preferably with a crusader bent.

 Seaward wrote:
Specifically for 3.5 edition. Need a decent deity for the Black Templar-ish paladin I've been roped into. First ever time playing D&D, so I at least want to be able to answer a, "Who's your god?" question without a blank stare.

So one of the allowed paladin deities, preferably with a crusader bent.

Torm is the God of Paladins, but he's not really a Black Templar-y Paladin.

Kossuth might be an interesting deity to worship. He is the God of elemental fire, purification through fire. Being True Neutral means that you can have paladins, and I think that the nature of the Black Flame Zealots might be an interesting way to go, though they're more sneaky-stabby if I remember correctly. But the 'purification through fire' might be as close to black templar as you can get.

Hrm... It's been forever since I've been in the Forgotten Realms that I don't remember much of the background :-\

Lathander is the God of kicking evil's ass. Very proactive and solution orientated, could be played as direct and to the point a la Black Templars. Less about the HERESY and grim dark though- Lathander offers a proactive and optimistic approach.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Specifically for 3.5 edition. Need a decent deity for the Black Templar-ish paladin I've been roped into. First ever time playing D&D, so I at least want to be able to answer a, "Who's your god?" question without a blank stare.

So one of the allowed paladin deities, preferably with a crusader bent.

Torm is the God of Paladins, but he's not really a Black Templar-y Paladin.

I don't know, Torm seems to fit the bill:

Torm, or The Loyal Fury, was the god of law and a lawful good greater deity whose portfolio consisted of duty, loyalty, and righteousness.

Worshipers: Good fighters and warriors, guardians, heroes, knights, loyal courtiers, paladins

Favored Weapon: Great Sword

Helm may work as well depending on the time period:

Helm, also known as the Vigilant One and The Watcher, was the god of guardians, protection and protectors. He was worshiped by guards and paladins both, long being seen as a cold and focused deity who impartially took the role of defender and sometimes also enforcer. His activities in the Time of Troubles caused the folk of Faerûn to look differently on the Watcher.

Worshipers: explorers, fighters, guards, mercenaries, paladins

Favored Weapon: Bastard Sword

Torm seems...very chivalrous.

Helm is (was) LN. While he would accept worship from a LG character, I'm not sure a paladin would devote himself to a LN deity.

If we're talking 3.5 timewise, Tyr is a good choice. Torm was one of his servants.

Keep in mind you will be hard-pressed to square the LG alignment requirement with the Black Templar image. FR is a high fantasy setting where LG doesn't really have a grimdark facet.

Doing a bit of research, it looks like Helm did have a couple orders of paladins. One of them even seems to have played a prominent role in the Maztica atrocities.

Interesting. He might be the way to go, though a non-chivalrous Tormite is also intriguing.

All of the gods had their "crusaders".

Tyr is also a decent option. The Law is not always chivalrous.

 djones520 wrote:
All of the gods had their "crusaders".

Tyr is also a decent option. The Law is not always chivalrous.

Yeah, I finally got ahold of the 3.5 FR religion book, though Tyr seems suspiciously close to...well,Tyr, of Nordic legend.

 Seaward wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
All of the gods had their "crusaders".

Tyr is also a decent option. The Law is not always chivalrous.

Yeah, I finally got ahold of the 3.5 FR religion book, though Tyr seems suspiciously close to...well,Tyr, of Nordic legend.

A lot of the gods are suspiciously close to Nordic gods. Back in the original AD&D days there was a supplement that made rules for many gods of our own ancient religions, and a lot of names familiar in Forgotten Realms lore was in that book.

But I think a crusader style Paladin of Tyr, god of law, would be awesome. Judge Dredd with a Warhammer comes to mind.

Paladins committing atrocities ... would no longer be paladins.

 Manchu wrote:
Paladins committing atrocities ... would no longer be paladins.

If it fell within the gods tenents, would it matter?

I never read the Maztica books, so I'm a little unfamiliar with that story.

LG gods don't have tenants advocating atrocity.

 Manchu wrote:
LG gods don't have tenants advocating atrocity.

Helm is a LN god though. I assume we're talking about the Maztica stuff right?

Yes and paladins must be LG.

 Manchu wrote:
Yes and paladins must be LG.

Per the rule of the game. In the fluff though, Paladins are going to do whatever the hell their god tells them to do. And if they tear through a village of unbelievers, and Helm still grants them their powers, then obviously he approves.

Fluff v. rules is not a meaningful distinction in D&D 3.5. Paladins must be LG. They cannot do evil, for any reason, and remain paladins.

Ok, so you are arguing that novels written and approved by TSR/Wizards of the Coast are wrong.

Granted, over the years they have certainly retconned things, though the biggest instances I've seen have been with 4th Edition, this isn't exactly one of them.

No one is arguing that you can play a chaotic evil paladin in 3.5. We're just pointing out that a LN God had a sect of Paladins who committed "evil" in his name, and remained Paladins.

That is fact, as far as fact goes in fiction.

 djones520 wrote:
We're just pointing out that a LN God had a sect of Paladins who committed "evil" in his name, and remained Paladins.

By all means, provide your source.

I think you will find the atrocities in Maztica were committed by Helm's priests. Clerics' alignment restriction is deity-based. This is not true of paladins.

 Manchu wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
We're just pointing out that a LN God had a sect of Paladins who committed "evil" in his name, and remained Paladins.

By all means, provide your source.

Gold and Glory, I believe.

'Twas the Helmite paladin order Companions of the One True Vision that were involved in the Maztica stuff.

Isn't this what I understand to be the age old debate about paladins, though? As long as a race pings as 'evil' on their detect-o-meter, they're perfectly justified, it would seem, in genocide. Even Torm's official dogma from an edition back has a line in it about bringing "quick, painful death" to certain individuals, so it's not as though it's always sunshine and rabbits.

I would go with Hoar. Minor LN deity of revenge and retribution. You get to wander the land, listening to stories of injustice and track down those responsible and dispense fitting punishment.

Huh. That could be a really good one.

 Seaward wrote:
Companions of the One True Vision

No such organization is mentioned in Gold & Glory. Instead, that source mentions a group called Code Helm that is mostly comprised of paladins and clerics of Helm. They kill Illithid.

Good and evil in D&D are not subjective viewpoints. They are objective cosmic phenomena. Killing evil creatures cannot meaningfully be an atrocity in itself. Torture, by contrast, is evil regardless of the recipient. In D&D 3.5, a paladin who engages in torture (much less any evil act of such gravity as to be reasonably labeled an atrocity) would no longer be a paladin for the purposes of class abilities and advancement until atonement, if then.

Sorry. It was Champions of Valor, in a write-up on the Vigilant Eyes of the God.

These cautious paladins of Helm look for evil that threatens innocents and place themselve between the two. Although the order is relatively young, its numbers are steadily rising as the church encourages certain members of the Companions of the One True Vision (the Helmite knightly order responsible for many native slaughters i Maztica, and thus unpopular in Faerûn even years later) to join the Vigilant Eyes. Many guilt-ridden Companions see service in the Vigilant Eyes as a way to atone for the needless deaths they caused in Maztica, and the Vigilant Eyes is developing a reputation for selflessness and humility because of the penance of some of its members. Paladins of this order can multiclass freely as arcane devotees, clerics, fighters, divine champions, and Purple Dragon knights.

Some helpful quotations for the novice:

"A paladin need not devote herself to a single deity--devotion to righteousness is enough." 3.5 PHB p. 43

Commentary: The paladin has limited casting progression as to a subset of divine spells. Paladins do not obtain their spells via religious devotion as clerics do, however. Rather, this ability and all other paladin class abilities are based in the paladin's own righteousness reflected in their Lawful Good alignment.

"Good and evil are not philosophical concepts in the D&D game. They are forces that define the cosmos." 3.5 PHB p. 103

Commentary: The righteousness of paladins is an objective fact testable at any given moment for the very reason that Lawful Good alignment is a requirement to access paladin abilities and progress in the paladin class. In this sense, paladins are living barometers of good. Although a paladin may have doubts as to the uprightness of her prospective actions, she will always have moral clarity regarding actions she has taken in the past.

"All paladins of Faerun are devoted to a patron deity, chosen at the start of their career as paladins." Third Edition FR Campaign Setting p. 25

Commentary: Being a paladin in Faerun is a kind of religious devotion (although this does not contradict the first commentary above). A reverse version of the cleric one-step alignment rule therefore generally applies to Faerunian paladins: they must be devoted to a Lawful Good, Lawful Neutral, or Neutral Good deity. To be clear, the deity's alignment has no impact on the paladin's required Lawful Good alignment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Many guilt-ridden Companions see service in the Vigilant Eyes as a way to atone for the needless deaths they caused in Maztica

3.5 PHB pp. 44-45 wrote:[A paladin "who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct"] regains her abilities and advancement potential if she atones for her violations ...

My emphasis.

I thought all divine spells in Forgotten Realms were coming from some deity, even if it's not necessarily the one the character thinks he or she is drawing upon?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

Many guilt-ridden Companions see service in the Vigilant Eyes as a way to atone for the needless deaths they caused in Maztica

3.5 PHB pp. 44-45 wrote:[A paladin "who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct"] regains her abilities and advancement potential if she atones for her violations ...

My emphasis.

Indeed. The tantalizing question to me would be whether the Companions who did not choose to join the Vigilant Eyes remain paladins.

 Seaward wrote:
I thought all divine spells in Forgotten Realms were coming from some deity, even if it's not necessarily the one the character thinks he or she is drawing upon?

The FR Campaign Setting does not say Paladins obtain their spells from deities but merely that they are all devoted to deity. Contrast this to the FR Campaign Setting on druids, which explicitly clarifies that Faerunian druids obtain their spells from deities.

 Seaward wrote:
The tantalizing question to me would be whether the Companions who did not choose to join the Vigilant Eyes remain paladins.

Joining the Vigilant Eyes is simply one method of atonement. If you are asking whether any paladin who willfully committed an evil act can remain a paladin without atonement then the answer is no.

Well, except Gray Guards, I would assume.

I don't know that Gray Guards "canonically" exist in Faerun. It was a Complete Scoundrel option. I suppose I should say that even Gray Guards must atone for committing willfully evil acts, if that's what you're getting at.

Is the sponsoring deity the one responsible for determining if an action's evil?