Paladins should be able to choose Eldath (srsly hear me out)

[Arn]

Currently, Paladins cannot choose Eldath, but they should be able to, according to FR lore.

There has been at least one paladin of Eldath in canon FR lore. See Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 3E, page 228 (last paragraph there):

That should be enough, but to respond to people who say Eldathyns are supposed to be peaceful and pacifist:

Yes, you are right. But Eldath still permits violence in self-defense or the defense of others, even for her clerics. See Faiths and Avatars, page 58:

Her monks can be "deadly" when defending themselves or others, as seen in Faiths and Avatars, page 59:

And, finally, Eldath's dogma explicitly permits violence in self-defense. See Faiths and Pantheons, page 93:

So I would say a paladin of Eldath can definitely resort to violence in self-defense. Not that they would have to, but they COULD.

This is actually perfectly in line with the Paladin ethos, which says a Paladin avoids killing whenever possible. See The Complete Paladin's Handbook, page 26:
[Edit by Arn on 3/3/2022: Image deleted as irrelevant, but referenced in a subsequent post below.]

EDIT: As Ravial informed me, The Complete Paladin's Handbook is not enforced by the DM team. Only the Paladin's Code found in the PHB 3.5 (+ deity's dogma) is enforced:

Hidden: show

There is a lot of unclear information in here as to what is enforced paladin code according to the DM Team.

To be clear, the only DM Team enforced paladin code on this server that you should rely upon is the below basic information, if you have clarification questions beyond this then please PM the DM Team with your questions.

The only aspect of paladin code (which is defined to many different degrees in different canon Forgotten Realms lore sources) that the DM Team enforces on this server is the basic paladin code from the Player's Handbook 3.5, 44:

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act. Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents...

----

This PHB code (+ Dogma) is the paladin code that the DM Team enforces.

If you have clarification questions about any aspect of the basic paladin code enforced quoted above, please PM the DM Team with your questions. The DM Team has posted some clarification notes below as well for public viewing.

The DM Team also recommends reading the simple definitions of alignments in the first post of this linked thread in the Roleplaying Guides forums:

viewtopic.php?f=421&t=7349

The DM Team has some publicly posted information clarifying a bit more from the DM Team perspective on paladin code here in the Roleplaying Guides forums:

Subject: Paladin Questions

TL;DR: Eldathyns can be Paladins without violating Eldath's dogma. Please let Paladins choose Eldath as their patron deity. Pls.

[whatsittoya]

I second this. One of the most significant conflicts in the lives of the best paladins is the internal conflict of being a warrior pacifist. There are plenty of paladins who lean towards violence-solves-everything, and opening up Eldath would give some support to the diplomacy-first-please-don't-make-me-do-this paladin archetype.


Gemma needs more friends anyways, she can't connect with murderhobos.

[Atlas]

Hidden: show

Currently, Paladins cannot choose Eldath, but they should be able to, according to FR lore.

There has been at least one paladin of Eldath in canon FR lore. See Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, page 228 (last paragraph there):

That should be enough, but to respond to people who say Eldathyns are supposed to be peaceful and pacifist:

Yes, you are right. But Eldath still permits violence in self-defense or the defense of others, even for her clerics. See Faiths and Avatars, page 59:

Her monks can be "deadly" when defending themselves or others, as seen in Faiths and Avatars, page 60:

And, finally, Eldath's dogma explicitly permits violence in self-defense. See Faiths and Pantheons, page 93:

So I would say a paladin of Eldath can definitely resort to violence in self-defense. Not that they would have to, but they COULD.

This is actually perfectly in line with the Paladin ethos, which says a Paladin avoids killing whenever possible. See The Complete Paladin's Handbook, page 26:

TL;DR: Please let Paladins choose Eldath as their patron deity. Pls.

You really should not skew the lore of that source book by cutting out a piece of a paragraph and leaving out the rest?

Your pacifist view on the Paladin from the Complete Paladins Handbook is utterly false, when the entire paragraph amounts to saying this:

Lawful Good Alignment

Every paladin must be lawful good. The moment he abandons the conditions of this
alignment is the moment he stops being a paladin. At the heart of a lawful good alignment is the belief in a system of laws that promotes the welfare of all members of a society, ensures their safety, and guarantees justice. So long as the laws are just and applied fairly to all people, it doesn't matter to the paladin whether they originate from a democracy or a dictator.

Though all lawful good systems adhere to the same general principles, specific laws may be different. One society may allow a wife to have two husbands, another may enforce strict monogamy. Gambling may be tolerated in one system, forbidden in another. A paladin respects the laws of other lawful good cultures and will not seek to impose his own values on their citizens.

However, a paladin will not honor a law that runs contrary to his alignment. A government
may believe that unregulated gambling provides a harmless diversion, but a paladin may
determine that the policy has resulted in devastating poverty and despair. In the paladin's mind, the government is guilty of a lawless act by promoting an exploitative and destructive enterprise.

In response, the paladin may encourage citizens to refrain from gambling, or he may work to
change the law. Particularly abhorrent practices, such as slavery and torture, may force the paladin to take direct action. It doesn't matter if these practices are culturally acceptable or sanctioned by well meaning officials. The paladin's sense of justice compels him to intervene and alleviate as much suffering as he can. Note, though, that time constraints, inadequate resources, and other commitments may limit his involvement. While a paladin might wish for a cultural revolution in a society that tolerates cannibalism, he may have to content himself with rescuing a few victims before circumstances force him to leave the area.

When will a paladin take a life? A paladin kills whenever necessary to promote the greater
good, or to protect himself, his companions, or anyone whom he's vowed to defend. In times of war, he strikes down the enemies of his ruler or church. He does not interfere with a legal
execution, so long as the punishment fits the crime. Otherwise, a paladin avoids killing whenever possible. He does not kill a person who is merely suspected of a crime, nor does a paladin necessarily kill someone he perceives to be a threat unless he has tangible evidence or certain knowledge of evildoing. He never kills for treasure or personal gain. He never knowingly kills a lawful good being.

Though paladins believe in the sanctity of innocent life, most kill animals and other nonaligned creatures in certain situations. A paladin may kill animals for food. He will kill a monster that endangers humans, even if the monster is motivated by instinct, not evil. While some paladins hunting for sport, others may hunt to sharpen their combat and tracking skills.

That is the full section without taking one paragraph out of context, and instead what it actually says is what a Paladin will kill for and what he will not kill for.

There is also another section in The Complete Paladins Handbook which says the Paladin is a warrior who views war as a noble enterprise in which to further the cause of good:

Valor

A paladin demonstrates unyielding courage in the face of adversity. No danger is too great
to prevent him from fulfilling a promise or completing a mission. His commitment is stronger than his fear of pain, hardship, or even death. A paladin's valor is particularly evident on the battlefield. He regards war as a noble enterprise, and combat as an opportunity to glorify the institution he represents. A paladin attacks an enemy without hesitation, continuing to fight until the enemy withdraws or is defeated. Whenever possible, a paladin chooses the most formidable enemy-a powerful monster, a giant, a dragon, or the leader of an army-as his primary opponent. In general, a paladin prefers melee to missile combat, so he can engage his opponent face to face.

Examples:

• A moment ago, Sir Geffen and his companions were riding peacefully through ashaded valley when they were ambushed by a brutish hill giant. The giant snatched young Fredrin from his horse and is now waving him in the air like a trophy.

"I claim this youth as my slave!'' thunders the giant. "If you want him back, send
your best man to fight!''

Without hesitation, Sir Geffen rides forward.

• Locked in battle with an army of ogres, Sir Geffen's party is suffering mounting
casualties. "Withdraw!'' shouts Bordu, a friend of Geffen. "We will regroup and fight
another day!''

Sir Geffen's companions scramble from the battlefield, but Geffen lingers behind.
"Come with us!'' cries Bordu. "You can't win!''

"Perhaps not,'' says Geffen, steeling himself for a phalanx of charging ogres. "But I
shall cover your withdrawal as long as I can.''

At the DM's discretion, a paladin can withdraw with honor if outnumbered by more than 2:1
in hit dice. If the paladin belongs to an elite organization, the DM might allow the paladin to
withdraw if he faces odds of more than 3:1. If the player suspects such a situation exists, he may ask the DM whether a withdrawal with honor is possible. With the DM's permission, the
paladin may withdraw without violating his ethos.

You cannot take something out of context like this and suggest that the lore from The Complete Paladin's Handbook promotes pacifism when it clearly does not.

[Hator]

Hidden: show

Again, you people seem to be quoting books from different editions (not particularly in this case, but over the general arguments in favor or disfavor of [insert what ever here].) which have often been modified, changed and errata'd (yes I make up words) over the different editions.

For the main argument of this topic, I am not against it, as long as said character is almost exclusivly RP.
It wouldnt even make sense for it to seek any kind of violence, even going to the graveyard or the kobolds. As quoted by the very segment of books you posted, their monks can be deadly when defending others of the faith (which wont seek violence), their holy sites or their wards (and im sorry but Joe Blow the lvl 1 wizard that asked you to come along isnt your "ward") nor do they "seek to provoke violence".

But hey! We have Gemma already doing it. Not against any others doing the same.

Just my point of view ! ^^

[Flasmix]

I am in favor of this.

That write up is your cookie cutter Paladin, hands down. Paladins of different Orders, hell, even if they have the same God could have different views. Let's look at Ilmater. There's the Order of the Golden Cup and the Companions of the Noble Heart. The two have the same God but operate in a different manner.

The Golden Cups members were generally peaceful and always tried to help, and rarely did they seek out evil to slay. They were not pacifists, however, nor opposed to such actions, and did not hesitate to fight when confronted by evil. Still, members felt their role was focused more toward healing and protection than battle. They let their allies, such as the Companions of the Noble Heart, hunt down evil doers while they protected the victims.

Kind of sounds like what an Eldathan would be like.

[ValerieJean]

I am in favor of this.

That write up is your cookie cutter Paladin, hands down. Paladins of different Orders, hell, even if they have the same God could have different views. Let's look at Ilmater. There's the Order of the Golden Cup and the Companions of the Noble Heart. The two have the same God but operate in a different manner.

The Golden Cups members were generally peaceful and always tried to help, and rarely did they seek out evil to slay. They were not pacifists, however, nor opposed to such actions, and did not hesitate to fight when confronted by evil. Still, members felt their role was focused more toward healing and protection than battle. They let their allies, such as the Companions of the Noble Heart, hunt down evil doers while they protected the victims.

Kind of sounds like what an Eldathan would be like.

I am 100% behind this as well. I have nothing to add of what Flassy said. Add Eldath in let's have some more!

[Svabodnik]

I'm guessing the limitation exists in game due to that Eldath doesn't grant divine power to LG clergy (limited to CG, CN, and NG via Faiths and Pantheons). That being said, a paladin of Eldath was already mentioned in lore, and it's not unheard of deities aside from Sune to grant exceptions for paladins. For instance, Champions of Valor introduces the Order of the Crescent Moon, which is a group of lycanthrope-hunting paladins that worship Selune (CG, and permitting only CG, CN, and NG clergy otherwise). As such, I'm all for it.

[whatsittoya]

Hidden: show

Currently, Paladins cannot choose Eldath, but they should be able to, according to FR lore.

There has been at least one paladin of Eldath in canon FR lore. See Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, page 228 (last paragraph there):

That should be enough, but to respond to people who say Eldathyns are supposed to be peaceful and pacifist:

Yes, you are right. But Eldath still permits violence in self-defense or the defense of others, even for her clerics. See Faiths and Avatars, page 59:

Her monks can be "deadly" when defending themselves or others, as seen in Faiths and Avatars, page 60:

And, finally, Eldath's dogma explicitly permits violence in self-defense. See Faiths and Pantheons, page 93:

So I would say a paladin of Eldath can definitely resort to violence in self-defense. Not that they would have to, but they COULD.

This is actually perfectly in line with the Paladin ethos, which says a Paladin avoids killing whenever possible. See The Complete Paladin's Handbook, page 26:

TL;DR: Please let Paladins choose Eldath as their patron deity. Pls.

You really should not skew the lore of that source book by cutting out a piece of a paragraph and leaving out the rest?

Your pacifist view on the Paladin from the Complete Paladins Handbook is utterly false, when the entire paragraph amounts to saying this:

Lawful Good Alignment

Every paladin must be lawful good. The moment he abandons the conditions of this
alignment is the moment he stops being a paladin. At the heart of a lawful good alignment is the belief in a system of laws that promotes the welfare of all members of a society, ensures their safety, and guarantees justice. So long as the laws are just and applied fairly to all people, it doesn't matter to the paladin whether they originate from a democracy or a dictator.

Though all lawful good systems adhere to the same general principles, specific laws may be different. One society may allow a wife to have two husbands, another may enforce strict monogamy. Gambling may be tolerated in one system, forbidden in another. A paladin respects the laws of other lawful good cultures and will not seek to impose his own values on their citizens.

However, a paladin will not honor a law that runs contrary to his alignment. A government
may believe that unregulated gambling provides a harmless diversion, but a paladin may
determine that the policy has resulted in devastating poverty and despair. In the paladin's mind, the government is guilty of a lawless act by promoting an exploitative and destructive enterprise.

In response, the paladin may encourage citizens to refrain from gambling, or he may work to
change the law. Particularly abhorrent practices, such as slavery and torture, may force the paladin to take direct action. It doesn't matter if these practices are culturally acceptable or sanctioned by well meaning officials. The paladin's sense of justice compels him to intervene and alleviate as much suffering as he can. Note, though, that time constraints, inadequate resources, and other commitments may limit his involvement. While a paladin might wish for a cultural revolution in a society that tolerates cannibalism, he may have to content himself with rescuing a few victims before circumstances force him to leave the area.

When will a paladin take a life? A paladin kills whenever necessary to promote the greater
good, or to protect himself, his companions, or anyone whom he's vowed to defend. In times of war, he strikes down the enemies of his ruler or church. He does not interfere with a legal
execution, so long as the punishment fits the crime. Otherwise, a paladin avoids killing whenever possible. He does not kill a person who is merely suspected of a crime, nor does a paladin necessarily kill someone he perceives to be a threat unless he has tangible evidence or certain knowledge of evildoing. He never kills for treasure or personal gain. He never knowingly kills a lawful good being.

Though paladins believe in the sanctity of innocent life, most kill animals and other nonaligned creatures in certain situations. A paladin may kill animals for food. He will kill a monster that endangers humans, even if the monster is motivated by instinct, not evil. While some paladins hunting for sport, others may hunt to sharpen their combat and tracking skills.

That is the full section without taking one paragraph out of context, and instead what it actually says is what a Paladin will kill for and what he will not kill for.

There is also another section in The Complete Paladins Handbook which says the Paladin is a warrior who views war as a noble enterprise in which to further the cause of good:

Valor

A paladin demonstrates unyielding courage in the face of adversity. No danger is too great
to prevent him from fulfilling a promise or completing a mission. His commitment is stronger than his fear of pain, hardship, or even death. A paladin's valor is particularly evident on the battlefield. He regards war as a noble enterprise, and combat as an opportunity to glorify the institution he represents. A paladin attacks an enemy without hesitation, continuing to fight until the enemy withdraws or is defeated. Whenever possible, a paladin chooses the most formidable enemy-a powerful monster, a giant, a dragon, or the leader of an army-as his primary opponent. In general, a paladin prefers melee to missile combat, so he can engage his opponent face to face.

Examples:

• A moment ago, Sir Geffen and his companions were riding peacefully through ashaded valley when they were ambushed by a brutish hill giant. The giant snatched young Fredrin from his horse and is now waving him in the air like a trophy.

"I claim this youth as my slave!'' thunders the giant. "If you want him back, send
your best man to fight!''

Without hesitation, Sir Geffen rides forward.

• Locked in battle with an army of ogres, Sir Geffen's party is suffering mounting
casualties. "Withdraw!'' shouts Bordu, a friend of Geffen. "We will regroup and fight
another day!''

Sir Geffen's companions scramble from the battlefield, but Geffen lingers behind.
"Come with us!'' cries Bordu. "You can't win!''

"Perhaps not,'' says Geffen, steeling himself for a phalanx of charging ogres. "But I
shall cover your withdrawal as long as I can.''

At the DM's discretion, a paladin can withdraw with honor if outnumbered by more than 2:1
in hit dice. If the paladin belongs to an elite organization, the DM might allow the paladin to
withdraw if he faces odds of more than 3:1. If the player suspects such a situation exists, he may ask the DM whether a withdrawal with honor is possible. With the DM's permission, the
paladin may withdraw without violating his ethos.

I have no care for whether Eldath is added to the deity selection list or not, but you cannot take something out of context like this and suggest that the lore from The Complete Paladin's Handbook promotes pacifism when it clearly does not.

Nothing is being skewed, information is just being selected based on its relevance to the request. The claim of cherry-picking would only be applicable if the OP was trying to invalidate non-pacifistic paladins, but they're not. They're providing information that makes pacifistic paladins justified and reasonable without invalidating the ones who aren't.

Retribution for the Hoarites, redemption for the Lathanderites, mercy for the Ilmateri, protection for the Helmites, and peace for the Eldathyns. So long as the paladin code of conduct (the first and foremost standard that governs paladins, even before faith) is adhered to, it should be all good. Eldath has as much to give paladins as Ilmater does, that's for sure.

[Arn]

That is the full section without taking one paragraph out of context, and instead what it actually says is what a Paladin will kill for and what he will not kill for.

But I did include all of those parts about killing and not killing?

If I were really trying to cherry pick things, I could have easily cropped out the preceding page (and the following paragraph), but I made the conscious decision to leave that all in so people could get the whole context.

So yeah. I just meant to say that an Eldathyn paladin could choose to resort to violence only in self defense, and that would be consistent with the Paladin ethos. Which I still think is true. I did not mean to say all paladins would be pacifist, because I agree that would be absurd. Again, that is why I included the preceding page and the subsequent paragraph.

Also, the majority of the OP is devoted to explaining when an Eldathyn might use violence. That is because I have the understanding that paladins are generally not pacifist. I really am not sure why you think I have such a view.

*Edited for clarity, and to be less argumentative.*

[Arn]

Again, you people seem to be quoting books from different editions (not particularly in this case, but over the general arguments in favor or disfavor of [insert what ever here].) which have often been modified, changed and errata'd (yes I make up words) over the different editions.

Yeah, that's a quirk of our server. The timeline takes place in AD&D, but NWN2 itself is based on D&D 3.5 rules.

To be perfectly lore accurate, I guess we should only be referencing the AD&D source books.

[Steve]

Well, if we're going by AD&D terms, that what better than consulting the Grand Tour of the Realms?

Paladins are fighters of a higher calling than most common warriors. They fight for a strongly held moral and ethical code, and are held to exacting standards in all their actions. Failure to live up to their moral and ethical alignment results in their downfall, and the stripping of all special abilities granted by the paladin class.

There is no specific paladin's code, no set of do's and don'ts by which paladins are graded on a pass/fail basis. The closest thing to such a code is "Quentin's Monograph," a short treatise on the nature of alignment and paladinhood by a retired paladin. In addition to flowery descriptions of early endeavors and practical advice on the care of weapons and animals, the monograph summarizes what it calls the Paladin's Virtues.

The listing is not all-inclusive, and every paladin grades and emphasizes these virtues based on his or her own personal ethos and religious background. Paladins may obey all these virtues to the letter and still lose their special status, or flout one virtue in the name of another and still retain paladinhood. In this fashion, a paladin may exist outside an organized hierarchy or even lead rebellions and wars against unjust or evil causes. It is possible under these virtues that one paladin may even fight another, both seeking to defend a different paladin's virtue or interpretation of all of them.

Paladins in the Realms, like priests, are devoted to a particular deity. The most common paladin deities are those which embody action, decision, watchfulness, and wisdom. Torm and Tyr are both popular deities for paladins, as is Ilmater, who stresses the need to suffer to attain one's goals. All these gods are good and lawful in their basic alignment.

Paladins also serve deities who present themselves as being good but not necessarily lawful, and lawful but not necessarily good. These include Azuth and Helm, who are lawful and neutral in their outlook, and Mystra, Deneir, Lathander, and Milil, who are good and neutral.

Chauntea and Mielikki are also neutral and good, but tend to attract more druids and rangers than paladins, though there are exceptions. No gods who claim true neutrality, evil, or chaos in their ethos and morals have paladins operating in their name.

Check the last line. Now compare to Eldath. &

And now, for reference, Quentin's Monograph:

[Arn]

No gods who claim true neutrality, evil, or chaos in their ethos and morals have paladins operating in their name.

Check the last line. Now compare to Eldath. &

But Eldath is not true neutral. Your quote talks about "true neutrality."

[Deathgrowl]

I think it should be noted that paladins are holy warriors. That's the whole idea around the entire class. If you make a pacifist holy warrior, you're making a self-contradiction.

That said, I don't see why Eldathyn paladins can't exist. There are some druids and clerics of Eldath that will go to pretty extreme lengths, in regards to violence, to defend groves and stuff. And lore says there is a paladin of Eldath. That should be enough. He's also a fighter, by that quote you put up. So by no means is this a pacifist.

[whatsittoya]

And Sune has Chaos and yet she has paladins in operation in BG. Also a pacifistic warrior is definitely a contradiction but that doesn't mean it's invalid or bad. Warrior doesn't mean war-mongering, and a warrior who goes out of his way to avoid conflict if there's a potential for peaceful resolution, while still being ready and able to fight, remains a warrior.

[Deathgrowl]

And Sune has Chaos and yet she has paladins in operation in BG. Also a pacifistic warrior is definitely a contradiction but that doesn't mean it's invalid or bad. Warrior doesn't mean war-mongering, and a warrior who goes out of his way to avoid conflict if there's a potential for peaceful resolution, while still being ready and able to fight, remains a warrior.

Sure, but a pacifist is someone who refuses to fight. A warrior is prepared to, if necessary.

Obviously, that "if necessary" part will depend on the kind of paladin we're talking about, as has already been pointed out in this thread. Eldathyn paladins probably have the highest threshold for engaging in violence. But they're not pacifist.

But maybe that's just semantics?