Q. Is it possible
to have a female
paladin?
A. The answer to
this one is a definite
(non-sexist) yes.
The AD&D and
D&D games systems make
no distinction
between male and female
characters, although 'he'
rather than
'he or she' is used in the
rules.
<Correction: The Game
does make distinctions between the male and the female.>
(Imagine #14)
Upon becoming 1st level, a paladin can or is:
A paladin may not:
S12*, I9, W13*, D6, C9, Ch17
AL = LG <cf. Heaven>
A = Any
W = Any
<The paladin is a sub-class of the cavalier, and, gains the 11 abilities of the cavalier at level 1.>
A paladin character is a
fighter sub-class, but unlike normal fighters, all <A paladin is a CAVALIER
sub-class: see Paladin, UA>
paladins must begin as lawful
good in alignment (q.v.) and always remain
lawful good or absolutely
lose all of the special powers which are given to
them. They have both fighting
abilities and limited spell powers (at high
level). To become a paladin
a character must be human, have a strength
of not less than 12, a minimum
intelligence
of 9, a wisdom of 13 or more, a
minimum constitution
of 9, and not less than 17 charisma. If a paladin
has
both strength and wisdom
in excess of 15, he or she gains the benefit of
adding 10% to the XP awarded
by the DM.
Law and good deeds are the meat and drink of paladins.
If they ever knowingly perform
an act which is chaotic in nature, they must seek a high
level (7th or above) cleric
of lawful good alignment, confess their sin, and
do penance as prescribed
by the cleric.
If a paladin should ever
knowingly
and willingly perform on
evil act, he or she loses the status of paladinhood
immediately and irrevocably.
All benefits are then lost,
and no deed or
magic can restore the character
to paladinhood; he or she is everafter a
fighter.
Q: What happens when
paladins lose
their exalted status? Do
they become
cavaliers or just fighters?
A: 'Fallen' paladins
do become cavaliers,
but probably disgraced ones,
regardless of
their alignment.
(136.52)
The benefits of a paladin are:
1. Detect Evil: Detect
evil at up to 60' distance, as often as
desired, but only
when the paladin is concentrating
on determining the
presence of evil and seeking
to detect it in the right general direction.
Q:
Can paladins detect the evil in all
evil-aligned
characters?
A:
The paladin's detect evil ability is like
a
detect
evil spell, not a know alignment
spell.
Thus, it can detect the presence of
evil
alignment in other characters (see the
spell
description in the PH,
page
44) and can even detect the degree,
nature,
and other alignment components,
as per
the DMG, page 41.
(136.52)
Q:
In an earlier issue, you said a paladin
?s detect
evil ability works just
like
a detect evil spell, and that it
could
detect evil characters. Isn't
there
a section in the rules that says
detect
evil spells don't work on evil
characters?
A:
There sure is. Check out the 1st Edition
DMG,
page
60. Evil characters don't always
radiate
evil. Just for the record, I
didn't
actually say that; one of my editors
did [It
was me.--Roger]. While my editors
are fine
people whose timely interventions
have
more than once caught my errors
before
I embarrassed myself in print, the
shoe
was on the other foot this time.
(156.57)
<note that the special commentary in the DMG seems to contradict the above answer>
2. Improved Saving Throws: Make all saving throws (q.v.) at +2 on the dice.
3. Immune to Disease: Immunity to all forms of disease.
Q:
Will a paladin's immunity to disease
protect
him from the touch of a
mummy,
a harm or cause disease
spell,
lycanthropy, or green slime?
A:
The paladins immunity extends to ?all
forms
of disease? (Players Handbook, page
22),
so (by implication) any disease or
condition
that is cured by a cure disease
spell
cannot be caught by a paladin. Lycanthropy,
however,
may be considered a
special
case, as a cure disease or remove
curse
from a 12th-level cleric is required
(DMG,
page 22), so this condition is as
much
a magical curse as a disease. A previous
rules
question in POLYHEDRON?
Newszine
noted that lycanthropy could be
caught
by paladins for this reason, so this
ruling
shall stand.
Of course,
this still leaves an enormous
number
of things to which paladins are
immune:
normal infections, diseases from
mummies,
the effects of numerous monster
plants
(green slime, violet fungi, etc.)
? i.e.,
anything that can be cured by the
application
of a cure disease spell alone.
Note
that the effects of yellow mold cannot
be overcome
in this manner, as the
cure
disease is applied after the PC?s death
and in
conjunction with another spell.
Some
campaigns may restrict the effects
of a
paladin?s disease immunity to those
diseases
not contracted by magical means
or from
monsters, however.
(136.52)
Q: Can
paladins become Lycanthropes?
Are they
immune to all disease?
A: Paladins
are indeed immune to all
forms
of disease. Unfortunately for them,
Lycanthropy
is as much a curse as it is a
disease.
The DMG uses an example of a
paladin
contracting lycanthropy and also
mentions
cure disease and remove curse
as ways
of eliminating it.
-- HJ
(Polyhedron #1)
Q:
Why does a paladin?s immunity to
disease
protect him from attack by
green
slime, violet fungi, and other
plant
monsters?
A:
In my opinion, it doesn?t. My editor [me
again]
assumed that since green slime can
be killed
with a cure disease spell, paladins
must
be immune to its effects. However,
green
slime is a monster with the ability to
destroy
flesh, wood, and metal. A disease
is a
malady caused by a pathogenic organism;
a paladin?s
immunity to disease does
not protect
him or his equipment from a
green
slime?s attack, its susceptibility to
cure
disease spells notwithstanding. Similarly,
a violet
fungi?s flesh-destroying attack
works
on paladins, even though cure
disease
spells halt its effects. Furthermore,
paladins
can get infected wounds (if your
campaign
considers them), as these are not
diseases
per se; cure disease spells also
remove
such infections.
(156.57)
Q.
Can paladins become lycanthropes?
Are they
immune to all disease?
A.
Paladins are indeed immune to all
forms
of disease. Unfortunately for
them,
lycanthropy is as much a curse
as it
is a disease. The DMG uses an
example
of a paladin contracting
lycanthropy
and also mentions the
spells
cure disease and remove
curse
as ways of eliminating it.
(Imagine
#3)
4. Lay on Hands:
The ability to "lay on hands",
either on others, or on his or her
own person, to cure wounds;
this heals 2 HP of damage
per level of experience
the paladin has attained, but laying on
hands can be performed but
once per day.
5. Cure Disease: The
ability to cure disease of any sort; this can be done once
per week for each five levels
of experience the paladin has
attained, i.e. at levels
1 through 5 one disease per week, at
levels 6 through 10 two
diseases, at levels 11 through 15 three
diseases, etc.
6. Protection from Evil:
The continuing emanation of protection
from evil (see
CHARACTER SPELLS)
in a 1" radius round the paladin.
Question: Is a Paladin’s protection from evil in a 1” or 10' radius?
Answer: According
to the PH, a Paladin continually emanates a protection from evil
(as per the spell) in a 1” radius around him/her.
This translates in game
distances to 10 yards outdoors and 10 feet indoors. — W. Niebling, J. Ward
(Correction: 10'
indoors and 10' outdoors. The area of a spell is not tripled outdoors,
only it's range)
Q: Can a paladin voluntarily
drop his
protection from evil 10'
radius in
order to fight a devil or
other creature
from the lower planes? The
illustration
on page 23 of the Players
Handbook would seem to indicate
that this is possible.
A: A protection from
evil 10" radius from
any source will not hedge
out a creature if
the caster allows the creature
to enter the
area of effect. Once the
circle is so broken,
the creature can freely
attack anything
within the spells radius.
Its attacks, however,
are still at -2 "to hit,"
and protected
creatures still get their
+2 bonuses to
saving throws. The protection
from evil
also continues to hedge
out any additional
creatures not voluntarily
brought within
the radius. If a creature
subsequently
leaves the circle (or the
circle shifts so that
the creature is outside
the radius), it may
not reenter unless the circle
is voluntarily
broken again. It is possible
to break the
circle accidentally, but
some DMs may
warn the paladin or spell-caster
if this
might happen, if the PC
is specifically
trying to avoid this. See
Manual
of the
Planes
for spell effects on other planes (as
is the case in that particular
illustration
you mentioned).
(137.68)
Q: Will a paladins protection from evil keep ghouls at bay?
A: Yes, but ghouls
are the only undead
creatures so affected. The
paladin (or
spell-caster) can voluntarily
break the
circle in order to melee
the ghoul, but this
allows the ghoul to return
the attack,
though at the appropriate
penalty (see the
spell's description on page
44 of the Players
Handbook).
Furthermore:
7. Turn Undead: At
3rd level, the paladin gains the power to
affect undead and
devils and demons as if
he or she were a 1 st level cleric, and
this power goes upwards
with each level of experience the
paladin gains; so at 4th
level the effect is that of a 2nd level
cleric, at 5th it is that
of a 3rd level cleric, etc.
(See The
Cleric above.)
At 4th level - or at any
time thereafter - the paladin may
call for his warhorse; this
creature is an intelligent heavy warhorse,
with 5+5 hit dice (5d8 plus
5 hit points), AC 5, and
the speed of a medium warhorse
(18"); it will magically
appear, but only one such
animal is available every ten years,
so that if the first is
lost the paladin must wait until the end of
the period for another.
9. If a paladin has a "Holy
Sword" (a special Magic Sword which
your referee is aware of
and will explain to you if the need
arises), he or she projects
a circle of power 1" in diameter
when the Holy Sword is unsheathed
and held; and this power
dispels magic (see CHARACTER
SPELLS, dispel magic) at the
level of magic use equal
to the experience level of the
paladin.
<there are 2 kinds of
"holy swords": +5 and +6>
10. Clerical Spellcasting:
At 9th level (through 20th level) of experience, paladins gain
the ability to employ cleric
spells (q.v.). They may never use
scrolls of spells, however,
except those normally usable by
fighters.
Q: At what level do
paladins cast
their spells?
A: Paladins get their
first spell at 9th level
and are treated as 1st-level
casters at 9th
level, 2nd-level casters
at 10th level, etc.
(137.68)
Q: Do paladins receive
bonus clerical
spells for high wisdom?
A: No, only clerics
and druids get them.
(137.68)
The following strictures apply to paladins:
1. They
may never retain more than ten magic items; these may
never exceed:
* these include daggers,
swords, etc.; and such items as magic
bows && magic arrows
are considered as but 1 weapon
Q: Can high-level
paladins use clerical
magic items?
A: No, not unless
the clerical item?s description
specifically says that a
paladin or
noncleric may use it. This
holds true even
for paladins who can cast
clerical spells.
(136.52)
2. They
will never retain wealth, keeping only sufficient
treasures to support themselves
in a modest manner, pay
henchmen, men-at-arms, and
servitors, and to construct or
maintain a small castle.
(Your DM will give details of this as
necessary.) Excess is given
away, as is the tithe (see 3. below).
3. An immediate tithe (10%)
of all income - be it treasure,
wages, or whatever - must
be given to whatever charitable
religious institution (not
a clerical player character) of lawful
good alignment the paladin
selects.
4. Paladins will have henchmen
of lawful good alignment and
none other; they will associate
only with characters and
creatures of good alignment;
paladins can join a company of
adventurers which contains
non-evil neutrals only on a single expedition
basis, and only if some
end which will further the
cause of lawful good is
purposed.
5. If possible, paladins
will take service or form an alliance with
lawful good characters,
whether players or not, who are
clerics or fighters (of
noble status).
Paladins do not attract a
body of men-at-arms to service as do regular
fighters.
Question: My friend
and I had a dis-
pute about whether or not
a Paladin will
go on an adventure with
neutral
good characters.
I say no, because on page
24
of the Players Handbook
it says “...they
(Paladins) will associate
only with char-
acters and creatures of
good alignment.”
I would like to know who
is right.
Answer: Your friend
is right. Neutral
good is a “good alignment,”
just as law-
ful good and chaotic
good are. Although
a Paladin greatly prefers
to associate
with none other than lawful
good char-
acters and creatures, it
also notes on
page 24 of the PHthat
“paladins can join a company
of adven-
turers which contains non-evil
neutrals
only on a single-expedition
basis.”
Experience Points | Experience Level | 10-Sided Dice for Accumulated
Experience Points |
Level Title | THACO * | Saves ** | Notes *** | Proficiencies | NPC XP | SCL **** | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
(-1,500 to -501) | 0 | 1d4 + 1 | Horseman | 20n | 16.17.18.20.19 | Start at 0 if not LUC+ | 1/1 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
(-501 to -1) | 0 | 2d4 + 1 | Lancer | 20n | ^ | Start at 0 if not LUC+ | 2/1 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
0 ---- 2,750 | 1 | 1 | Gallant | 20 | 14.15.16.17.17 | WOC | 3/2 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
2,751 ---- 5,500 | 2 | 2 | Keeper | 19 | ^ | - | ^ | - | - | - | - | - | - |
5,501 ---- 12,000 | 3 | 3 | Protector | 18 | 13.14.15.16.16 | Turn undead, WOC, Saddle vault | ^ | - | - | - | - | - | - |
12,001 ---- 24,000 | 4 | 4 | Defender | 17 | ^ | Warhorse | 4/3 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
24,001 ---- 45,000 | 5 | 5 | Warder | 16 | 11.12.13.13.14 | WOC, Mount SPEED | ^ | - | - | - | - | - | - |
45,001 ---- 95,000 | 6 | 6 | Guardian
|
15 | ^ | - | ^ | - | - | - | - | - | - |
95,001 ---- 175,000 | 7 | 7 | Chevalier | 14 (3/2) | 10.11.12.12.13 | WOC, Ride pegasus | 5/4 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
175,001 ---- 350,000 | 8 | 8 | Justiciar | 13 | ^ | - | ^ | - | - | - | - | - | - |
350,001 ---- 700,000 | 9 | 9 | Paladin (Knight - OSRIC) | 12 | 8.9.10.9.11 | WOC, Ride hippogriff | ^ | - | 1 | 1 | - | - | - |
700,001 ---- 1,050,000 | 10 | 9+3 | Paladin (10th level) | 11 | ^ | - | 6/5 | - | 2 | 2 | - | - | - |
1,050,001 ---- 1,400,000 | 11 | 9+6 | Paladin (11th level) | 10 | 7.8.9.8.10 | WOC, Ride griffon | ^ | - | 3 | 2 | 1 | - | - |
1,400,001 ---- 1,750,000 | 12 | 9+8 | Paladin (12th level) | 9 (2/1) | ^ | - | ^ | - | 4 | 2 | 2 | - | - |
1,750,001 ---- 2,100,000 | 13 | 9+10 | Paladin (13th level) | 8 | 5.6.7.5.8 | WOC | 7/6 | - | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | - |
2,100,001 ---- 2,450,000 | 14 | 9+12 | Paladin (14th level) | 7 | ^ | - | ^ | - | 6 | 3 | 2 | 1 | - |
2,450,001 ---- 2,800,000 | 15 | 9+14 | Paladin (15th level) | 6 | 4.5.6.4.7 | WOC | ^ | - | 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
2,800,001 ---- 3,150,000 | 16 | 9+16 | Paladin (16th level) | 5 | ^ | - | 8/7 | - | 8 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
3,150,001 ---- 3,500,000 | 17 | 9+18 | Paladin (17th level) | 4 | 3.4.5.4.6 | WOC | ^ | - | 9 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
3,500,001 ---- 3,850,000 | 18 | 9+20 | Paladin (18th level) | 3 | ^ | - | ^ | - | 10 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
3,850,001 ---- 4,200,000 | 19 | 9+22 | Paladin (19th level) | 3 (5/2) | ^ | WOC | 9/8 | - | 11 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
4,200,001 ---- 4,550,000 | 20 | 9+24 | Paladin (20th level) | 3 | ^ | - | ^ | - | 12 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
350,000 XP per level for each additional level above the 11th.
Paladins gain 3 h.p. per level after the
9th.
Constitution-based HP adjustments no longer
apply after 9th level. - OSRIC
<>
* THACO is based on per
level progression
** Does not incl. +2 paladin bonus
*** Generally ignore this column if you
are not playing with the UA rules. WOC = weapon
of choice.
**** Spell Casting Level.
NB: Paladins do not gain bonus
cleric spells for having high wisdom. This ability is limited to "true"
priests, i.e. clerics or druids. - OSRIC
<>
<do paladins gain retainers? my guess: no>
SPELLS
USABLE BY CLASS AND LEVEL -- PALADINS
Clerical Spell Level
Paladin Level | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
9 | 1 | - | - | - |
10 | 2 | - | - | - |
11 | 2 | 1 | - | - |
12 | 2 | 2 | - | - |
13 | 2 | 2 | 1 | - |
14 | 3 | 2 | 1 | - |
15 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
16 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
17 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
18 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
19 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
20* | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
* Maximum spell ability.
QUESTION: Do Rangers
and Paladins cast spells at their level or do they cast them as a first
level?
Would a 9th-level Ranger
cast a spell as a 1st-level MU or would he
cast it as a 9th-level Magic-user?
ANSWER: He would cast
it as though he were a 9th-level Magic-User.
I don’t agree with this,
but I am informed that it is correct.
I still think they should
cast spells as a 1st-level Magic-User.
(Correction: Rangers
and paladins cast at 1st level when they first gain the ability to cast
spells. See here.)
Question: Do Paladins
and Rangers have to have special gods to pray
to in order to obtain their spells?
Do their gods have to be
patron gods of Paladins and Rangers?
Answer: No.
The only absolute restriction
on the selection of
a deity by a Paladin or
Ranger is based on alignment -- that is,
the character’s god obviously
cannot be of an evil nature. While
a Paladin could be expected
to only pay homage to a lawful
good deity, in general it
would be possible for a Ranger (for
example) of neutral good
alignment to pray to a chaotic good
deity. — J. Wells
Question: In our town
of Terre Haute, there is an eighth-
level paladin that has a
favorite saying, “Repent or Die.” On one
occasion he pulled back
the arm of a captured orc, placed a
Ring
of regeneration on his finger and then ripped his face off.
When the orc’s face healed,
he would do it again. He says he
has a valid right to do
this, because torture was very much a
part of the inquisition
and he is saving the orc’s soul. This
raises two questions. First,
is the paladin still a paladin and if
not, is he changed forever?
Answer: Inform the
paladin he isn’t one any more. His new align-
ment is now lawful
evil. Paladins tend to frown upon torture of any kind
for any reason and would
not let it be done in their presence, let alone
do it themselves. Good and
the process of law must be followed.
Everything a paladin does
must obey laws of good and thereby insure
that all are treated fairly
and just.
Granted, a lot of cruel
and heartless things have been done in the
name of religion, but that
doesn’t mean that it was good or right. Men
have always done strange
things for even stranger reasons. For the
paladin to have tortured
the orc was an evil act, and therefore he
has
given up the right to be
a paladin. I suggest that he not be allowed to
regain it, either, but if
you decide to let him, make sure the quest is long,
hard, and nearly impossible
to accomplish.
Q: What should a paladin
character
do when he captures an evil
opponent?
A: Let?s say that
a hill giant
(encountered in its lair
on a wilderness
adventure) surrenders to
the
paladin, expecting mercy;
can the
paladin kill it?
A careful reading of the
alignment sections
of the Players Handbook
(pages 33-34) and the DMG (pages
23-25) should be
helpful here. In your example,
any of
several actions are justifiable
in terms of
the lawful-good alignment
? if the DM
sees them that way:
1. The captive giant could
be killed
immediately if it had committed
great
crimes and represented a
threat to the
community at large. Conversely,
this could
be construed as a neutral-evil
act in which
the strong dominate the
weak and ignore
mercy.
2. The captive giant could
be released if
it has committed no crimes,
and if allowed
to live may remember this
kindness and
become a useful member of
society. Conversely,
this can be construed as
a chaotic
act in which the rights
of the individual
are held higher than the
welfare of the
community at large.
3. The captive giant could
be kept prisoner
and either forced to work
in a manner
that would contribute to
the common
weal, or it could be educated
in the hopes
that it will change its
alignment and
become good. Conversely,
this can be
construed as a lawful-evil
act in which a
creature is forced to serve
the prevailing
order and conform to another?s
interpretation
of what is right.
An aside: Is this option
actually slavery?
Slavery was, historically
speaking, not
always considered evil.
Prisoners of war,
whether civilian || military,
were enslaved to make them
useful and to avoid killing them in the society of the victorious nation.
However, deliberate raiding
for slaves is evil, and their treatment can easily become evil in any slave-owning
society.
If the paladin in the example
meant to force all hill giants to serve
humanity, then this would
be slavery. The
DM must think his way through
considerable
cultural relativism on this
topic, but it
is recommended in the AD&D
game that
slavery be considered an
evil act. In this
event, prisoners convicted
of evil deeds
and sentenced to hard labor
cannot be
considered slaves.
4. The captive giant
could be forced to
swear an oath to behave
itself and work
for the common good of humanity
(or, at
worst, to leave humanity
alone). This
could also be held to be
a chaotic act if the
giant?s trustworthiness
is questionable.
Obviously, the paladin must
do something
with the giant. Ultimately,
it is up to
the paladin?s player to
decide what should
be done, and up to the DM
to decide if the
character?s motives were
pure or otherwise.
It is strongly suggested
that the
player and DM take a short
halt in the
game to discuss this, so
the PC isn?t unfairly
penalized for his actions.
(136.52)
In my first column I had
a question concerning a paladin and his
sudden alignment
change. That letter, like most, was extremely long
and it did not warrant a
whole column. I only printed part of that
section. I, however, see
the error of my ways. I should have explained
that the paladin had done
many other evil things before and that
warranted an alignment change.
It was not sudden. It was just that he
had to be informed that
he wasn’t a paladin anymore. If I believed in
anti-paladins, that is what
he would be considered by me.
Question: Can a Paladin put someone to death if the victim is severely scarred and doesn’t want to live?
Answer #1: Absolutely
not!
The Paladin would try to
find a reason for the person to live, if not with the world,
then shut away doing religious
work where those who benefit from the aid would not care what he looks
like.
The Paladin would also do
all that he could to see that the
character did not succeed
in taking his own life.
Answer #2: The "Sage
Advice" column in The Dragon #36 (Vol. IV, No. 10,
April 1980) contained some
interesting questions and answers regarding "good" as related to Paladins
and Rangers.
Let us examine these in
light of the foregoing.
A player with a Paladin character
asks if this character can "put
someone to death (who) is
severely scarred and doesn?t want to
live." Although the
Sage Advice reply was a strong negative, the
actual truth of the matter
might lie somewhere else. The player does
not give the name of the
deity served by the Paladin. This is the key
to lawful good behavior
in AD&D terms. Remember that ?good?
can be related to reality
ofttimes, but not always. It might also relate
to good as perceived in
the past, actual or mythical. In the latter case,
a Paladin could well force
conversion at swordpoint, and, once
acceptance of ?the true
way? was expressed, dispatch the new
convert on the spot. This
assures that the prodigal will not return to
the former evil ways, sends
the now-saved spirit on to a better place,
and incidentally rids the
world of a potential troublemaker. Such
actions are "good," in these
ways:
1. Evil is abridged (by at
least one creature).
2. Good has gained a convert.
3 . The convert now has
hope for rewards (rather than torment)
in the afterlife.
4. The good populace is
safer (by a factor of at least 1).
It is therefore possible
for a Paladin to, in fact, actually perform a
"mercy killing" such as
the inquiring player asked about, provided
the tenets of his or her
theology permitted it. While unlikely, it is
possible.
Question: I am a 12th-level
Paladin and I want to start a lineage.
Is this possible?
Can my Paladin get married,
and if so, can he have children?
Answer #1: Well, most
believe that Paladins practice celibacy.
I firmly uphold this belief
and will not allow my Paladin, Guinivere, to marry.
This is a personal decision,
or it can be made by your DM for you.
Even if they don’t marry,
I am quite sure that Paladins are capable of having children.
Answer #2: Another
case in point was that of a player with a Paladin character who wishes
to marry and begin a lineage.
Again, our "Sage Advisor"
suggests a negative. While many religions forbid wedlock
and demand celibacy, this
is by no means universal. The key is again
the deity served, of course.
DMs not using specific deities will harken
back to the origin of the
term Paladin and realize that celibacy is not a
condition of that sort of
Paladinhood. Also, although the Roman
Catholic church demands
celibacy of its priests, the doctrines of
Judeo-Christianity hold
matrimony and child bearing and rearing as
holy and proper, i.e. "good."
So unless a particular deity demands
celibacy of its fighter-minions,
there is no conceivable reason for a
Paladin not to marry and
raise children. This is a matter for common
sense--and the DM, who,
if not arbitrary, will probably agree with
the spirit of AD&D
and allow marriage and children (This must be a
long-range campaign, or
else its participants are preoccupied with
unusual aspects of the game.
No matter . . .)
QUESTION: Is there an anti-Ranger and an anti-Paladin in AD&D?
ANSWER: It depends.
I say no, but others say yes.
It doesn’t say that there
is an anti-anything in any of the AD&D
books.
If you play straight BtB,
there is no anti-Paladin or anti-Ranger.
Question: Is there
such a thing as a lawful neutral Pala-
din? We have a dwarf who
is one.
Answer: No, there
is no such thing as a lawful neutral Paladin—
and, for that matter, there
is no such thing as a dwarven Paladin. All
Paladins must be human and
must be lawful good in alignment.
Question: May a Paladin initiate melee or must he/she wait for provocation?
Answer: Just because
a character or creature is lawful good does
not mean they will allow
themselves to be placed in positions where
they can be taken advantage
of. When dealing with beings that are
not lawful good, they will
not only be constantly on their guard, they
will also deal with them
as they would be dealt with by those of other
alignments. They will not
allow a demon the first strike just to be sport-
ing, or let a band of orcs
have the first arrow shots just because they
are far weaker than the
paladin, or let a beautiful neutral illusionist CAST
a spell on them just because
she is a woman (or pretty). The class sur-
vives because it innately
knows how to deal with other alignments and
not be tricked by the lawless
ways of others. — J. Ward, W. Niebling
l l l
Question: Can paladins
contract lycanthropy?
Question: Will the
rotting caused by Demogorgon have an effect on monks of fifth level or
higher, since they are immune to disease?
Answer: Yes, a paladin
can become a lycanthrope.
Answer: Yes, a high-level
monk can be affected by Demogorgon’s
rot-disease attack.
The immunity to disease
that is enjoyed by paladins and by monks of
fifth level or higher applies
only to “natural” diseases, such as
those listed in the table
on page 14 of the DMG, and not to
“unnatural” diseases such
as those caused by the attack or
touch of a monster. The
same thing goes for the rotting disease
transmitted by a mummy or
the “disease” caused by the spread
of green slime, for instance.
SA:
Paladins & Marriage & Pregnancy
Q: Is it acceptable
for paladin characters
to drink alcoholic beverages?
A: Whether or not
paladins may consume
alcohol is up to the DM.
In making such a
decision, the DM should
consider the
beliefs and general tendencies
of the paladin
?s religion. It is also
helpful to keep in
mind that the only beverages
which could
not be infected or spoiled
in the Middle
Ages were alcoholic; the
only major teetotaling
culture in the world at
the time was
the Islamic Middle East.
Balance this with
an understanding of the
obvious effects of
overindulgence, of course;
lack of moderation
was the offense that most
concerned
real-world medieval society.
(136.52)
Related Article: Cavaliers and Paladins in the Forgotten Realms
As for AD&D
questions, i find them pretty tedious, as the game system is out of print
and not supported by any publisher. That said, I'll respond briefly:
Paladins are indeed meant to be the bravest, most loyal, and purest of knights. If there is societal proscription against something, including a knight using a bow, then a paladin would not do so unless it was to save the life of some honored figure, such as his liege lord. that duty would likely over-ride his honor. another example is the killing evil prisoners that have surrendered and asserted a change of alignment to the paladin's own. This is not generally unacceptable, for that act assures the former lost ones will go on to a better reward in the after life and no returning to their evil ways.
- Gary
Gary,
I had a situation come up. The group had been ambushed by a group of Ogres, and managed to fight them off and capture the remaining one. They questioned it(By tying it upside down and hanging it by its feet from a tree.) They learned that it was part of the assualt group that had just attacked a keep some days before. And this PC group was part of the defense of the keep. The paladin in the group, once finding out that no more harm will come from this tribe. That this is the last ogre, decides to execute the Ogre. Their mission is to get to the highfolk, and thus they dont have time to drag a ogre to authorities. Its clear the ogre will only slow them down. The Dwarf who was doing the questioning, gets pissed at the Paladin for jumping in and finishing off his prisoner. Walks over to the Paladins horse and ...
Phoebewedh walks over to
Ivric's horse and slits its throat.
"Don't tarry when you run
to catch up with us.
If you ever so much as interfere
with my prisoners again I will gut you like a pig and feed you to my boar.
" he says to the paladin.
I explain to the character
that this is not a good act(the dwarf.), I am thinking that he needs an
alignment change to CN from this act. Furthermore killing a Paladin of
Heironeous's warhorse isn't going to sit lightly with the paladin, and
likely a duel to the death will take place here. What would you do in htis
situation(the dwarf is CG).
What would I do as the DM
in the above situation?
I'd carefull referee the combat between the paladin and dwarf, for the former surely must not allow such an affront to occur or else lose his paladin status
BTW, I'd give the paladin a +1 to both hit and damage his opponent due to rage at the foul act of sttacking a horse.
Cheers,
Gary
<>
So...
That is wasn't the paladin's
warhorse makes the matter less serious, but only marginally so. the paladin's
honor was besmirched by the dwarf, and as the DM I would call that to the
attention of the player of the paladin if there was less than great umbrage
taken.
To allow the incident to
pass without punishing the offending dwarf would be a dark stain on the
honor of the paladin.
Paladins are not stupid,
and in general there is no rule of Lawful Good against killing enemies.
The old addage about nits
making lice applies.
Also, as I have often noted,
a paladin can freely dispatch prisoners of Evil alignment that have surrrendered
and renounced that alignment in favor of Lawful Good.
They are then sent on to
their reward before thay can backslide
Cheers,
Gary
<>
An eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth is by no means anything but Lawful and Good.
Prisoners guilty of murder
or similar capital crimes can be executed without violating any precept
of the alignment.
Hanging is likely the usual
method of such execution, although it might be beheading, strangulation,
etc.
A paladin is likely a figure
that would be considered a fair judge of criminal conduct.
The Anglo-Saxon punishment
for rape and/or murder of a woman was as follows:
tearing off of the scalp,
cutting off of the ears and nose, blinding, chopping off of the feet and
hands, and leaving the criminal beside the road for all bypassers to see.
I don't know if they cauterized
the limb stumps or not before doing that.
It was said that a woman
and child could walk the length and breadth of England without fear of
molestation then...
Chivington might have been
quoted as saying "nits make lice," but he is certainly not the first one
to make such an observation as it is an observable fact.
If you have read the account
of wooden Leg, a warrior of the Cheyenne tribe that fought against Custer
et al., he dispassionately noted killing an enemy squaw for the reason
in question.
Cheers,
Gary
Elfdart wrote:
Because there's so much
contention over what is Good, what was Good and what might be Good, I always
make it clear from the outset what would be allowed from a Paladin.
There's a big difference
between a lawful execution and a lynching.
A paladin is qualified to
be judge and jury--assuming he is acting according to the oath he took
to gain his status.
Elfdart wrote:
If I'm going to have a Paladin
in the group, I make sure he is given the legal power to dish out justice
(like US marshalls used to) and the right to try and string up bandits
and the like.
This way he is being both
Lawful and Good.
That is logical and correct
in my estimation.
Elfdart wrote:
As I wrote earlier, I don't
believe in putting PCs in the position of "What do we do with all of these
baby goblins now that we've killed the adults?".
I simply don't include them,
or contrive some reason why the PCs don't have to deal with them.
In other words, I don't
put PCs in the position where doing an FRPG William
Calley is an option.
An astute manner of managing
such a dilema.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Also pertaining to Rangers,
if they cast a spell like Animal Friendship, and they are say 12th level,
is the Hit Die that the Ranger can get based on his Ranger levels, or only
the levels he was able to start casting druid spells?
Thanks
Spells are case as 1st level
when they are initially included in the capacity of a class.
Thus, the levels of non-spell-casting
sort are ot counted.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally posted by CrusaderX
Gary, I'm curious about
your thoughts on the D&D (or AD&D) Paladin class. Many gamers see
the Paladin's Lawful Good alignment restriction as an essential part of
this class. Other players, however, have no problem with allowing Chaotic
Good Paladins, Lawful Evil Paladins, and Paladins of any and all alignments.
Do you think that the Paladin's Lawful Good alignment restriction is an appropriate, or even an essential, element of this class? I myself am all for having "Holy Warriors" of all alignments, but I've always viewed the "Paladin" title as being uniquely bound to the service of both Law and Goodness. Maybe I'm just a traditionalist.
Also, from where did the class concept originate? Is it true that Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions story is one of the main influences of the AD&D Paladin?
Thank you for your time,
good sir! This is indeed a wonderful thread.
Welcome CrusaderX.
Pleased to be of service...and
to have a bit of fun in so doing.
As far as I am concerned,
the Paladin is Lawful Good--perior.
The class takes vows, swears
an oath, and then follows it. <note: ceremony: special
vows is an option>
The concept is drawn from
some legend--Authurian--and some quasi-legend--the
paladins of Charlemaine plus the code of chivalry as it was written, more
honored in the breach than the keeping. As described in the game system,
any characyer that was of paladin class would cease being so immediately
his vows were broken.
Playing a proper paladin is often mishandled also. They are not stupid per se, only bound by oaths. For example I did allow paladins to slay dangerous prisoners if those individuals renounced Evil. In such a state of grace, killing them is actually a Good act, for they will then go on to a better life in another world instead of being sent to some dark and dismal plane to suffer for their ways after death. While a paladin will fight to the death if necessary, they are not usually bound to suicidal valor for no pirpose.
Anyway, while Poul Anderson
in his excellent THREE HEARTS & THREE LIONS was treating Oiger the
Dane as his protagonist, that work was not the source for the paladin class.
I did borrow a good deal
from the troll he had in the yarn though
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally posted by ColonelHardisson
Three Hearts and Three Lions
didn't inspire the paladin? Wow. I always thought it did. Another urban
legend dispelled.
Well that's the way it goes
In truth I was using the
older sources for the model of the paladin, and the 12 Paladins of Charlemaigne
was my main inspiration.
Of course it didn't hurt
that I had been told the story of Roland at about age three...
Howdy Ken
Well, as the Paladin is supposed to be the virtuous warrior wholly dedicated to being upright and doing good, the Detect Evil capacity seemed natural.
I envisaged it as being one
that the Paladin must use with active thought, that meaning when he is
thus engaged he can be doing nothing else.
(It was not meant as an
automatic sensing device akin to a Geiger counter detecting radiation level.)
The Evil needs to be an active force such as in a character or a spirit entity or at worst a semi-intelligent monster able to contemplate doing wicked things, or an active magical effect that has a sentient quality that triggers it malign effect.
Okay, there is is, and don't ask why this isn't quantified thus in the original PHB
cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally posted by
Joseph
Elric Smith
So as a follow then why would
people think it is rude for a paladin to detect evil? or would they, not
that they do IMC, as it is considered part of there make up.
Ken
If in the company of gentle
folk, certainly belted knights and nobles, for a Paladin to perform a detection
for evil is clearly a gross insult to all those present!
Only if there is ample reason
for a devoutly religious person to suspect some malign influence might
the act be considered otherwise.
To do so before a sovereigh
head of state, directed at that one, is certainly lesse majeste, perhaps
a capital offense.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordVyreth
Second, there has been a
fairly lively series of debates on the Wizards boards lately about alignment.
A lot of people seem to be very vocal on the issue of alignment, and exactly
what a good alignment creature can do to evil or potentially evil creatures.
Some even went so far as to suggest it's right to kill all babies of a
typically evil race like, say, hobgoblins, just because they'll probably
grow up to be evil. Others suggest that detect evil should suffice for
immediate punishment, especially for paladins. This could mean a paladin
has the right to kill every greedy merchant and pickpocket he sees, just
because he detects them as evil, without even witnessing the crime. What
is your opinion on how a paladin should react in these and similar situations,
or any good creature in general? I could post the links to the debates
if you want.
Alignment
was meant primarily as a role-playing tool.
(Despite what some of the
"mature" and "sophisticated" gamers assert, roleplay was indeed a central
feature of the AD&D game from the proverbial get-go.) the player was
to be guided by it when role-playing his character, and the DM had the
same benchmarks to use in judging the PC's actions.
The debates now make me regret
that I ever included the system feature, as it is being taken beyond the
pale.
Better to have the character's
actions speak for their ethics and morality than some letter set.
Rhe main problem seems to
be that the players are assuming alignment in a vacuum, without reference
to any deities establishing and overseeing the matters concerned with such
judgements and actions.
Bacause the main system
fails to provide properly for deities to be active in such matters, abuses
of the most eggregious sort take place.
A paladin is supposed to
be the architype of the Christian knight.
that means focusing on doing
right, spreading the word about the faith (in the deity the paladin serves),
helping others of goodwill, protecting the weak, etc.
Judging others not opposing
the paladin is quite out of the picture.
This is a subject that I
could write a complete essay on, but it is bootless.
Let those who publish the
system clean up the mess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calico_Jack73
... I'd like your view on
the Paladin class and the features that make is supposedly "Unplayable".
Thank you so much for your
input Gary.
First, many a Paladin PC
has been played, and that done successfully generally following the rules
for the class as written.
Lawful Good does not equate to stupid or foolish, It means the PC must follow the Law as determined by the deity the Paladin acknowledges, and thus promote Good according to that Law.
As I have pointed out at times, a Paladin might well execute a group of captives after they have converted from their former (Evil) alignment to Lawful Good, for that act saves their sould, prevents them from slipping back into error.
A Paladin will not normally
sacrifice himself, fight needlessly, unless it is a situation where honor
and duty demand that.
Such sacrifice would have
to be demonstrably for the betterment of his deity, or else based on anoath
the character made prior to the dire situation.
While in general a Paladin can not lie, that does not mean he must say anything, or can not answer evasively or mislead--if that is according to the tenents of his avowed LG deity.
A Paladin played by someone that doen not understand the basis of the Code of Chivalry taken to the extreme and attached to religion is likely unplayable, but that's the fault of the player, not the class.
Yes, I have played a Paladin character, but not for long, as I don't enjoy Lwaful Good characters much--too restrictive for a Chaotic sort of person such as I am
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jyrdan
Fairblade
Second, the actual question;
what is your concept of the paladin's code? That seems to have been a particularly
vexing problem in many campaigns, with paladin's slaughtering baby orcs,
or alternately raising orcish children as their own, attacking thieves
for the slightest infraction, or being guilty of enormous hubris and arrogance
(Which goes against the high charisma required for the class).
that sounds about right.
The paladin is modeled on
the medieval paladins of Charlemagne, and they were surely a conflicted
lot.
What is and isn't chivalrous
and honorable is up to the DM, but slaughtering baby orcs isn't likely
to fall into either class.
Slaughterind adult orcs
converted to Lawful Good is likely acceptable, as it sends them on to a
better reward, prevents them from backsliding to evil ways.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewJeffCT
To take the paladin thing
a bit further, we had a lengthy thread on here a few months back about
whether paladins should be chaste/celibate, as in they do not engage in
any sexual activity at all. I had started the thread because I was wondering
why so many DMs seem to require paladins to be basically sexless when the
various Player's Handbooks dating back to 1st Edition do not technically
require it.
When you DM somebody playing a paladin, is this an unwritten part of your paladin code?
I will say that sex/love is not something that comes up every session in our games, but I was thinking about it a while back when a paladin PC of mine basically stood guard while the rest of the group was visiting our game's equivalent of the Castle Anthrax... And, I am also not saying that the paladin would be wildly promiscuous like a medieval era Wilt Chamberlin, but I could see a paladin in a committed monogamous relationship with a follower of the same deity.
Where on earth such a notion
came from is quite beyond me...and beyond the pale.
Paladins have no requirement
of celibacy, and those of the troubador bent can be unchaste as well.
How they fare with that
is a matter of what deity they honor, of course.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewJeffCT
I think it comes from a
time a bit later than Charlemagne - possibly the Templar Knights of the
Crusades that aspired to things like celibacy and devotion to God above
all earthly pleasures, though it rarely held true in actual practice. (To
quote Monty Python & The Holy Grail, "I am Sir Galahad, the Chaste")
I had mentioned it because I have been playing D&D for over 25 years now and in many different groups and that sort of ideal always seems to be the unwritten rule of paladinhood.
Well that makes no sense
for anyone to do, as the Templars were holy knights and warriors, not paladins.
As for anything serious based on Arthurian fairy tales, I scoff
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
Yes, but then Lancelot was
a Cavalier, not a Paladin!
Heh,
You are interpreting the
fabulous to suit your veiw
Lancelot
was a knight as was Galahad, the only
potentially celibate knight of the make-believe round table.
The only named paladins
were the knights of Charlemagne such as Roland and Oiger.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
Merely giving my translation
of certain literary characters into AD&D terms.
I've always conceptualized the difference between Cavalier and Paladin
as that between Lancelot and Galahad. It rather fits, don't you think?
And of course, Ogier AKA Holger Carlson was the ONLY literary Paladin that exactly fits AD&D terms.
Who can argue in regards
your translating one bit of fantasy into another?...I did that a lot when
i designed the game.
However, I would argue that Roland was a model of the paladin, more so than even Oiger.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerraDave
Roland the model Paladin,
and not the Holier then Holy Galahad?? In there best known forms, both
are basically the best Knights the French could imagine (country of origin
not withstanding)
Only one small difference...
There probably was a Roland, and there never was a Galahad.
cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOZ
paladins weren't really
supposed to be knights... thus, the cavalier.
Well, not the typical knight
anyway <nervous laugh>
Ciao,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuce
Traveler
Gary, what were the more
memorable paladins that you've seen played?
Heh,
There were only a few played in my campaign, but there were two that were remarkable,
That played by Don Arndt
was the most cautious one I have ever experienced or heard of.
His behavior was so remarkable
that the Artifict, "Invulnerable
coat of Arn" was created to jape at such play.
The most paladin-like PC
in the campaign was played by Mark Ratner with Aylerach, a paragon of bravery
and virtue.
He was duped into freeing
the demon Fraz-Urbluu from his prison in Greyhawk Castle, the delighted
demon carrying both he and Erac back to his home in the Abyss as a reward.
Sadly, both of Erac's Vorpal Blades alng with Aylerach's two-handed +5
Holy Avenger turned into useless bars of iron there. Although both PCS
were reutrned to the PMP, neither was very pleased with me as their DM
for that adventure.
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry
That said, have you ever
given an opinion on the "Paladin vs. an Orc Baby" scenario before? (Otherwise
known as the "would you strangle baby Hitler?" moral question.)
Not directly.
If the infant orc
was not able to reason, the paladin would not slay it, possibly see to
its care somewhere until it reached a state where reason was possible;
but if and when the immature
humanoid was able to reason, the paladin would make it swear its rejection
of evil, confess its adherance to LG, and then execute it before it could
recant.
Thus the orc would be guaranteed
acceptence in a more benign afterlife.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by rossik
wow....that really changed
my point of view about paladins...very good
but in the other questiom, about turning evil dragons to good, the dagon would take much more time to reason, no?
would he kill in instants a red dragon?
(btw, love the info about he footlocker!)
Good Afternooon,
Note that the "converted"
evil humanoid" is quite unlikely to remain so,
will return to its evil
ways,
so thus the mercy killing
by the paladin to assure that doesn't happen.
It is all for the good of
the subject of course.
The same surely holds true
of evil dragons.
A permanent conversion from
the malign is most unlikely, the best outcome likely being a neutral creature
with evil tendencies.
Thus I hold that a paladin
will attack on sight any evil monster of that sort...assuming he believes
there is a reasonable chance of prevailing.
Otherwise, the paladin will
mark the location to return with a stronger force.
As for Footlocker nagic items, the class in a new, Grade 13 one, and it contains four progressively more powerful versions of the item. The most potent is reminescent of Luggage.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry
Of course there's that sticky
problem of the paladin having now chopped down a publicly-declared "good"
creature, but I have to admit I can appreciate the finality of the solution.
Hi Henry,
That should pose no problem with those folk of the same persuation as the paladin, as they will understand and agree with that most caring dispatch of a reformed miscreant to a better place.
Of course those of the same alignment as the "converted" will absolutely hate the deed and its doer.
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcas
...
A paladin would not have
our modern notions of the death penalty. . . .
What do you mean by "our"?
Some of us are not nancy boys...or the like
Cheers,
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey
On paladins: I definitely
like violent paladins. Remember that in Rob Kuntz's first Maze module one
of the PCs is assumed to be a paladin on a mission to assassinate the king!
(Puts me in mind of Aquinas's and the Jesuit's justification of killing
unjust kings.) My favorite model for a paladin is R. E. Howard's Solomon
Kane. No Nancy-boy, he!
I quite concur in regards
paladins.
Charlemagne's paladins fought
the Saracens without mercy.
Cheers,
Gary
The paladin was likewise
loosely drawn from the Paladins of Charlemagne and the Code of Chivalry.
Changes in both archetypes
were mandated by the game system for which they were designed.
As they two are quite different
archetypes, criticism of these classes on grounds of similarity is fatuois.
The purpose of each class
in the campaign milieu is quite different.
Cheers,
Gary
1. SUBCLASS = cavalier
2. SOCIAL CLASS MINIMUM = LUC (01: LLC
to UMC, begin at 0)
3. ABILITY SCORE MINIMUMS
STRENGTH = 15 (7d6)
INTELLIGENCE = 10 (5d6)
WISDOM = 13 (8d6)
DEXTERITY = 15 (3d6)
CONSTITUTION = 15 (6d6)
CHARISMA = 17 (9d6)
COMELINESS = 3 (4d6)
4. POSSIBLE RACES & MAX. LEVEL ATTAINABLE
= half-elf, human <level limits for half-elves
are not noted in UA>
5. MULTI-CLASS POSSIBILITIES = none
6. HIT DIE TYPE = d10 (1d4+1 at 0 level)
7. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF HIT DICE = 9
8. SPELL ABILITY = yes
9. ARMOR PERMITTED = any (A paladin will
not
wear leather, padded,
or studded leather armor, because
such garb is beneath the character's
station.) <>
10. SHIELD PERMITTED = any
11. WEAPONS PERMITTED = any (Similary,
a cavalier or paladin will not USE pole arms, missile weapons, or
other types of arms that are commonly associated with the lower social
classes. See the description of the cavalier class above for particulars.)
Q:
Unearthed Arcana says that cavaliers
and paladins
use pole arms and
missile
weapons only at high levels.
How high
is high enough?
A:
A cavalier or paladin must be proficient
in all
the class?s preferred weapons (<Weapons
of Choice>: see
Unearthed
Arcana, page 14) before he can
become
proficient in pole arms, bows, or
other
weapons not on the preferred list.
(137.68)
12. OIL PERMITTED = no (The use of oil
in personal combat is unacceptable to the cavalier, but such characters
may USE oil in siege warfare.)
13. POISON PERMITTED = never
14. ALIGNMENT = LG
15. STARTING MONEY = see Starting
Money for Cavaliers
16. WEAPON PROFICIENCIES = 3*, 1/2 levels
(1st: 3, 3rd: 4, 5th: 5, 7th: 6, 9th: 7, 11th: 8, 13th: 9, 15th: 10, 17th:
11, 19th: 12) (Choose from the following list)
(*Lance
(required at level 1), long sword, broad
sword, bastard sword, short
sword, horseman's mace, horseman's
flail, horseman's military
pick, dagger, scimitar, and javelin.)
(Add short composite bow for elven and
half-elven paladins)
17. NON-PROFICIENCY PENALTY = -3
18. NON-WEAPON
PROFICIENCIES = 2, 1/2 levels (1st: 2, 3rd: 3, 5th: 4, 7th: 5, 9th:
6, 11th: 7, 13th: 8, 15th: 9, 17th: 10, 19th: 11)
19. STARTING AGE = human
(17 + 1d4: m21)
20. COMBAT = F
21. SAVING THROWS = F
22. MAGIC ITEMS = F, but no
more than 10
* A 0-level Horseman has 1 WP, A 0-level
Lancer has 2 WPs.
** 0-level Horseman and Lancers have 1
NWP.
<line 4: level limit for
half-elf paladins?>
<line 4: UA.14 notes
that only gray, dark, or high half-elves may become cavaliers>
<line 22: add age for
half-elf paladins>
<check above against
the errata>
<origin = Three Hearts &&& Three Lions, by Poul Anderson? not sure about this, check Gary's comments, above>
<note: there is a limited edition Gary Con "Paladin in Hell" miniature>