From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Subject: Re: Paladins
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:29:42 GMT

Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou) writes:

>   That's your definition of good, wherein all killing is evil.

>   Oh, because you know of any medieval society wherein killing -any
>killing- isn't considered evil? From what planet do you come from?
 
 One where they read history books. Killing wasn't considered a great
 evil by every culture. The Norsemen certainly didn't think it was
 evil. Eric Bloodeagle's saga tells the tale of a real Norse hero.
 When he would capture a particular bothersome opponent, he would 
 offer them up to Odin as a blood sacrifice by giving them the
 "blood eagle." He basically broke their chest open and spread
 their lungs out like an eagle's wings. His countrymen very much
 approved of him.

Killing in vengeance of a wrong committed is considered no crime in
certain Islam factions.

Want more?
	

>   If all killing
>   is evil, then why does the diety have paladins, who are just men and women
>   who kill people for the right reasons? 

>Yeah, why don't we check it up? ANYBODY, yooo hooo, can you post the
>definition (from a dictionnary, and say which) of the Word "Paladin"???

The word stems from the tales of the companions of Charlemagne. His
peers, or paladins, were the subject of a great many very ornate
poems. These tales are normally included in Bullfinch's mythology
if you purchase the larger volume.

>You assume that just because a character lives on a medieval society, that
>he's too stupid to be able to LEARN from his mistake, REPENT, and CHANGE
>alignment (or at least his current course of actions).

You assume that the religion or legal system WANTS to rehabilitate people.
Most ancient legal systems were more interested in punishment than in
reforming the wrongdoer. The code of Hamarabi (Sp?) doesn't exactly read
like a how to guide on criminal reform. Criminal reform is a modern
concept, in vogue for less than half a century.

>   The Muslim paladin is likely to
>   cut off his hand,

[Other religions don't have paladins in Pat's eyes]

Paladin, in ADD terms (remember, we aren't on rec.games.frp.rannou, rather
rec.games.frp.dnd.) is ANY Lawful Good religious warrior. I can and I will
draw the conclusion of the Muslim holy warrior since that is where he
fits in the ADD system. They might not call them paladins, but any
Lawful Good religion in ADD terms may have holy warriors. 

>Think about it: The paladins sister get killed by the thief just in front
>of him. Now he hates the thief and feels perfectly justified to kill him,
>even more so than before, right? WRONG!!! That shows how much you don't
>know about killing. I never killed anyone, but I've seen many movies in
>which the hero, after suffering for years or months at the hand of the
>villain, finally gets the chance to fight him, he wons the fight, and has
>the chance to kill him... and doesn't. Often we hear "I would have become
>just like him, then. I would have acknowledged that thew only way to deal
>with opposition is by killing." Well, guess what PC would be the most
>likely to feel like that? The paladin!

Repeat after me, folks: "Movies aren't real. They are marketed to make
us feel good and make lots and lots of money." If you want to watch a
good movie, watch Henry V. Henry invaded France and nearly conquered it
(he most likely would have if he hadn't died early of illness). Henry
has no compunctions about killing. This is in the late middle ages. 
Things weren't any lighter in the Dark Ages.


Axly

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd