Why Celibate Again?

Lukon · Post by **Lukon** » Fri May 04, 2007 2:03 am

I know that it's a well-ingrained facet of FK that paladins are chaste and celibate within the game. The question I have, though, is why?

It isn't the case in standard D&D or the Forgotten Realms setting. It actually contradicts some established facts in the FR universe. (Lord Piergeron Paladinson, etc.) It has led to some fun RPs, certainly, but it seems strange to make such a diversion from canon without some sort of reason behind it.

So, I guess what I'm asking...is where the idea came from. as a policy choice?

Leohand · Post by **Leohand** » Fri May 04, 2007 3:01 am

Most Paladins are celibate, but there are exceptions, see Thornhold, book 4 in the Song and Swords series.

As for Piergieron, I believe he's a retired Paladin, though I've never heard of him being married.

Jaenoic · Post by **Jaenoic** » Fri May 04, 2007 5:36 am

In being celibate a paladin is left to be more loyal to his god. His time is not split up between his duties and his family, and he is never put in a situation where he'd have to choose one over the other.
Take for example Keldorn I think his name was, a Paladin from Baldur's Gate 2. He was married, and this caused him a lot a lot of problems because he was torn between his order and his family, but his order kept winning out and this was causing problems with his family.
Love can also cause irrational behaviour(As I'm sure we all know.

) which is unnacceptable when a paladin needs to keep a level head in a tight situation.
I also like to equate it with something akin to nuns with my celibate character. She is already "married" to her god because she is completely devoted to serving him, so it would be innapropriate to have a relationship with anyone else.

These are my takes on celibacy and why it's critical to the holy warrior. Hope it helps some. =)

Dugald · Post by **Dugald** » Fri May 04, 2007 5:31 pm

I agree with Lukon.

As far as I've seen there is nothing saying paladins practice celibacy as a class requirement or feature. The way I understand it, is that the practice is a choice to demonstrate how devote one is - that some of the more devout individuals and orders put an emphasis on.

When you take a step back and apply jaenoic's reasoning, you should start to see that it would also apply to the even more devout clerics of the same deities.

In canon, it's probably a regional/cultural practice. In game, it keeps paladins acting like paladins - and I'm cool with that too.

Kregor · Post by **Kregor** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:06 pm

There was a time, as I recall, when certain faiths in FK required their priests to be celibate. But this condition was waived, and since, has become the new norm. This was also expected, as I recall, of the priests of the Triad, even in canon source. For the most part, any requirements of chastity seem to have faded among the priesthood.

Aran · Post by **Aran** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:37 pm

There are reasons for celibacy for paladins that you will find out during your squire lessons. It basically boils down to what Jaenoic mentioned. Paladins on FK are required to follow a god (unlike in tabletop where I believe paladins can swear fealty to a state or lord), and thus the paladin is expected to devote himself completely to that god. If a paladin marries, or has children, he would not be able to fulfill all of his duties to his god.

I enjoy the fact that paladins on FK are expected to follow all of the virtues. It helps set them apart from the other classes.

Dugald · Post by **Dugald** » Fri May 04, 2007 9:14 pm

I think the main question is, why such a large change from the forgotten realms setting?

Hrosskell · Post by **Hrosskell** » Mon May 07, 2007 1:11 pm

I think they pointed out the differences. Most paladins in the FR games and books that I've read being married have great difficulty and some amount of strife between family and church. Also, most of the paladins I've seen that have a family are not actually paladins anymore, but retirees, if that answers any questions.

Kelemvor · Post by **Kelemvor** » Mon May 07, 2007 3:47 pm

All of the IC explanations given above are valid, but I'd rather be honest with players than cite some convenient excuse as to why the difference.

As I understand it, Paladin roleplay was elevated to the very specific and high form that it is now because our earliest paladins were so terribly dire. The falls from grace were many and various, the number of well-played and definitive paladins easily counted on one hand.

Chief among these falls was what has come to be fondly termed 'the lure of the willy'. For whatever reason - a perceived angst roleplay, cyber sex or yet another attempt to play out an Anakin Skywalker type 'jump to the dark side' - many squires and paladins over the years have given up or changed guilds over the opposite sex.

Hence, enforced celibacy and chastity is one of those things where we try to make it very clear from the start what is expected of the player.

Leohand · Post by **Leohand** » Mon May 07, 2007 10:43 pm

In closing, it's the rules, you gotta accept it, but you might petition for a special role-play still, but dunno if they'll accept it, but no harm in making the petition if you feel up to it.

Kelemvor · Post by **Kelemvor** » Mon May 07, 2007 10:58 pm

Ahem

In closing, it's a policy not a rule...
We won't disembowel you for not being celibate and chaste, but you wont be able to progress as a Squire or Paladin.

As for applications, any player may apply for any in game character based roleplay or change. Playing a paladin that wasn't celibate would require a very convincing application though.

Solaghar · Post by **Solaghar** » Tue May 08, 2007 1:40 am

What about a Paladin of Sune?

Mele · Post by **Mele** » Tue May 08, 2007 3:50 am

No longer an ingame option.

Amalia · Post by **Amalia** » Tue May 08, 2007 8:08 am

...and if they were, I think it'd be awesome to see them take the "impossible love" tack-- Sune rules over that aspect, too, after all.

Kelemvor · Post by **Kelemvor** » Tue May 08, 2007 9:22 am

Solaghar wrote:What about a Paladin of Sune?

You raise a valid question, because in point of fact, playing a celibate and chaste paladin of Sune should be no different from playing any other faith of paladin.

Unfortunately, it's a common misconception among the younger or less mature players that Love = Lust and Sune = sex.

Sunite paladins were removed because of players' inability to overcome that misconception.

Dugald · Post by **Dugald** » Tue May 08, 2007 4:58 pm

Any chance the idea would be more receptive with the concept of the character being wed or bound "off screen" to a npc that would never come into play? And then the chasity req would still be met for that paladin/squire from the ooc perspective, and allow the potential for someone to bring into game that PC's child 2 or 3 real life years from then (going through the proper channels, of course).

I appreciate the straight forward answer, just looking for a way that both OOC and IC goals can be met without a compromise in either.

Kelemvor · Post by **Kelemvor** » Tue May 08, 2007 7:44 pm

You're now venturing into the territory of an application, which is why I tried to be as honest about the situation as I could be.

The current situation is that paladins must be chaste/celibate and that Sunite paladins are not available.

If you wish a roleplay that differs in any respect from the current policies, then you would need to apply for it. I can make no promises and give no advice beyond that noted above, as all applications are judged on their merits.