Can a Paladin get PTSD?

[Arbane]

Of course, if the guy who's immune to fear can get PTSD, it raises the obvious question of why all the OTHER characters aren't gibbering wrecks by level 5....

[Stealth Marmot]

The other classes have the benefit of not choosing the class that paints a giant "Torment me DM!" target on the character's back.

I mean if you are playing a paladin of COURSE the DM will decide that means you want your character to be tormented, driven towards evil, and constantly having to make impossible choices. The paladin's primary purpose is not smiting, or healing, it's acting as DM's chew toy so the other player characters don't have to.

What, did you play the paladin to have FUN? Ha! You play a paladin so the DM torches your character's family in front of you instead of some other player's family.

Edit: Forgot the blue.

[wumpus]

Of course, if the guy who's immune to fear can get PTSD, it raises the obvious question of why all the OTHER characters aren't gibbering wrecks by level 5....

Great saves against SAN rolls are a class feature of PCs (for anybody not playing Call of Cthulhu).

[Admiral Squish]

I haven't read all the way through the thread, but I will say if paladins experienced NO fear whatsoever, they would probably die almost immediately. If you felt no fear, you wouldn't feel an instinctual urge to avoid threats, to step out of the way of a sword or step away from the edge of a cliff of flee from the holwing banshee. I agree with the general sentiment express thus far that immunity to fear doesn't eliminate fear entirely, it merely prevents fear from actually affecting your actions. You still experience fear, on some level, but you can always overcome it.

The other classes have the benefit of not choosing the class that paints a giant "Torment me DM!" target on the character's back.

I mean if you are playing a paladin of COURSE the DM will decide that means you want your character to be tormented, driven towards evil, and constantly having to make impossible choices. The paladin's primary purpose is not smiting, or healing, it's acting as DM's chew toy so the other player characters don't have to.

What, did you play the paladin to have FUN? Ha! You play a paladin so the DM torches your character's family in front of you instead of some other player's family.

I do kinda agree with this sentiment, but in a less mean way. While all characters in a D&D game have their skills and strength tested, paladins have their morality and convictions tested as well. In choosing to play a paladin, you accept the limitations of the unbending moral code, just like a wizard accepts their need for eight hours of rest to prepare their spells, or a fighter accepts that their equipment is vulnerable and may be taken from them in certain situations. And you must ALSO accept that that moral code will be challenged by the DM. Some DMs are bad. Some DMs will lock a rogue/illusionist in an arena with an iron golem, or have rust monsters attack the fighter just before a boss fight, just like some DMs will put a paladin in a Trolley Dilemma and declare they fall no matter what they decide. A good DM, however, will challenge the paladin's morality, force them to make difficult decisions with real consequences, and, if they remain faithful in the face of temptation and act in accordance with their own sense of justice and morality, have them emerge stronger for it. The story of a pillar of virtue, surrounded by evil and temptation, persevering in the face of overwhelming odds... It has a certain appeal to it. And without some level of challenge, the story is no more satisfying than finding out the final boss of a level 20 dungeon is a level 1 goblin.

[8BitNinja]

The other classes have the benefit of not choosing the class that paints a giant "Torment me DM!" target on the character's back.

I mean if you are playing a paladin of COURSE the DM will decide that means you want your character to be tormented, driven towards evil, and constantly having to make impossible choices. The paladin's primary purpose is not smiting, or healing, it's acting as DM's chew toy so the other player characters don't have to.

What, did you play the paladin to have FUN? Ha! You play a paladin so the DM torches your character's family in front of you instead of some other player's family.

Edit: Forgot the blue.

You don't need the blue, with a lot of people, it isn't sarcastic

[Max_Killjoy]

All the more reason to make it blue...

[Stealth Marmot]

you don't need the blue, with a lot of people, it isn't sarcastic

It bloody well should be!

[wumpus]

It bloody well should be!

A lot depends on the setting. If you try to bring a RAW paladin into a "gritty" world, you are going to be the world's chew-toy. If you bring one into a high fantasy setting, the world can be expected to re-arrange itself to avoid giving the paladin hard choices. The Giant has gone to great lengths to show that paladins make great fictional heroes, but can be tricky to play and integrate into a party. I'd expect any "I make the decisions around here to adhere to the code" paladin to get the target painted on (by the rest of the party) pretty quick.

[Jay R]

A lot depends on the setting. If you try to bring a RAW paladin into a "gritty" world, you are going to be the world's chew-toy. If you bring one into a high fantasy setting, the world can be expected to re-arrange itself to avoid giving the paladin hard choices. The Giant has gone to great lengths to show that paladins make great fictional heroes, but can be tricky to play and integrate into a party. I'd expect any "I make the decisions around here to adhere to the code" paladin to get the target painted on (by the rest of the party) pretty quick.

Three of the last four games I've played, and one of the last two I've DMed, have had paladins. And you know what?

Neither the DM nor the other players are required to be jerks.

I know it sounds impossible, but technically, the rules do not require you to make the game unfun for other players.

[Max_Killjoy]

Three of the last four games I've played, and one of the last two I've DMed, have had paladins. And you know what?

Neither the DM nor the other players are required to be jerks.

I know it sounds impossible, but technically, the rules do not require you to make the game unfun for other players.

It's a two way street.

I've seen GMs who gleefully set out to crush the mind and soul of paladins.

I've seen paladin-players who think the setting and NPCs and everything should distort itself to avoid ANY difficult choices or moral questions for the paladin, and regard anything the paladin does as good because he's the paladin and the hero and good.

[Kalmageddon]

Yes, a Paladin can get PTSD. However, if you really have to do it, please do it right.
I've seen the term used far too often by people that experience mere distress.
PTSD is not distress, it's being locked in your own mind screaming, while you feel like you are living the same **** over again.
That's not something I would give to a character you intend to actually roleplay.
Just my 2 cents.

[robnar]

In my view, there's three things that kinda get lumped together in PTSD. Some have taken to calling it 'combat stress' as well. I am familiar with two of these.

1. Traumatic recall. Strykke, on the first page, described this well.

The other thing that is hallmark PTSD is intrusive thoughts. The 1000 yard stare. It's more about fixation than fear. PTSD happens when an event won't let you go. It always pops into your head. You dream about it every night.

2. 'Battle-mind'. This is the hyper-alertness and overreaction phenomenon that several posters, including Strykke, have described. For me, it was very much a habit gained from months on end of hyper-vigilance and extreme danger coming from out of nowhere.

3. Survivor's guilt. This is guilty or regretful feelings of whether or not you could've done something differently - saved a friend, avoided shooting somebody, etc. For me, this involved constantly replaying the situations.

None of these are mutually exclusive - you can have any, or all. I had 2 and 3, others I know had 1 and 3, others had the full monty. I know one rape victim who had a bad case of 1 and 2.

Personally, I think Paladins would be least-vulnerable to the first - the moral clarity and courage that I think the immunity to fear comes from reflects this. I think paladins would be most vulnerable to the third. I think it would be interesting to roleplay a paladin with a bad case of the second, as some decisions would be really hard.

One other note, the trauma in PTSD doesn't have to have happened to you. It can be something you witnessed, or did to another.

On a final note, the first Rambo movie is REALLY, REALLY good.

[Wardog]

Apparently diseases are evil. However, many diseases are bacteria which are living creatures. They have animal intelligence, so therefore they should be neutral. I'm pretty sure D&D isn't the most accurate source for disease.

D&D is less accurate than WebMD, and that's saying something.

By D&D rules, wouldn't bacteria be "mindless" "vermin" rather than "animals"? Although that would still make them neutral...

But do bacteria even exist (or cause disease) in D&D? I'm inclined to think that that would be one of the things where trying to apply real-world science would break the setting, because too many things are based on mythical or fantastical ideas about how they work. It would probably work better to assume diseases were caused by imbalanced humors, curses, evil spirits, wounded souls, etc.

[Max_Killjoy]

By D&D rules, wouldn't bacteria be "mindless" "vermin" rather than "animals"? Although that would still make them neutral...

But do bacteria even exist (or cause disease) in D&D? I'm inclined to think that that would be one of the things where trying to apply real-world science would break the setting, because too many things are based on mythical or fantastical ideas about how they work. It would probably work better to assume diseases were caused by imbalanced humors, curses, evil spirits, wounded souls, etc.

I recall a book where a healer working magic on a diseased patient comments on the "countless tiny demons" that are afflicting the person.

Not sure about D&D, but I think a fantasy setting can work without throwing modern science in the bin.

[8BitNinja]

In my view, there's three things that kinda get lumped together in PTSD. Some have taken to calling it 'combat stress' as well. I am familiar with two of these.

1. Traumatic recall. Strykke, on the first page, described this well.



2. 'Battle-mind'. This is the hyper-alertness and overreaction phenomenon that several posters, including Strykke, have described. For me, it was very much a habit gained from months on end of hyper-vigilance and extreme danger coming from out of nowhere.

3. Survivor's guilt. This is guilty or regretful feelings of whether or not you could've done something differently - saved a friend, avoided shooting somebody, etc. For me, this involved constantly replaying the situations.

None of these are mutually exclusive - you can have any, or all. I had 2 and 3, others I know had 1 and 3, others had the full monty. I know one rape victim who had a bad case of 1 and 2.

Personally, I think Paladins would be least-vulnerable to the first - the moral clarity and courage that I think the immunity to fear comes from reflects this. I think paladins would be most vulnerable to the third. I think it would be interesting to roleplay a paladin with a bad case of the second, as some decisions would be really hard.

One other note, the trauma in PTSD doesn't have to have happened to you. It can be something you witnessed, or did to another.

On a final note, the first Rambo movie is REALLY, REALLY good.

This list is convenient, now I can properly say the effects.

Turns out, the character I made only has number three. However, number 2 kicks in sometimes, but doesn't affect him as much.

[Jay R]

It's a two way street.

Agreed 100%.

I have never understood why people think the word "paladin" is the verbal component for a magic spell to compel all people - paladin player, other players, DM - to try to hurt the game for others.

[GungHo]

Agreed 100%.

I have never understood why people think the word "paladin" is the verbal component for a magic spell to compel all people - paladin player, other players, DM - to try to hurt the game for others.

Another reason why I like the paladin as a PrC. Everyone gets to decide if they really want to be a part of it or not. If people are going to be miserable about it, then just stay a fighter or a cleric or a warpriest or anything but the troll compelling device.

[Max_Killjoy]

Another reason why I like the paladin as a PrC. Everyone gets to decide if they really want to be a part of it or not. If people are going to be miserable about it, then just stay a fighter or a cleric or a warpriest or anything but the troll compelling device.

And it fits into the idea that being a Paladin is something earned, not something presumed.

[Milo v3]

And it fits into the idea that being a Paladin is something earned, not something presumed.

I still think Chosen One fits the paladin better than "I have years of my life working towards this thing I want". Earning it from having the right mindset/personality/heart fits better IMO than earning it from training.

[Max_Killjoy]

I still think Chosen One fits the paladin better than "I have years of my life working towards this thing I want". Earning it from having the right mindset/personality/heart fits better IMO than earning it from training.

I meant earning it by proving your character and judgement through action, rather than being handed the honor on a silver spoon platter.

But then, I've never cared for the notions of fate or destiny.

[Milo v3]

I meant earning it by proving your character and judgement through action, rather than being handed the honor on a silver spoon platter.

I don't really see how that has anything to do with it being a base class or prestige class. Only classes which get their abilities like that are sorcerers (who can't control their power at first and create disasters by accident) and warlocks (where getting powers without earning them properly is the whole point).

[Metahuman1]

Just glanced at the title and my first thought was "I dunno, but I'm quite certain a Paladin of Freedom doesn't.".

[Max_Killjoy]

I don't really see how that has anything to do with it being a base class or prestige class. Only classes which get their abilities like that are sorcerers (who can't control their power at first and create disasters by accident) and warlocks (where getting powers without earning them properly is the whole point).

The "base class" Paladin starts out raw, but immediately gets his powers by some sort of lucky accident of fate or destiny or whatever, or unearned favor from some god or the ambiguous and convenient "conceptual force of good".

The "prestige class" Paladin has a good deal of experience and (I would hope) has proven his character, judgement, and moral fiber repeatedly.

[Milo v3]

The "base class" Paladin starts out raw, but immediately gets his powers by some sort of lucky accident of fate or destiny or whatever, or unearned favor from some god or the ambiguous and convenient "conceptual force of good".

Umm... what makes you think the character hasn't earned it? Good only gives them the power of a paladin because of their moral compass and heart being pure enough. There's no reason to assume Good just chooses people arbitrarily.

The "prestige class" Paladin has a good deal of experience and (I would hope) has proven his character, judgement, and moral fiber repeatedly.

Except that such a prestige class would just have the prerequisite of "Be a loyal person with a good heart and a desire to help people"... which is less of a prerequisite than base classes like Druid or Wizard have. Characters have lives before they gain their first class level.

[Max_Killjoy]

Umm... what makes you think the character hasn't earned it? Good only gives them the power of a paladin because of their moral compass and heart being pure enough. There's no reason to assume Good just chooses people arbitrarily.

A person who has done nothing, who has faced no challenges and dealt with no hard choices, has not demonstrated a moral compass or a "pure heart".

I suppose you could have a setting in which "Good" just knows who is "inherently good" or something, and chooses them from birth?

Except that such a prestige class would just have the prerequisite of "Be a loyal person with a good heart and a desire to help people"...

Why would that be the case?

[Milo v3]

A person who has done nothing, who has faced no challenges and dealt with no hard choices, has not demonstrated a moral compass or a "pure heart".

Um... you don't have to be a experienced soldier in a war zone to have done something/been challenged/had to make moral choices. Nothing about that requires already having levels in a base class. Even then, you could easily have converted their Warrior levels.

Do you think most level 1 fighters have never seen combat? Did you think wizards got their levels from touching a spellbook rather than spend many years studying magic? Did you think druids just spontaneously knew druidic and the druid code of conduct? Did you think sorcerers have all their spells 100% under their control out of nowhere?

Characters have lives before you play them.

Why would that be the case?

Because being a paladin wouldn't really require any skills aside from that, no feats really are necessary, and putting a base attack bonus requirement just means "I don't want players to start as paladins because I want them to have done things" despite the fact the class system doesn't work that way and that characters generally have done things before play even regardless of their level.

[Max_Killjoy]

Um... you don't have to be a experienced soldier in a war zone to have done something/been challenged/had to make moral choices. Nothing about that requires already having levels in a base class. Even then, you could easily have converted their Warrior levels.

Do you think most level 1 fighters have never seen combat? Did you think wizards got their levels from touching a spellbook rather than spend many years studying magic? Did you think druids just spontaneously knew druidic and the druid code of conduct? Did you think sorcerers have all their spells 100% under their control out of nowhere?

Characters have lives before you play them.


Because being a paladin wouldn't really require any skills aside from that, no feats really are necessary, and putting a base attack bonus requirement just means "I don't want players to start as paladins because I want them to have done things" despite the fact the class system doesn't work that way and that characters generally have done things before play even regardless of their level.

No one said anything about warzones.

But obviously we have different ideas about what a starting character is in a zero-to-demigod system like D&D, and what level a character who'd already proven themselves worthy would have reached by having gone through enough of whatever it is in life that they had to go through to do so.

I can think of plenty of things to require of a character before they were Paladin-ready, but now that I think about it, most of those things are considered a sideshow at best by D&D, so maybe not.

[Milo v3]

No one said anything about warzones.

You're acting as if you already need to be a level six player character to be worthy of becoming a paladin. That's a lot of combat and disaster they have to live through.

But obviously we have different ideas about what a starting character is in a zero-to-demigod system like D&D, and what level a character who'd already proven themselves worthy would have reached by having gone through enough of whatever it is in life that they had to go through to do so.

Evidently so.

I can think of plenty of things to require of a character before they were Paladin-ready, but now that I think about it, most of those things are considered a sideshow at best by D&D, so maybe not.

That more just says "I keep using the word paladin to mean something completely different to everyone else" than "this is a problem with how D&D handles paladins".

I have issues with how paladins are handled in D&D, but them being an option at character creation is not one of them.

[Max_Killjoy]

You're acting as if you already need to be a level six player character to be worthy of becoming a paladin. That's a lot of combat and disaster they have to live through.

Not "acting as if" -- that's part of my position.

That more just says "I keep using the word paladin to mean something completely different to everyone else" than "this is a problem with how D&D handles paladins".

Not really.

A character could be required to have a minimum BAB, certain Skills (knowledge of their religion, some sort of healing skills, etc) and Feats, access to minimal Divine spellcasting (hey, a cleric level to go with those fighter levels), etc, before taking a level in a Paladin prestige class.


Or does Paladin really just mean that someone has the blessing and empowerment of some appropriate deity or convenient "Good" because said power "had a good feeling about this one"?

[Milo v3]

Not "acting as if" -- that's part of my position.

It's a position that has nothing to do with paladins in fiction though. With what you're suggesting, they may as well become paladins after their life of adventuring. There is no reason at all the character couldn't have already overcome challenges in their life which before you play them.

Not really.

A character could be required to have a minimum BAB

Why would they only empower people with heavy military experience?

certain Skills (knowledge of their religion, some sort of healing skills, etc)

Why would they only take the religious and medics?

access to minimal Divine spellcasting (hey, a cleric level to go with those fighter levels)

That would be pretty redundant.... Why would they need to invest paladin power into someone who is already a divine warrior who has had power invested within them? Why not invest that power into a place it would actually help?

Or does Paladin really just mean that someone has the blessing and empowerment of some appropriate deity or convenient "Good" because said power "had a good feeling about this one"?

The "good feeling" wouldn't be enough, they still have to do good and prove they have a good heart. None of that requires having already lived a life of adventuring though. It's called backstory.