OK, so I'm in some habit of unintentionally opening wasp nests with certain discussions (Miqo'te, White Mages, etc.) 
. Nonetheless, I do like discussions that can offer a vibrant debate by the presence of multiple, conflicting points that acknowledge one another! Hopefully this one is less controversial, and that is about the Ul'dahn Paladins, the Sultansworn, and the recently constructed Free Paladins. We see a lot of Free Paladins in roleplay recently (at least I have), and there is an assumption that they are straight-up Lawful Good, just because that's how paladins are defined in other fantasy IPs. While I'm not saying this assumption is outright erroneous, I did want to challenge it with a deeper thought on the matter.
If anything, I feel they are closer to the real-life historical paladins of Charlemagne; best of the best royal guards, not crusaders of justices. This is supported by the fact that the French fleur-de-lis is found on PLD AF armour (ironic, considering Ul'dah is Ottoman/Arabic in primary influences). As mentioned below, I feel Lawful Neutral would be the closest fit. I think an analogy would be describing them as straight-up knights; heavily armoured sword and shield warriors in service to a lord. This makes free paladins akin to hedge knights. Heavily armoured sword and shield warriors without a lord to serve.
I'll start by posting the handful of posts that have already addressed this topic on the other thread...
Seriphyn
TheLastCandle
Sounsyy
. Nonetheless, I do like discussions that can offer a vibrant debate by the presence of multiple, conflicting points that acknowledge one another! Hopefully this one is less controversial, and that is about the Ul'dahn Paladins, the Sultansworn, and the recently constructed Free Paladins. We see a lot of Free Paladins in roleplay recently (at least I have), and there is an assumption that they are straight-up Lawful Good, just because that's how paladins are defined in other fantasy IPs. While I'm not saying this assumption is outright erroneous, I did want to challenge it with a deeper thought on the matter.If anything, I feel they are closer to the real-life historical paladins of Charlemagne; best of the best royal guards, not crusaders of justices. This is supported by the fact that the French fleur-de-lis is found on PLD AF armour (ironic, considering Ul'dah is Ottoman/Arabic in primary influences). As mentioned below, I feel Lawful Neutral would be the closest fit. I think an analogy would be describing them as straight-up knights; heavily armoured sword and shield warriors in service to a lord. This makes free paladins akin to hedge knights. Heavily armoured sword and shield warriors without a lord to serve.
I'll start by posting the handful of posts that have already addressed this topic on the other thread...
Seriphyn
Quote:I wouldn't mind starting a discussion on Free Paladins, incidentally. So far, a lot of the roleplayers spin it as your standard Dungeons & Dragons goody-two-shoes. Granted, Jenlyns says "A true paladin offers his sword and shield without promise for reward" and other generic Lawful Good stuff...but I wonder if it's viable to say that's just this character's interpretation? For six hundred years, all paladins have been Sultansworn. I bet one could easily argue that history trumps one captain's decision to train outsiders. In which case, paladins are elite royal guards rather than crusaders of justice. To be "prepared to defend the Sultan to the death", they wouldn't be merciful at all like stereotypical LG...and would be rather ruthless.
Damnit, I wish I could access the non-CS dialogue from lvl30...I'm sure the NPC that tells you about free paladins mentions something about the 220 (or something) Commandments of the Paladins. Darn.
TheLastCandle
Quote:Honestly, I'm not up to date on Sultansworn lore, but given what I know of Ul'dah, I wouldn't be surprised if they generally swerve away from the "textbook Lawful Good" Paladin. It also wouldn't surprise me if the implications of that particular tenet (defending the Sultan/Sultana to the death) mean different things to individual Sultansworn. I daresay there is as much room for a typical goody-goody as there is a stone-cold Lawful Neutral hardass who only seeks to preserve order.
Sounsyy
Quote:I've always viewed the Paladins in a similar way. They're Royal Guards, not the Justice League. Furthermore, they're the Royal Guards of some... not so "Just" royals. Nanamo seems to be the one decent exception to a long line of Ul family dirtbags. Sultan Sisigan wipes out Ul'dah's sister nation of Sil'Dih over water control. We don't really know much about Sultana Sasamo, but she had 80 sins apparently. Doesn't sound like a great character. The Sultansworn also seem to protect the Syndicate on occasion (one of the Syndicate is a Prince?). The Syndicate is formed of the six richest citizens of Ul'dah. And there are several lore references that say they are not all nice people. Lots of corruption.Â
So, hard to imagine Paladins being champions of Good when they are tasked with the protection of some of Eorzea's worst crooks? Not all are bad, mind you, but a good many. Paladins supposed to have good intentions I guess? Jenlyns at least seems to be naively good. Oh and there's the Monetarists who seemed to have infiltrated the Sultansworn on some level and are using it for their own personal gain? That was a part of the PLD quests.
