Monday, 10 March 2025

The Lynchian Paladin

Regular readers will know that I harbour a long-simmering ambition to write up rules for running explicitly heroic campaigns oriented around the idea either that all PCs are of the paladin class or that all PCs are conceptually 'paladins' in the sense of fighting against evil.

A long series of irregular posts, which I really ought to assemble under their own tag, lays this out:

As you will see if you carefully read these posts (as all true disciples of the Order of Noisms must do, and indeed must already have done dozens of times) I've suggested a variety of models of such campaigns, which ideally I would like to write up as a series of volumes the, if I have my druthers, would come out in a posh slip-case finely decorated:
  • The traditional D&D paladin, a paragon of lawful good, who attempts to 'do good' within a typical TSRan type setting
  • A more Arthurian, Pendragon-inspired 'knight of the round table' fighting for Christian order within a world imbued with ancient magical forces
  • A pseudo-Japan in which mighty heroic samurai do battle against demons and evil spirits 
  • A pseudo-Ancient Mesopotamia or Levant where Gilgameshian heroes or 'Book of Judges' style judges fight against primordial chaos embodied in monsters and devils
  • A vaguely Iberian class of holy knights who do battle againts evil infidels
  • A somewhat Warhammerian set of 'demon hunters' in a reformation-era Old World (with the serial numbers filed off)
  • A group of dwarven warrior-priests in Lanthanum Chromate
  • Space Paladines in the demonic future
  • A Beowulf-inspired 'Clan of Cain' scenario
The main idea here is that each of these scenarios involves some systematised way (on which notes can be found in the pieces linked to above) through which incursions of evil find their way into the human world and have to be rooted out, uncovered, battled, etc., by said paladins.

A friend of mine recently raised the issue of David Lynch and his sad (fairly) recent death, and I immediately started to see a connection between this type of campaign and Lynch's approach to what we could call 'worldbuilding'. I am obviously here talking about Twin Peaks and Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me most of all, but I think across most of Lynch's ouevre we see a similar concern playing out - the idea that, lurking around every corner, behind every closed door, reflected in every mirror, hiding at the foot of each bed, waiting at the bottom of every car park, there might be something supernaturally and unspeakably awful. This is I think most readily 'gameable' in Twin Peaks, which in a way almost reads like the Actual Play Report to the world's greatest Unknown Armies campaign: evil entities from interdimensional 'lodges' come to the human world to do dastardly things and law enforcement tries to cope with the fallout. But in its own way Blue Velvet follows a similar pattern - and even A Straight Story has a very mild hint of that flavour, with the main character taking on the quality of a roving wizard casting spells to solve people's slightly otherworldly problems (like the woman who keeps mysteriously killing deer by accident). 

In this paradigm the PCs could take on something of a Kyle McLachlanian aspect as straight-jawed Philip Marlowe-investigator types, but this is by no means a pre-requisite and one could paint with a much broader brush than that. What is chiefly needed - and as I have begun to lay out - is a means by which to systematise the crucial mechanism of intrusion: how evil manifests itself in the setting through some at least partially random method, and how it is that the PCs encounter it. 

12 comments:

  1. I recently finished rereading the last of Jack Vance's Demon Princes novels, Book of Dreams.

    By coincidence, the villain and final Demon Prince of that volume is a fantasist who structures and justifies his crimes through a dissociative fiction embodying a league of seven brave paladins. Each role has a distinct persona and skill-set which disturbingly ennobles the outer man's awfulness.

    Probably this view stands at odds with the original motive for your series, the point of which is to play it straight, but it did get me thinking.

    There is something to the trope "the paladin is an asshat". The main question is whether framed from the point of view of the moralist, who sees the code of conduct as compromised by expediency, or the anti-moralist, who sees the code of conduct as an obstacle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love the Demon Princes and the Book of Dreams in particular.

      Treesong always makes me think of Kent for some reason.

      Delete
    2. Yes, he's a great character - a prescient view of a type of person undoubtedly already present in the analog fandom, that the Internet would only magnify.

      Delete
  2. Wow, Noisms, this post raises questions very near to my RPG-heart. I'm relatively new here, so I went back and read the posts you listed. I have been working on a game and setting of my own that I would say are adjacent to several of your concepts. However, the idea of evil breaking into the world in a systematic way is a brilliant idea I have never considered before.

    It is wonderful that the DM isn't entirely responsible for planning the irruption of evil. It treats everyone at the table as a player, which I love, and preserves the surprise. However, it turns a campaign into a bit of a challenge: how to transcend random event generation so that a narrative emerges.

    You could just hand wave that away, but I think the stakes are raised if there is some meaning, strategy, or enemy that is gradually revealed, and that drives player engagement. One way to approach it is to create some overall structure, possibly randomly, that affects the individual events. Is this evil solitary, dual, or legion? Does it precipitate ruin or corruption? Does it devour? What prevents it from just taking the world? If it is dual or legion, are there individual evils with aligned or competing interests?

    Having generated that overarching narrative, I might then have some modifiers for randomizing incursions so that they both fit into the campaign arc and also provide me (the DM) with some surprises and twists. Are some of these feints or diversions? Are key pieces/players/places being removed from the board? Are pieces being collected and assembled for a nefarious purpose? Are there multiple plays going on at once?

    You need some kind of accounting and some kind of clock. When evil advances, it gets closer to its victory condition. That could have a feedback effect on the power of the incursions, which might give you a built-in CR ladder. Of course, the most a paladin can give to a just cause is his own life, which you might measure in honour. That might satisfy those who would be supremely satisfied by saying of their character, "He died well."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I like all these ideas - and definitely the 'clock ticking' thing is a good idea. What I'd like is a timeline where certain events are guaranteed to occur but the events themselves are generated randomly. So you know on Day 13 such-and-such will arrive in such-and-such a place, but you don't know in advance what the such-and-suches are.

      I know exactly what you mean about there needing to be a greater meaning - but I wonder whether this is something that might emerge organically from the randomness as the DM puts a pattern together (which as I understand it is kind of how Twin Peaks operated).

      Delete
  3. Supernatural incursions reminds me of the Black Road from Zelazny’s Amber series - supernatural corruption manifesting differently in each world it afflicts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That didn't occur to me but you are so right. I can't believe I didn't think of Amber in this connection.

      Delete
  4. When I was a young player (early1980s) I really loved Paladins – the honour and the unyielding fight against evil. Eventually though I came to find this whole ethos too simplistic, almost child-like. There are obviously ways to make this more mature and complex, as your ideas have shown. But having grown up and gone on to see the effects of war, totalitarianism and self-righteousness at first hand I have become much more cynical.

    That has affected my gaming. I really enjoy pushing paladins to question things such good and evil. A basic scenario runs like this – evil goblinoids invade and ravage innocent village (the poor victims and their tragic losses are played up), the paladin leads the fight back to the goblinoids’ lair/base (their evil nature is played up), the goblinoids are defeated. Then, during the “clean-up” the paladin is faced with the goblin children standing unarmed wondering what is going on. The paladin will be berated and disciplined later by their superiors if they leave the goblin children alive and then sent back to "finish the job." Or, for more immediacy, a senior cleric can be with the group and demand the immediate slaying of the goblin children.

    There should be no easy answer to this type of scenario. The goblins were evil. Their children would grow up to be as evil and do more evil. But at the time of the encounter, they are just unarmed kids standing around. There is no winner whatever decision is taken – other than perhaps the god of moral ambiguity.

    Personally, I see this as more rewarding than fighting against an unambiguous evil but it is certainly not for every group.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It depends on what one's tastes are in the end. I've consumed enough morally ambiguous media to last a lifetime - these days the idea of trying to do good in a tragic world is a more appealing framework for me.

      Delete
  5. Dude, that seriously sounds like a monologue by the supervillain Dr. Schadenfreude.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hot damn. Yknow this idea could be the redemption arc for Hunter: the Reckoning too, which I always loved but was a confused game that didn't really hold together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't have that in mind when I wrote this but it totally makes sense.

      Delete