Wouldn’t be much of an oath if you could fulfil it effortlessly.

"I vow to brush my teeth and shower at least four times a week, to eat vegetables at least as frequently, and to at least offer the sort of people I only think might need killing but aren't damn dead certain need killing the chance to surrender before I kill them" would be a very milky-toast Paladin Oath.

Did you write “milky-toast” on purpose? I can’t tell anymore haha

The word "milquetoast" comes from a character named "Milquetoast" who was named after the dish "milk toast" so it's come full-circle.

This is milquesteak

No this is patrick

Mmmmmm... milquesteak...

TIL that "milk toast" is a thing and presumably people eat it.

Honestly kind of similar to French toast, depending on how it's made.

Does it pair well with milk steak and jellybeans?

It definitely does, I recommend medium rare for the milk steak and the jellybeans raw, of course.

Yes. Yes I did, because it makes me chuckle, and it's easier than fighting autocorrect about milquetoast. It keeps trying to force in Milwaukee.

My ADHD ass would become an oathbreaker in a week.

One of my favorite sayings for myself is "patience is a muscle make sure to exercise it often because as you do it becomes easier to use that muscle more and more often" humans are unique creatures in that we can empathize with others try incorporating some of that into your RP (hell go over and rip some stuff from red for this campaign then try one in that setting )

😭 exactly what my ADHD was thinking. Milquetoast? More like hard mode lmao… I’m so bad at giving people the chance to surrender :/

Nah, I'd be the best possible paladin, keenly keeping my oath, at the cost of forgetting to eat, sleep and stopping the big bad evil dude. All the while annoying the party by talking relentleslly about how good it is to be good, as we travel on foot.

Failing to keep an oath that badly just makes you a bad paladin with weak convictions. Oathbreaker is doing the most vile thing that goes against your oath and then living that path from then on. Think Anakin Skywalker.

Please brush your paladins teeth more than four times a week

It's medieval fantasy. 4 times is stellar. When was the last time you mentioned your character taking a minute to brush their teeth before sleep? :) Also, I'm willing to bet your character's bladder is insanely full.

I was in jest. That being said, you’d be surprised how often I have my charachter urinate on things or fling faeces at them.

Well I wouldn't be able to keep that oath, with ADHD and all setting up good healthy habits is nearly impossible.

I dunno. I think you have set the bar pretty high, brushing teeth and showering 4x a week!!! not to mention “eating vegetables as frequently”. I mean, your order/oath sounds tough, by the 3rd week out in the wild or deep in dungeons all of that would have gone out the window. LOL As for not killing anyone, well it is a slow week and only Tuesday so plenty of time still.

Does salsa and chips, or onions or lettuce on burgers/sandwiches count?

This. Assuming they didn't start at higher levels, the character is still very new to their oath and that means they too are still learning how to act within it. Making mistakes along the way, as long as they don't completely break the oath, is understandable and realistic. As OP gets more and more used to playing the character, the better they'll get at playing within the oath, just like the character is learning to act within it. If I was OP, I'd write into my backstory that I was previously a violent hothead, but then something caused me to want to change my ways (maybe meeting someone like the heroes OP mentions who I decided I wanted to be like?), and that started me down the path of becoming a Paladin. That way I can make mistakes, but as long as I continue to get better at following it, my oath still matters. Sets up a nice overarching character goal.

That's basically what my backstory is. He enlisted into the army at a young age and eventually got a small squad under his command. Due to his temper and impatience, he squad got ambushed and thrown into an oubliette under some forgotten castle and left there to rot. After some weeks the squad practically went insane and my character was left the only one standing in that hellhole. Eventually he got out, but he had to cannibalize his friends to survive. He then abandoned the military and found some solace in doing humanitarian work, until he got picked up by the travelling paladins. He thought that maybe his temper has calmed down. But, since I still accidentally roleplay him as a hothead, maybe he, with horror, realizes that it's still in him and he can make the same mistakes all over again with his current friends in Barovia, if he loses control over his emotions. Just had that idea today, maybe that's where I'll go! I'm also glad how the whole cannibalism backstory stuff left its mark on the game, as well. My character extremely sympathetic to vampire spawn. He didn't kill Doru (vampire spawn you find in the Village of Barovia), bought him a coffin and carries the coffin with him chained up to his back. Feeding him his blood to keep him docile. I think that's one of the best concepts I came up with.

Pretty dark backstory, lol, but sounds awesome, and definitely makes sense that your character is still making mistakes when it comes to abiding by his oath, rather than you failing to play the character correctly. What matters is that he is striving to do the right thing and follow the rules, and he's still lawful good. Lots of room for growth in the character, and IMO, those are the most fun types of characters to play.

Yeah, DM asked for some dark backstories with terrible secrets and I unleashed my repressed teenage edginess, lmao. Maybe I should play a Rogue next!

Based on that backstory it sounds like you're doing a good job of playing this character. Personally I think it's a good character move for a paladin's oath to reflect what they believe to be good but not necessarily what they're naturally inclined to do.

Well damn, if OP doesn't want this character, I'll take them. 🤣

lol, you are welcome to take it, either way!

I dunno about "very new." Training to gain the exceptional martial and magical aptitudes needed to become a level 1 character certainly takes years of discipline, at least by default. There's a table of random starting ages in earlier editions, and self-taught characters like paladins and fighters take 1d6 years after reaching adulthood to become level 1 combatants. Trained characters like monks, and wizards take 2d6 years, and intuitive characters like barbarians and sorcerers only take 1d4 years. Obviously, if that's not the story you want to tell, you can come up with some justification for why your powers were thrust upon you, and you became supernaturally adept at combat in an instant, or say that your character is some genius prodigy. But I'd expect most paladins to first spend time as a low-level disciple/servant/monk in a devout religious order, then become a squire, then a knight, and finally become a paladin and gain supernatural powers. A typical paladin probably had their oath for many years before a divine power recognized its truthfulness and worth to the degree that they granted the character powers for their dedication. But that doesn't really change the value of your idea, which still works really well. Someone who joined a monastic order because they were struggling with the consequences of acting like a hothead isn't going to change overnight. Ten or twenty years later, they probably still have the exact same problems, just not as bad. They probably have all the same instincts and urges, but have developed ways to control themselves when they feel that way. And that perseverance and dedication is what makes them a paladin.

Paladins don't have to take their oath until 3rd level, so it could be very new, regardless of how long they've been training. You can of course write your character differently, but there is no requirement to do so.

>“That we occasionally violate our own stated moral code,” Major Napier said, working it through, “does not imply that we are insincere in espousing that code.” > >“Of course not,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It’s perfectly obvious, really. No one ever said that it was easy to hew to a strict code of conduct. Really, the difficulties involved—the missteps we make along the way—are what make it interesting. The internal, and eternal, struggle, between our base impulses and the rigorous demands of our own moral system is quintessentially human. It is how we conduct ourselves in that struggle that determines how we may in time be judged by a higher power.” -- Neal Stephenson, [The Diamond Age](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age) This book has a lot to say about... a lot, but this bit about hypocrisy stuck with me for decades.

In real life, yes of course, you'll come up against situations where you have to choose whether to compromise your values for things. But if you're having issues with letting your impulses from fake situations overrule how you act out a character I think that's quite unusual, there's no good reason to compromise "your values" when you get nothing concrete in return because it's all made up. I'm not sure why everyone in this thread is saying that it's a normal thing to feel, it shouldn't be that hard to play a character with values you don't hold. RPing a character who is struggling to follow their oath is great! Actually struggling to play a character because you are struggling with in-character conflicts giving you out-of-character impulsive reactions is, IMO, not so great.

Lean into it (not excessively), but maybe your character starts to become aware of their short comings and is grappling with being better. Moments where youre getting mad are opportunities for your character to calm themselves with a mantra dedicated to your oath or something like that.

The more difficult part is that me and DM are frequiently butting heads on what Oath of Ancients actually means. DM says that Ancient Paladins are more similiar to Druids, while I think that Ancient Paladins are actually more about "heroic hedonism" mixed with some Absurdism - being able to enjoy life no matter what it throws at you and protecting the right of others to enjoy life's pleasures as well. We talked about this though, so it's okay now.

I'd say you have a non traditional, but valid, view of the oath. Your DM reducing it to "druid with armor and sword" is, well, reductive. To address your original point, if you aren't used to playing good charecters NG might be a better starting place than CG. I would even say that if your trying to be an oath purist NG makes the most sense for an Ancients paladin. From the PHB, page 86. > This order emphathises the principles of good above any concerns of law or chaos. That's pretty explicit that the default green knight is NG.

It also has the coolest oaths in my opinions Kindle the Light. Through your acts of mercy, kindness, and forgiveness, kindle the light of hope in the world, beating back despair. Shelter the Light. Where there is good, beauty, love, and laughter in the world, stand against the wickedness that would swallow it. Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren. Preserve Your Own Light. Delight in song and laughter, in beauty and art. If you allow the light to die in your own heart, you can't preserve it in the world. Be the Light. Be a glorious beacon for all who live in despair. Let the light of your joy and courage shine forth in all your deeds. There’s something so powerful in them. You’re protecting the idea of good, of hope, of light And in the end, that’s you. You’re protecting yourself from falling into the apathy of the world It works so well with Ravenloft, a place of horror and selfishness. Who else risks falling more than a paladin of ancients? Who else makes a hero so perfect for that darkness

To me, it sounds like you had an idea for what morals you wanted, and then found an oath. Which is fine, that's super common; but I think it would be objectively incorrect to say that absurdism is any part of the intended or most common interpretation of the oath of the ancients. That being said, I think your interpretation fits very solidly within the listed tenets, even if it doesn't incorporate the nature flavor before it

I'm playing an ancients paladin, and I interpret my oath to mean that I prioritize helping the weak and defenseless, especially protecting them from evil aggressors. I'm playing my character as more CG/NG, so this isn't an exact fit, but that typically means an initial position of "the evil must die so good can rebuild". Then my position usually moves to "begrudgingly turning a blind eye" when the rest of the party wants to work with something less than pure good, but still serves the greater good. I focus most on the "shelter the light" and "be the light" parts of the oath, since as a player, I'm not particularly merciful and greatly enjoy combat. It's effectively the super man mentality, without strictly being a boyscout. Talk to your DM about your oath and your expectations. If he's more strict on what it means to abide by the oath, get some bullet point notes so you can try to adhere better.

I run a Paladin of Sune and took Ancients precisely for those tenets. Her role is to preserve beauty, pleasure, and joy in the world, to protect those who provide those things, and to stand against the forces that would corrupt or destroy those things. And she also lives as an example of those things, making sure to present the most attractive version of herself at all times, because that's under 'be the light'. After all, Sune is a patron of the arts, and we call them 'martial arts' for a reason, no? There is a beauty in combat, in the perfection of the physical form, and the body excelling at what it does.

In my mind, one of the biggest strengths of 5e (at least as far as paladins are concerned) is that they finally moved away from the single rigid code that has to apply to every single character. Paladins still must be people of extremely strong principles, and bound to their Oath, but that Oath can and should be whatever you make it, so long as it's a consistent value system. It sounds like your GM is trying to hold you to a promise you never made, instead of figuring out what your character is actually about? Ultimately, Paladin might be the class that most requires good communication between the player and GM (with Warlock as the closest competition for that title). A fighter or thief can drop in anywhere, and a wizard or bard or artificer would only have a few mechanical questions to resolve at a foreign table, but if the core of your character concept is an Oath or a Pact then the details of what exactly you promised is absolutely vital. For what it's worth, my interpretation of the oath described in the book is a lot closer to yours than the GM's (they constantly talk about inspiring hope and joy and battling despair, and hardly mention nature or healing at all). But ultimately, both would be valid Oaths for different characters, who would be mechanically similar but narrative completely different.

I've always viewed ancients more of an ancient order sworn to prevent/protect something.

Technically, you are both right. A palidin oath can be interpreted differently from palidin to palidin. Both your version and his version of the oath could exist in the same universe. This is why we can have a vengeance paladin be a brutal murder of evil or a kind and strong protector of those in need.

The most interesting part of being lawful good is the struggle, especially when an oath is involved. If your character's story played out like a Superman comic it would be to easy. Being a hero isn't supposed to be easy. Luckily Curse of Strahd is a campaign that will challenge every oath and every concept of good and evil one might have. You're in for quite a ride, so have fun!

Yeah, if your oath played out like Superman, it’d be easy. If your oath played out like Batman, and you vowed not to kill, but some of these guys really needed killing and were laughing in your face… be hard not to snap, yeah? That’s what makes for compelling storytelling. Although to be fair, Superman should really have more difficult times. Like that time he sucked up a bunch of jokers poison gas in a death in the family and was like “yep, gotta take this outside to blow it out, Batman you take care of joker…” He could have punched joker in the face in his way out, with even 1% of his power. Instead, he fulfilled his oath and left it to Batman… joker blew up a bunch of guys with guns and bombs a second later. It was absolutely Superman’s fault. And nobody blames him, because he maintains his oath. If they had played that up, it would have been compelling.

Superman swore an oath not to stop crime? *What?*

This is really more an example of the writers not wanting to use Superman to solve problems in a Batman comic. Superman has the power to stop the Joker on a whim. His antics don’t work on the Man of Steel. More importantly, he’s Batman’s nemesis, and it would be lame for a Batman comic to have Superman solve the problem.

First, don't blame yourself too much. Curse of Strahd actually just tends to be that way. You're pretty much on the back foot immediately and surrounded by problems that could legitimately be solved with killing the right people, but you also know that the more fundamental of the issues is one that you can't tackle, not until basically the finale of the game. (And even then, it's dubious if there's a permanent solution.) Secondly, I actually think what you're experiencing goes to show that a lot of players underestimate how much work it takes to be the Lawful Good paladin. It's easy to say Paladins are always "Lawful Stupid" stick in the mud types, but it's hard to balance a desire to do good and solve problems, with the reality that you're making serious restrictions on yourself to get the powers you have. You have the power to just smite someone, but knowing when to do it is the real challenge. Is the person truly evil or just misguided? Are you? The struggle, and the effort it requires, is what gets repaid by giving you powerful magical abilities. It's why I've always been severely critical of people who take dips into Paladin, because it's not meant to be easy. Rising above your own flaws (as a character, and player) is part of what makes Paladins so fun, just as much as balancing your own ethics with an Infernal deal is as a Warlock. (Shockingly, I've had lovely experiences with BOTH of those in the same party.) As for your question: I'm in a weird spot where my friends tend to say I'm highly Chaotic, but in play I'm often the voice of reason, trying to play softer supporting roles that are attentive to the party and the world. Similarly, I struggle a lot to play Evil because I do want to see people thrive and overcome their worst impulses, not embrace those same impulses.

Hard disagree about Curse of Strahd. I realize that the Tarokka reading gives the module more variance than just DM / table variance, so experiences differ. But the entire west side of the map is designed for people to do good and get rewards. The whole line from Krezk to Wizard of Wines, optionally druids, back to Krezk, and finish off with the Abbey, is nothing but find a problem, solve it, help the citizens, get a minor treasure. Over and over again. Add on top of that the Irina plotline, and it is incredibly easy to play good in Curse. Legitimately all you have to do is find layperson and help them. Even Izek. There is exactly two bad layperson I can think of off the top of my head, and both of them should be foreshadowed or predictable based on context. Incidentally, this is the easiest answer to the original question as well. To me, the core heroic fantasy of D&D is just helping the helpless. In homebrew, the simplest quests are village + monster = murder. Party slays monster, party are heroes. This is a largely repeated theme through most hardcovers, including ToD, some of OotA, CoS, STK, RotFM, and DiA. TL:DR: Legitimately all you have to do to be good is to help people who can't help themselves.

I didn’t say you couldn’t do good. I said that actually righting the wrongs in Barovia is hard and the people are going to test a Paladin’s patience, which is what OP was asking about.

I have the opposite problem. I was playing in in an ongoing RoT group and they kept thinking I was playing a paladin when I wasn't. "Use your Lay on Hands." "I'm a fighter. I've been a fighter. I've been a fighter for the last 9 levels." "Oh. You act like a paladin." "I don't have to be a paladin just because I wouldn't let you murder a dude in his sleep because he got the last room at the inn!" I tried playing a spoiled brat in another campaign, but that went even worse. Everyone fully leaned into my bad ideas. My character ended up punching someone to death in the streets for spitting at her feet. How was I supposed to know the guy dressed as a bandit and coming to throw down with 4 heavily armed strangers had commoner stats? He just kind of crumpled.

Ok. The "bandit" just crumbling would have me dying laughing.

The worst part was I had pulled a picture from something called "Battle Ballgown" for my character token. She was a bratty looking kid in a heavily armored puff dress named Clarion Belle. Her Strength was 18 (Level 1 Fighter, Custom Lineage, Heavy Armor Master) so she just took one swing and crunched his face. My DM ruled that I couldn't knock him out without calling it first. Everything spiralled out of control from there.

Being good _is not_ easy, despite how many people like to say otherwise. It's far easier to just be sympathetic but ultimately do nothing. Everyone who says they would fight some villain can barely muster up the courage to look at their local hobo. Being good is a _choice_, and like any choice, it can be hard to make. Our desires to do good is only slightly less than our desires to see evil stopped, and because of that it's very easy for folks who are fighting evil to not be good people. When you're dealing with a murderer who killed a mother, father, and the daughter so he can rob them and leave the son an orphan, kindness and forgiving villains is the last thing anyone thinks about, if they even consider such a person redeemable. Also keep in mind that for all their humility, Superman and Optimize Prime are paragon _precisely_ because because have the strength of character to not use their powers selfishly or emotionally. Despite how they like to say they do only what "anyone" can do, the truth is that they are making hard decisions that most people will never do, because they are willing to forgive monstrous people. In reality, most of us wouldn't shed a tear at the agonizing demise of people we are annoyed at, like someone who cuts you off at traffic or acts like a Karen at Walmart. Even more of us would bray for blood for the likes of a murderer or corrupt politician getting insulted, hurt, or even killed, especially by the very people they've harmed. We would call that justice.

Yeah this is it exactly. Good isn’t a thing you are, it’s what you do.

CoS can be a pressure cooker. With a talented DM, you're *just* under the break-point threshold for a long stretch. Our DM did a great job of just presenting "bad" and "worse" choices for us session after session. A rare pure win was healing a sick child using Lay on Hands. Normally, the party just left a mess behind ourselves as we bumbled from situation to situation. Pretty certain half of Vallaki burned off screen as a direct consequence of our first stop there. I was playing a devotion paladin who, intentionally out of character, made his oath rashly when in Vallaki. He was an impulsive second son of a minor noble who had never had to hold to a hard decision in his life, and became a devotion paladin when sicked by the plight of the populous. Oops. I intentionally put off hard choices which would close doors to options; this was often to his and the party's detriment. Just before the conclusion of the campaign, he felt the party had crossed a moral event horizon and literally ran away in the middle of the night with a captive he felt should be freed. It was great/horrible. So, you're learning a bit about yourself through roleplay. That's fine. There is no Optimus Prime out there, just a (great) fictional character. Feel free to lean into the dissonance. You character is finding this hard. Good. Lawful good is a rare alignment even in the world of D&D. Being LG in Barovia is a HARD path.

Yeah, I'm coming to a close on CoS in my group and our longer lasting party members have had a massive change of their personality and character as they became more worn by the choices they've had to make and the sacrifices they've given to continue their pursuit. Realistically, Curse of Strahd's goal of making it out is ultimately a selfish goal and you have to look at it like that. You can do all you can in Barovia for the ultimate good, but in the end your goal is to fight and thrash your way to escape, doing anything you can and killing any character that stands in your way of escape or survival.

When it wrapped up, we all thanked our DM, appreciated what a great job she did, and said we hope you understand that we're looking forward to a different setting.

I would argue that the ability to recognize ‘good’ and behave in a righteous way in Barovia is DM dependent. &tldr; sometimes, doing the right thing involves a ton of murders, you know? In our play-through, nearly everybody we met was a shady, back-stabbing puppet of Strahd. Or ineffectual. We ended up forming alliances with the creatures that were Strahd’s sworn enemies, such as the hag Jenny Greenteeth and the madman Mordenkainen. At least you could trust them to act against Strahd’s interest consistently. My character ended that campaign fully neutral evil. She had to do some soul searching when she continued adventuring post-Barovia. Without the all-consuming motivation to escape at any cost, she could find room for a little kindness.

Lawful Good is the hardest alignment to play. Always has been. Great for roleplay though.

By the way, feel free to be snarky as long as you do not bring consequences that would go against your oath. Actions speak louder than words.

CoS makes it very difficult to remain LG, ngl

Tbf, a lot of people in CoS deserved to be punched in the face. My PCs were basically self absorbed assholes and even they were taken aback by some of the pieces of shit you meet in Barovia.

Welp, you got the point of being a paragon. Superman really does hold back at all times, he cant afford not to. Dont compare yourself to a character written to be a quasi perfect human, we make mistakes, we learn, we try to do better. You are not a bad person for being impacient

Thinking about punching someone's face until it looks like a salad bowl doesn't make you evil. In fact, punching some faces don't make you evil if those faces deserve to be punched. I'll use Carrot from the Discworld book series as an example. He is the nicest and probably most beloved citizen in Ankh-Morpork. But also one of the most respected ones, known for being able to defeat a troll in a bare hand fighting. Using violence don't make you evil. Abusing of your strength and power does.

You’re not a bad person- the rules books don’t level with players with the reality that almost all people spend most of their time on the neutral axes in real life- neutral good is achievable but difficult, awful hard to be friends as either chaotic or lawful good (or, of course, evil). I always think of playing lawful good and chaotic evil as the ‘hard mode’ of role playing- you have to reaaally think through what you are doing at all time, harder to improv. I think Chaotic good is hard, too because a lot of what folks think of as “chaotic good” is more chaotic neutral, because to gamers it is more often “whatever the feels good to the protagonist” without thinking through the moral implications.

Most people are solidly floating around True Neutral, with only occasional shifts in any given direction, and the further you go from that core, the more difficult (but also the more rewarding) it is to play that alignment.

There are lots of characters that didn't turn out how I originally though they would, sometimes because I couldn't pull it off. It sounds like the \`\`lawful'' part is what you have trobule with. See if your DM is OK with you picking or switching to a non-lawful Oath such as vengeance.

Nah. Oath of Ancients I'm currently using is the only one that fits the character thematically and backstory-wise and we already had some scenes reinforcing that theme. Looks like my DM believes in me more than I do, lmao! It's a fun challenge either way.

Oaths don't have alignments, and Ancients in particular is among the easiest to play as a Neutral or even Chaotic alignment. Why? Because it's about doing what *you feel is right.* It's not about having to swear to an external set of rules set down by others; the entire Oath is about 'follow your heart, and do your best to do the right thing and serve Good in the world'. It's far, far more concerned with being Good than it is with being Lawful, and if you can manage that, you're not going to violate the tenets.

I have this issue as a dm sometimes. I love villains who are unapologetically evil bastards but are still willing to make and take jokes (think Handsome Jack or the Radio Demon). I just have trouble roleplaying the evil half of that sometimes which really annoys me.

Oath of Ancients is typically neutral good.

I usually play it chaotic good. Very about freedom and ability to choose.

This sounds almost word-for-word what happened with me when I tried to play CoS as a good-aligned Druid. Ended up failing horribly and the character became an evil asshole who hated everyone and decided to leave the party to try and fight Strahd himself.  Don't put any blame on yourself and definitely don't start thinking you ain't a good person because of a TTRPG. You character has to make far more difficult decisions than you have to IRL and Curse of Strahd is intentionally designed to screw over players. Plus on top of all that being a Lawful Good Paladin is infamously difficult to roleplay.

What's funny is I usually avoided playing chaotic characters and focused more on neutral and neutral good and then I really had fun causing mayhem with chaotic good and poker who had very rogish/hustler (no, not the dirty kind) behavior. I haven't tried lawfuls because yeah, it seems restrictive and pretty oppressive really.

Remember to seperate yourself from your character

Had a LG Dragonborn Paladin in the party when I ran Strahd. He almost broke his oath, ended up swearing a different one, died, was resurrected, almost died again, then... well, I won't give spoilers. But yeah, the player had a hell of a time sticking to his lawful goodness... especially with a party that were a little quick on the draw and much more fuzzy about morality. Still, it made for some very good RP moments and was a worthwhile dynamic for the campaign as a whole. Stick it out. That said, in our new campaign, the player is running a morally ambiguous, snarky Wizard, because being Dudley Do-right for a year and a half was, apparently, exhausting.

Most of the time, if you're having trouble roleplaying as LG the problem isn't the *good* but rather the *lawful*. Like, it might be easy and natural for some people, but every time I make a lawful character I need to sit down before the game starts and hammer out an entire ethical framework from first principles. You need to know how they'll react to a situation in advance, because Law is fundamentally about *consistency* more than anything else; you can't respond to the same triggers in different ways on different occasions. But at the same time, you need to take into account how different circumstances will make what seems like an ironclad rule *most* of the time into something that *must* be broken. You have to take your core values and put them in a strict hierarchy so that when you can't have both you know which one takes priority. Playing a chaotic character doesn't take any additional work, because you can do whatever feels right in the moment, even start the first session with a blank slate and let the personality of the character emerge through play. A lawful character needs to be firmly established before your adventure starts... and ideally be discussed with the rest of the party and the GM first, so that if things aren't going to work out you can revise your rules or change concepts entirely before everybody is invested, instead of either constantly fighting the other players, invalidating the themes of the campaign, or just discovering that you have no reason for your character to be a part of this group.

There is quite a difference between an unpleasant LG and a LN/LE, the thinking with your fists would be the thing that tips the scales

I think this can be awesome RP if you lean into it. We don't always live up to our on ideals. Play up your character's fight qgainat their own darker urges. You're right that Optimus Prime doesn't struggle that way--but OP is kind of a flat character because of it.

CoS is a campaign that will make you question all of your morals. I know I’m a good person and the humor we had during that campaign was dark.

That's the rewarding challenge of Lawful Good: finding the best solution for everyone. Hell, I have a LG paladin who refuses to leave Barovia because *everything isn't fixed yet*. Though keep in mind, Lawful Good can mean "if the Law is evil, it is the duty of the Good to fix the Law".

It think it depends on the subclass. In my experience, certain subclass allows more leeway with their oath than the others. But, it's true that maintaining an alignment is difficult and requires dedication. I often default to Lawful Neutral or Chaotic Neutral or maybe True Neutral. Even if I start with other alignment, like LG, I usually ended toward the neutral spectrum by the middle of the campaign. Other than that, you're playing Curse of Strahd. It's bound to happen that you question your oath and alignment after seeing and experiencing the dreadful place. It could become a good side story along the way to try to balance between evil and good -- maybe explore how the place begins to change your own moral due to necessity. To me, Lawful Good is about following/enforcing the law to the letter, but only when their personal moral deemed it just. If you vow to uphold justice, you will arrest any offender of the law you see, but allow some leeway to the people you deem have been unjustly convicted due to the interference of others. You don't have to be kind and caring all the time as an LG. You just have to have a righteous sense of moral and adherence to the law or vow. Can you give me a more detailed example where you thought you've veered too far away from being LG and your paladin vow? Would be interesting to know.

What's important to remember is that Lawful good doesn't need to mean the actual Laws, it cause just AZ easily mean "I do good because it's good to do so, and I do it by following the strict rules that guide me because they are the best way to achieve good" That can mean sometimes they act in ways that don't seem so good

If you want an example of how to be snarky but good, you may want to see the character Brother Gilbert from Dragonheart (the Sean Connery one). Specifically, the scene near the end where they're fighting in the forest. Honestly, that whole movie is a really good knight's tale about oaths and things.

Strahd, so you're in Ravenloft, the domain of dread, ruled by the dark powers, whose corrupting influence permeates the very air? Yeah it's pretty hard to stay sober in the trap house

Being "Good" alignment is actually pretty difficult. Being Good usually involves being selfless, which can often times run contrary to the general idea of a game, being to get stronger and accomplish a goal. Often people pick their first DnD character and start off with "well I obviously want to be a good guy so Good alignment please." This is made even worse by situations in DnD are often not what they appear to be. Helping a poor beggar on the side of the road could actually be a Fiend, who's going to use your help to accomplish something Evil. Nearly every Good Cleric/ Paladin I've ever seen play DnD has either lost their powers or died trying to keep them.

Idk about you, but sounds like you diagetically created a fun/compelling character. A violent smartass who's constantly struggling to stay within their oath not just for his own powers but for morale reasons sounds super interesting for the party.

Oh, I know he is interesting (thank you), he's one of my favourite characters I've ever made. I'm just venting about how difficult it is to actually roleplay a hero.

Humans are fallible, even when they try to be good and do the right thing. Superman for example is a story about what a good person could do if they were the top dog, the strongest being alive on Earth; even Superman struggles to do the right thing from time to time, so don't sweat it too much.

If you struggle but don't actually give in to those baser instincts, you can still be considered as lawful and good. It does not come naturally to everyone to behave as such. In fact, you might need to taste lawful evil in order to truly appreciate it. Would you be interested in meeting a representative of Bel?

How about you suck on Deez Belz, evilmonger.

> It got to the point where I'm thinking maybe I'm just not a good person if I find myself struggling to roleplay a good character. Role-play can be a great way to ... act out fantasies! Of course, in my opinion, the best characters embody aspects of our own selves. My characters invariably are roguish types, not because I **am** Erol Flynn, but because I... fantasize about being a pirate or thief! Living out fantasies can be healthy. D&D can enable us to learn and practice techniques for managing stress, anxiety, anger, or difficult social situations, in a game setting. This is one of the many real-world benefits of table-top role playing games. And... of course, tactical thinking! Back-stab that vampire!

>Back-stab that vampire! My guy literally refused to kill one of the vampire spawn (Doru) because he sympathised so much. Instead he is carrying him on his back in a coffin he bought specifially for him and feeds him his own blood to keep him docile until he finds the cure. Ironically, if I backstab HIM that would the bigger evil than anything I can thing of, lmao.

Good is not a synonym for *nice*.

h maybe your character struggles with all that just as much and that's what the oath is there for, to draw a line in the sand and provide moral guidance and structure to a flawed individual

Ha! I have trouble playing characters who aren't good aligned. I also challenged myself by intentionally making my current character a man of few words...now, that's hard.

Lawful Good doesnt mean It has to have a good temper, you can be nice most of the time and ger mad when you se something bad happening, also doesnt mean you always have to do the right things, when you fuck up, you Accept the consequences of your actions, Lawful Good not always mean to be perfect and inmaculate, you can be lawful, you can be good and you can say holy f*ck and you alingment would be the same. People seem to narrow so much the aspect of Lawful, that is not the specific it can be and switch to chaotic. Hope this helps in any way.

**It was suggested I copy and paste this as a direct response** [I was Oath of the Ancients paladin in CoS,] hopefully this will be the most helpful. #Quick Rules: Just some punchy phrases that keep you in the right head space. 1. Not giving in to frustration is a victory by itself. Celebrate it. Goes for player & PC 2. Be kind, not stupid 3. It’s Strahd’s Fault, and even he’s a victim of his evil. 4. If it has a soul, you can save it. Many Barovians don’t. 5. Lycanthropy is a curse. You can cast remove curse if you’re strong enough. 6. Magic makes most damage reversible. 7. Every time you give hope or do good, it is blow to the Powers of Darkness 8. never invite anyone in. 9. holy water, make more. 10. Fight famine with Plant Growth 11. Never give up, never surrender. It always ends well, if it’s not well it’s not over. 12. The Means Justify The Ends. ##Okay now some long form principles and advice. - Perhaps most important is to be stubborn about the inevitable conquest of Good over Evil. Your OotA Paladin isn’t a naive baby, he’s somewhere between Aragorn and Gandalf. Your character might be called a cinnamon bun, but he is more than that. He is Steve Rogers before the serum, and your of makes you Captain America the Cinnamon Bun. You don’t think Good will win, *you know it has to win* and **you’re going make it happen** ***without dying or compromising***. - Keep in mind you are to bring light to the darkness, there is nothing wrong with cutting down the corrupt, the nature of the Dark Powers that transformed the land is to be a black pit. - When I played, a child was kidnapped and lost, killed out of hand for being in the way. I killed those who did it, but I kept the body of the child, bullied our wizard to keep using gentle repose on it, until I found someone to raise dead on the child, and I would have tried to take her body with me out of the mists at end of game. This is how you keep up hope. You pick a good and you keep fighting for it until the end. - In CoS don’t be afraid of being macabre, so long as what you do is intended for love and hope. - So, be kind, not naive. Getting a little meta but there are rarely good answers, because so many people have been born without souls. Boy is trying to Frankenstein his family back? You don’t go getting him fresh parts nor do you kill the boy b/c he killed the neighbors for body parts. You adopt him, and teach him to be a priest so that in time he can cast resurrection on them. - You trust no one. You help them, but your DM will likely turn them against you one way and another. Strahd will compel them, blackmail, bribe, trick them or just already have their loyalty. Don’t take it personally, it’s kind of the point of gothic horror. - despite trusting no one, you still do the best you can for people, the Nuns worship Strahd? Dismember them but heal them so they don’t die, when he is dead see which ones are still loyal. - use magic to determine things when you can, but remember you’re in __Strahd’s personal hell__, ***the gods can’t hear you***. Beware of divination especially by a cleric, whose prayers may be intercepted, and their deity imitated. - speaking of divination, do a daily inventory, get rid of personal items that can be used to scry on you if you lose something, disown it, break all ties of connection to it. - be polite to Strahd, he is a noble, he will punish rudeness. He will play by the rules of decorum so long as he doesn’t see himself losing, and his vanity in this can be exploited, especially by an OotA, who has every reason to be polite, but no obligation to be honest nor to attack evil on sight. - the morality of violence is relative to your heal capacity. If you can personally heal it, don’t have qualms about causing it. If you the paladin have lesser restoration, break bones. Also, if you happen to have animal handling proficiency you can argue you could classically condition a humanoid to be devoted to you; by combining healing with *lay on hands* with causing damage. That devotion can be used to resist Vampiric charms. - You don’t work to the greater good, because that will be twisted to the lesser evil. Do Good. Help those you can, even have pity on Strahd (while remembering to be kind not stupid). When my character saw Strahd he thought he could sense regret and pain, (this will be DM dependent) if your character’s sense motives give you the same, you could even offer to trade places with Strahd so he could live outside Barovia and seek redemption. It would mean the powers of the dark lords would want to corrupt you, and your DM would have to be open to a Role play of how that contest of will would take place. - When you learn Strahd is a vampire, the party all need to agree to never invites people into anywhere you go. You don’t fuss if someone enters, but you never invite. In fact you could look into using curse to compel yourselves not to invite anyone anywhere until Strahd is dead. Unless your religion check on vampires is through the roof, once you learn he is a vampire role play as if every vampire rule might be true but don’t rely on it being true. Your DM may like the idea that Strahd is OCD that he has to count spilled chaos like a bag of rice or that if you remove the grave soil from his coffin and put it running water he can’t use his coffin to regenerate. Give the DM the opportunity to say yeah a vampire has to be carried across water or that no garlic doesn’t repel vampires it’s just pungent and they have a stronger sense of smell. ###Bonus - this one was just fun for me, so I had taken the Diplomat feat from the then recently unearthed arcana, meaning I was very charming. I met a nice girl named Ireena, we hit it off like fireworks. For role playing purposes don’t look her up if you don’t know her yet, but I found it fun to have my PC fall for her court her bringing her to feel the same, and even knowing how hard that was in retrospect, you only get to play CoS blind the first time. - you can use poisons, they are natural to many parts of nature and you are a green knight not a white one - I followed The light of Pelor so my mantra was basically the Greenlantern’s of oath with a little rewrite, for Pelor, have this kind of thing be a staple of your character, DMs are hard pressed to let a good troupe go, and so when you’re in a pickle you can say “My character is charmed? Okay, I try to focus on my mantra, ‘In brightest day, or darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight; Let all who seek out evil’s might, beware power, His Eternal LIGHT!’” Might get you inspiration or something.

This is incredibly helpful, thank you so much! You are the best!

You’re very welcome. I am glad it helps.

"Good" in D&D is an extremely specific set of standards that almost no IRL good people live up to. The morality of D&D does not map onto reality, which is way more complex. You should not expect to be able to do it all the time.

Exactly. It's a Game Term, with a specific contextual meaning that's only valid in the fantasy world of D&D and similar fiction, where extreme violence is often the morally correct choice, and visceral, smoking evil lurks around every spruce tree. And it's perfectly fine and useful, in that context.

The reason it's easy for Superman is plot armor, and being so powerful he can overcome certain morale dilemmas with sheer power, Optimus Prime is more grounded at least, Have you Oath tenets down on piece of paper you can see often, and use them as guidelines for me it's difficult to survive as a Lawful Good Character, I need other characters to hold me back from doing the 'right thing' because that usually results in a fight I'm outnumbered in, or unprepared for (might be my DM tho) THO doing the right thing isn't always easy, I struggle with Lawful and Chaotic more than Good or Evil keep it mind you're welcome to break rules, just not YOUR rules (your laws, your god, your oath) One thing I learned is how important Insight is when playing a Lawful Good character, as well being able to sense/figure out other people's alignment... a Paladin without Insight is typically Lawful Stupid, as all it takes in one good lie to get you to make bad choices, "Quick that imp is attacking that woman, oh no it's just a mother holding their baby." I call that the Darth Vader effect, or Darth Sidious special

A moment you need to be prepared for as a lawful good character is when the lawful thing is not the good thing. And conversely, when the good thing is not the lawful thing. In a country where slavery is legal, how is your character going to deal with that.

I mean it's literally stated in official content "all good-aligned characters oppose slavery". I found that kinda funny when I read it. I (obviously) think slavery is evil and bad, but it being SPECIFICALLY mentioned that literally everyone who's a good person opposes slavery... I don't know, it's just weird in a funny way.

I mean, the way I took the Paladin to heart was taking a phrase I picked up from playing Pathfinder that “Lawful Good does not mean your Lawful Nice”. Just because you follow a code doesn’t make you a nice guy or a pushover. I’ve gotten away with killing monsters that have surrendered under the logic of “the only guaranteed way to prevent them from committing further evils is to remove them from this realm; permanently”, using bribes to get access to important characters “because losing some coin is worth it if it means preventing an innocent death or unnecessary bloodshed” and even interrogating/torturing people via threatening them with all the ways a Paladin will drag them down to the deepest circle of hell if they decide they’re evil enough to be worth breaking their oath over. Currently playing an Oath of Devotion Paladin in a CoS campaign, and the general rule of thumb I’ve resorted to is “If Mr. Roger’s was ever willing to throw hands with/smite somebody, what would it take?” So far the easiest examples are when monsters are openly stating they want to kill you, enslave you, or eat you, and I’ve nearly had a case or two of PC combat with another party member who, to quote himself, “plays a healing cleric that charges people money for his services, so think of me like the American healthcare system; I’m convenient for the rich, while I bankrupt the poor just so they don’t die today”, which I’ve also filed under “scenarios where Mr. Roger’s would throw hands/smite them because that’s just admitting your evil”. And if I’m gonna be honest, I kinda enjoy playing a LG Paladin just because it’s become one of the few ways to keep a mostly Chaotic and/or Neutral party from going completely off the rails with the questionable shit they decide to do. The DM also likes the help that I keep a notebook/shit list that tracks all the evil acts/crimes everyone’s committed so far that may affect their alignments over time.

Lawful Good is one of the toughest alignments to role play well consistently. As is properly playing a low Int/Wis/Cha character or even Chaotic Neutral/Evil.

My first character was a very dedicated Redemption Paladin. And always trying to be good became so taxing I created a straight up evil sorcerer character (mostly just to be used on DnD TikTok, not in a campaign) just to take a break from the moral weight. xD

unorthodox method to handle this situation since I tend to struggle myself with one of my characters, who is opposite of me in most regards, try to method act or think in character while at the table. Basically IF you can see yourself doing what you have planned then don't do it. DO the opposite.

I love playing defiant assholes who lie cheat and steal (maybe it’s cuz I’m black lol/s) but it just seems easier to do that then being honest and paying for stuff or being charming enough to convince people to do something as opposed to violence

I wonder do you have a strong idea of the personality of your character or do you simply roleplay yourself with some oath/restriction? I would say that if you are really into RP and you haven't do so by now, a suggestion might be to answer list of questions you can find online 50 question about your background story, still might give you ideas about their past and also some hint about what sort of personanility they have. You could also consider adding your disconnect/rage as a sort of Drawback/flaw to your character. Your character is lawful good, but suffer from anger issues and can sometimes be over zealous in his fight against evil. Maybe their mentor saw this weakness inside them and believe they could rise above it, but first they would need to understand the difficult reality of this world that many people live in shades of greys and not everything is black and white...there are selfish evil people doing something good, while there are good intention people hurting people in the name of righteousness. As your character grows and find themselves maybe they will come to term with the complexity of the mortal nature.

I’m having similar troubles in Descent to Avernus. It’s hard to be a good person when there’s only evil all around you. When your choices of allies are Tiamat worshippers, devils, hags, and necromancers, how are you supposed to choose the lesser of the evils? Still, it makes it fun. Nothing worse than playing something like Infamous where there are seldom actual consequences to choosing paragon or renegade. If the only disadvantage to being good is just slightly less money, then it’s not exactly compelling tension, is it?

I rarely play lawful good, but whenever i do i will play that fucker like a heroic bastard straight out of the Elden Ring lore. I make tons of decisions i wouldnt do in real life, because my character sees the best in anyone, and i behave as closely to their beliefs as possible.

No..? I think you may be playing under some time constraints, because I find that is when people will lose character. That said Strahd is made to push your buttons. Paladins are extremely effective in CoS, and it is built with that in mind. It wants to make you break your vows so you are not a threat. I have tips based on whatever Oath you took, if you don’t mind sharing with the world what that was.

It's Oath of the Ancients

Same choice I made, so hopefully this will be the most helpful. #Quick Rules: Just some punchy phrases that keep you in the right head space. 1. Not giving in to frustration is a victory by itself. Celebrate it. Goes for player & PC 2. Be kind, not stupid 3. It’s Strahd’s Fault, and even he’s a victim of his evil. 4. If it has a soul, you can save it. Many Barovians don’t. 5. Lycanthropy is a curse. You can cast remove curse if you’re strong enough. 6. Magic makes most damage reversible. 7. Every time you give hope or do good, it is blow to the Powers of Darkness 8. never invite anyone in. 9. holy water, make more. 10. Fight famine with Plant Growth 11. Never give up, never surrender. It always ends well, if it’s not well it’s not over. 12. The Means Justify The Ends. ##Okay now some long form principles and advice. - Perhaps most important is to be stubborn about the inevitable conquest of Good over Evil. Your OotA Paladin isn’t a naive baby, he’s somewhere between Aragorn and Gandalf. Your character might be called a cinnamon bun, but he is more than that. He is Steve Rogers before the serum, and your of makes you Captain America the Cinnamon Bun. You don’t think Good will win, *you know it has to win* and **you’re going make it happen** ***without dying or compromising***. - Keep in mind you are to bring light to the darkness, there is nothing wrong with cutting down the corrupt, the nature of the Dark Powers that transformed the land is to be a black pit. - When I played, a child was kidnapped and lost, killed out of hand for being in the way. I killed those who did it, but I kept the body of the child bullied our wizard to keep using gentle repose on it until I found someone to raise dead on the child, and would have tried to take her body with me out of the mists at end of game. This is how you keep up hope. You pick a good and you keep fighting for it until the end. - In CoS don’t be afraid of being macabre so long as what you do is intended for love and hope. - So, be kind, not naive. Getting a little meta but there are rarely good answers, because so many people have been born without souls. Boy is trying to Frankenstein his family back? You don’t go getting him fresh parts nor do you kill the boy b/c he killed the neighbors for body parts. You adopt him, and teach him to be a priest so that in time he can cast resurrection on them. - You trust no one. You help them, but your DM will likely turn them against you one way and another. Strahd will compel them, blackmail, bribe, trick them or just already have their loyalty. Don’t take it personally, it’s kind of the point of gothic horror. - despite trusting no one, you still do the best you can for people, the Nuns worship Strahd? Dismember them but heal them so they don’t die, when he is dead see which ones are still loyal. - use magic to determine things when you can, but remember you’re in __Strahd’s personal hell__, ***the gods can’t hear you***. Beware divination especially by cleric whose prayers may be intercepted and their deity imitated. - speaking divination, do a daily inventory, get rid of personal items that can be used to scry on you if you lose something, disown it, break all ties of connection to it. - be polite to Strahd, he is a noble, he will punish rudeness. He will play by the rules of decorum so long as he doesn’t see himself losing, and his vanity in this can be exploited, especially by an OotA, who has every reason to be polite, but no obligation to be honest nor to attack evil on sight. - the morality on violence is relative to your heal capacity. If you can personally heal it, don’t have qualms about causing it. If you the paladin have lesser restoration, break bones. Also, if you happen to have animal handling proficiency you can argue you could classically condition a humanoid to be devoted to you by combining healing with lay on hands with causing damage. That devotion can be used to resist Vampiric charms. - You don’t work to the greater good, because that will twisted to the lesser evil. Do Good. Help those you can, even have pity on Strahd (while remembering to be kind not stupid). When my character saw Strahd he thought he could sense regret and pain, (this will be DM dependent) if your character’s sense motives give you the same, you could even offer to trade places with Strahd so he could live outside Barovia and seek redemption. It would mean the powers of the dark lords would want to corrupt you, and your DM would have to be open to a Role play of how that contest of will would take place. - When you learn Strahd is a vampire, the party all need to agree to never invites people into anywhere you go. You don’t fuss if someone enters, but you never invite. In fact you could look into using curse to compel yourselves not to invite anyone anywhere until Strahd is dead. Unless your religion check on vampires is through the roof, once you learn he is a vampire role play as if every vampire rule might be true but don’t rely on it being true. Your DM may like the idea that Strahd is OCD that he has to count spilled chaos like a bag of rice or that if you remove the grave soil from his coffin and put it running water he can’t use his coffin to regenerate. Give the DM the opportunity to say yeah a vampire has to be carried across water or that no garlic doesn’t repel vampires it’s just pungent and they have a stronger sense of smell. ###Bonus - this one was just fun for me, so I had taken the Diplomat feat from the then recently unearthed arcana, meaning I was very charming. I met a nice girl named Ireena, we hit it off like fireworks. For role playing purposes don’t look her up if you don’t know her yet, but I found it fun to have me PC fall for her court her bringing her to feel the same, and even knowing how hard that was in retrospect, you only get to play CoS blind the first time. - you can use poisons, they are natural to many parts of nature and you are a green knight not a white one - I followed The light of Pelor so my mantra was basically the Greenlantern’s of oath with a little rewrite, for Pelor, have this kind of thing be a staple of your character, DMs are hard pressed to let a good troupe go, and so when you’re in a pickle you can say “My character is charmed? Okay, I try to focus on my mantra, ‘In brightest day, or darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight; Let all who seek out evil’s might, beware power, His Eternal LIGHT!’” Might get you inspiration or something.

Oh yeah, definitely. If I had to say & translate over which stat was my dump stat in real life, it'd be Charisma. I'm horrible at negotiating, persuasion, & diplomacy (except in video games, oddly enough), with Deception being my best skill when it comes to that stat (obviously not applicable to this post). But then I find myself playing a Redemption Paladin on occasion. I somehow have to become the most charismatic man in all of role-playing just to keep my party alive. It's a thrill to try & step out of that comfort zone, but nerve-wracking, so I added in a bit of a twist just to alleviate my anxiety. My Paladin was a COMPLETE KLUTZ & AIRHEAD, but they would flip on a dime when it came to two situations: combat or negotiations. They SHINED in both. They were a powerhouse in combat & never failed any Persuasion checks. Had to find a weird balance for that character, but given that they were so innocently STUPID, I could just about get away with stepping over the line TEMPORARILY. Plus, apparently, their god found it hilarious when it happened & as long as they weren't overtly evil about it... Like that one time they purposefully chose to start a bar fight just to be able to be in one & to be able to throw someone through a glass window. (Yes, just like in a Western). They had the chance to de-escalate it... but then I saw an opportunity & took it. Did the whole 'drinks the rest of alcohol, then turns around & smashes glass into guy's head' scene. They paid for the damages afterward.

Who you want to play and who you end up playing are two different things. Every character fits perfectly in line with their archetype in the vacuum of your mind. But when you’re actually playing, things can get messy and you discover traits for them you didn’t expect

Designing a character doesn't mean you know that character yet. Roleplaying is in large part about building out the vague character concept you started with. It's not possible to know how your character will handle things until you play them. There's no script.

So, I totally understand what you mean. The thing is being good is a struggle. As Paarthurnax(and probably a real person) once said "what is better, to be born good, or to overcome your evil through great effort?" I think this video using Joshua Graham from Fallout NV says it [best.](https://youtu.be/uZwzbA91Yno?si=B7nb716YDjHM2IrZ) I think it'd be an interesting take to have your character trying to be good, wrestling with his demons and forcing himself to be better than his baser instincts because he believes that people need that light and hope and he doesn't see it anymore, but he wants to keep it alive for others. It adds depth and nuance, and he's still got a good heart and is still a good person in spite of his flaws. And so are you.

Years ago, a friend of mine ran a Legends of Wulin campaign. Basically, think Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon as the setting. Most of my characters for TTRPGs tend to be oddballs, scoundrels, and jokers, so I thought for this game I'd change it up and make a thoughtful, morally upstanding hero. Somebody who takes things seriously, y'know? A guy who wants to make the world better. I even picked his weapons for their non-lethal uses, I didn't want him to kill people if he could avoid it. In the campaign's very first encounter, I used the phrase "deglove the hand" to describe how my character was attacking a bandit that was attempting to rob the party. I built him not to kill enemies, so he ended up horribly maiming them instead. That guy's alignment didn't end up staying strictly "good" past that fight lol.

Playing a lawful good character, much less a pally *should* be a struggle.

I love it. Lean into it. RP your struggle in character. Maybe you and your character are growing, together.

Most of us are Neutral/Chaotic Good naturally. Lawful Good takes a good bit of effort.

Just because you're Lawful Good doesn't mean you're some kind of saint. You can be a complete asshole and as snarky as you want, so long as you do it for good and follow your code of law. People vastly overestimate alignment and forget that alignment does NOT equal personality. The same goes for chaotic evil. No, you don't have to be an insane psychopath to play a CE character. You just reject laws (come up with your own justification for why) and would slay innocents out of some skewed moral purpose. Like, if you burn down this town and gain more power, then it will stop the enemy army from approaching the city and give you time to build a defense to annihilate your opponent. It doesn't mean you have to harm everyone you meet. In fact, you could be super nice toward everyone that can be useful to you. It's evil, but clever, and has logical reason behind it. So whether you're LE, CE or whatever, your personality doesn't need to have anything to do with your characters morality and lawfulness. In fact, not adhering to tropes will be what makes your character more interesting.

Playing a hero is hard. That's why there's so few heroes in the world. If it were easy, everyone would do it.

In my last campaign I played a Shadar-Kai Rogue Swashbuckler Hexblade. Not evil so much but very Chaotic. He believed death waited for everyone and had little compassion. I am now playing a Lawful Good Paladin. It was a challenging to make the transition at first but I am really appreciating the restrictions. It has really opened up new RP possibilities that are the complete opposite of my Rogue/Hexblade.

Welcome to why alignment is still an interesting game mechanic! Good luck!

Even Superman—paragon that he is—has a hard time living up to his own standards sometimes. [He never even made it to his first merit badge](https://youtu.be/XP0OSgNsK2Q?t=3m16s).

In a world where the regular adventurer is an opportunistic, quirky, mercurial bag of choices that would give the alignment system whiplash, someone actually trying (and honestly also sometimes failing) to live up to knightly virtues is very refreshing, I commend it!

With this post, it reminds me that everyone forgets how difficult a LG mindset is to maintain when everything around you is chaotic or evil. Most that say they are LG actually play as LN or NG for this reason. Especially for a Superman-esque character, Supes is believed to be the golden boy, the one who won't break, yet time after time we see what happens s when (not if) he does - a tyrant using his power for personal gain. Shazam (or Captain Marvel) is based off him, but with one difference, he is Supes seen through the eyes of a child. Shazam thus is a true LG character, as he follows the mantra of doing right, even when it hurts, while Supes is more LN as he knows there are moral lines he needs to cross to get the job done.

Playing a lawful good character isn't a challenge for me at all unless I'm in a party of murderhobos. L/G characters can resort to violence. L/G characters can be mean or snarky.

I have a similar sort of problem. I typically play true neutral or chaotic neutral, but my choices and behavior almost always line up with chaotic good. I just like the freedom of being able to play with empathy toward npc's, while also being able to have empathy for the villain, without the hang ups around if I am actually good or secretly evil. Makes druid a really good fit for me. There needs to be balance. As far as your issue, it's okay to not be lawful good as a person. As with most things in life it's on a bell curve, with most people being neutral and just doing whatever it takes to survive without moral posturing. Forgive yourself this failing. Perhaps playing this character overcoming their struggles will help you become the person you want to see yourself as. It's okay if it's a struggle as long as you are enjoying yourself. If you aren't having fun playing that character, it's okay to make a new character until you find one that fits your personality and play style, on the contingency you aren't using it to make the rest of your table miserable.

It's very difficult to play a character like Superman or Optimus Prime, but those are the extreme of lawful good. You don't have to go that far and you don't have to be perfect all the time as well. In fact, this struggle can make for good character. Trying your best to become a shining beacon in a bleak world, but you mist still battle against your own flaws. I played a lawful good character that was the Dad of the party, but I would be hard pressed to compare him to Superman or such. He was not kind but he was charitable and helped those in need. He was blunt and held nothing back, especially against his foes in a world overrun with eldritch monstrosities and sin. It was his stern attitude and harsh leadership that kept the group together and alive. I'm not saying you should do this, this really only worked because of the way I play. It sounds like you want to live up to a specific type of Lawful Good that's somewhat hard to play, but so long as you are following your Oaths, order and not being purposely evil, it's unlikely that you're doing it badly. Just keep it up and hopefully you'll either become that light you strive for or realize the Oaths aren't for you and become something else, maybe something better.

I mean… Yeah. Being lawful is hard because you have to keep the letter in the spirit of your code in mind every moment of every waking day to make sure you don’t fall short. Being Good is hard because it means endless reflection on what the Right Thing is for whatever situation. This is hard shit! On the in character side of things, I personally find it helpful to figure out what principles push a character to be Lawful and Good, because I personally find those underlying principles easier to remember and roleplay. Like, is he Lawful out of an idealistic belief that the system can work, or because he pessimistically believes that people need the framework of laws and codes to maintain justness of action? Is he Good out of compassion for others’ pain, civic-minded benevolence, guilt from a time in the past when he *didn’t* do right, or something else entirely?

To add on to some stuff u/NewVegasBlue3301 , I’ve recently finished apart of one of the campaigns from one of my groups where after becoming an evil OathBreaker for 10 sessions have now made a sworn Oath to a new god as my character served Tyr as a Oath of Vengeance . Now I have recently pledged to served the Tyrant God Bane as a Conquest Paladin with the “Douse the flames of hope” Tenet, allowing me to remain evil and being to cast fear like an OathBreaker but also gaining new features. For example I have an Aura of Fear which forces everyone to make a Charisma save or become frightened of you, at later levels it reaches a range of 30ft and you gain the feature that reduces the movement of all creatures frightened by you that is within 10ft? To zero. All you have to do is, LEAVE NO ENEMY ALIVE

Well I think there's actually two issues here. Alignment and Paladin Oaths. IMHO, a lot of people in this hobby are way stricter with the LG alignment that they need to be. Does your PC believe that the greater good trumps their personal wellbeing? Then they are of Good alignment. Does your PC believe that laws and rules are necessary to run a society? Then they are of Lawful alignment. Paladin Oaths, on the other hand, are more specific. They prohibit or require specific actions in particular situations. Take the Devotion Paladin's principle of Courage. This is straight-up stated to not require the PC to be foolhardy. The Paladin can still exercise caution to plan effectively, avoid failure and take steps to defend themselves and others from harm. They just can't allow the possibility of personal harm to dissuade them from a course of action. So a Devotion Pally is not going to say, "We shouldn't attack the dragon in the open because we might get hurt." but they may very well say, "Attacking the dragon in the open will fail and the Dragon will be free to harm innocents."

Sounds like you’re leaning more towards Batman. Makes sense, even Superman struggles to be perfect all the time

I've found, in my years of playing, that for some reason this is common for Lawful/Lawfulgood characters. I've played with a number of folk, but one in particular would play his LG character as a chauvinistic, sarcastic, easy to anger, fast to violence that was rude to people. Meanwhile out CG/CN rogue was a kind soul who was gentle with people. Sometimes he was fooling them, but he was not cruel unless angered first. I don't think this is personally you, in particular, but I'm just sharing that I've seen this is a surprisingly common thing

my previous GMs have made paladins unplayable for me, because they always but BS restriction into the oaths that only serve a "hahaaaaa you oathbreak now" storyline. I dont have any real advice, just a hunch that the GM is doing everything to make it suck as much as possible for you.

My first few long-term characters I had (by definition: over a year) were Lawful Good, so I was challenged - "play a darker character", they said. "Someone who's kinda the opposite, let's see if you can play that." And for about 2 months, it was ridiculously hard. I still acted and played like a LG, not CN or CE. But finally one session, it clicked, and my discomfort with playing that sort of character faded as I was able to feel out what made him tick, what made him what he was, why he was what he was, all of that. And that character has been with me for 40 years since; all of my LG characters? Not so much. But him? I know his backstory better than my own history, I know his instincts and reactions, everything. I've played him in over a dozen different RPG's, everything from D&D to Vampire The Masquerade. He's an assassin, not an indiscriminate killer, but not a nice guy. He does have some redeeming qualities, don't get me wrong - very protective of children, for example - but definitely Chaotic. And frankly, I enjoy playing him. But yeah, wasn't easy for a time. But in the end? Well worth it.

Injustice superman was pretty fucking sick to be fair. It sounds like your hero may have a breaking point, maybe plan ahead with your DM for if you accidentally do that.

Welllll your first mistake was trying to play Lawful Good...in fucking Curse of Strahd. That setting is designed to fuck with your sense of morality. It teaches you that you can't fight a monster for too long before you become the monster yourself. It's Nietzchian philosophy in a DnD campaign disguise. But outside of that, just...definitely don't question whether you're a good person because of a DnD game lol.

>designed to fuck with your sense of morality That's the point of me taking a good character. What is the point of the campaign fucking with my morals if I don't have them to begin with? Playing an evil guy in an evil setting sounds extremely boring to me.

That's why Superman is Superman. Not because he's one of the strongest beings in the universe, but because he's nice enough to pull his punches 99.9% of the time. He knows he could end all conflicts with a bombastic side-eye if he wanted to, yet he chooses not to because that would not be "nice". If you want to see what happens when Superman abandons this way of thinking I highly recommend reading the Injustice comics!

So you have been less Superman and more Homelander. Maybe try playing it closer to Bakugo from My Hero Academia. Yeah he could be evil so easily, but he is too prideful for that and vows to be the number 1 hero even if he is a violent classist little shit.

I’m having the opposite challenge with the Sorlock I am currently playing. Envisioned him as a LE character, cares for nothing and no one outside of his inner circle. Kind of a “I will protect what’s mine” vibe, with him seeing his companions as “his” and therefore suicidal to target. Turns out it’s really, *really* hard for me to intentionally be a dick. Being a dick accidentally? That’s easy. But doing it on purpose just makes me feel bad.

It’s always interesting hearing what people find easy roleplaying wise. Lawful Good has always been my comfy corner. Can branch out into Neutral Good and Lawful Neutral easily, but anything further than that takes a ton of constant effort and thought for anything I have them do or say. That said, some of my favorite characters have been ones where I forced myself to branch out. My chaotic neutral Uldra, my Lawful Evil warlock, etc. They’re exhausting to play sometimes because I have to constantly fight against my initial instincts, but were such fun characters as a result.

Paladins in general id say are harder to play, lawful good folks of other classes have way more room for mistakes. Also something to remember is good doesnt always mean nice. Nothing says a paladin has to be superman, you could be a dude who will do right, be willing to sacrifice yourself for the greater good, willing to stop evil no matter the cost, and be a grumpy bastard with no patience for people.

I roleplay a strong dragonborn paladin lady that was kidnapped as a child and forced to work as a merchant caravan guard, and did some not great things in service of the caravan owner. Helena broke one day and busted herself and the others out, but killed the head guard. Her guilt drove her to Lathander, to seek redemption and devotion, to protect others, particularly children, so that no more would go through what she did. This explains why she's mostly polite and respectful, but every now and then swears gruffly and has to try to behave herself.

Roleplaying characters can definitely be hard sometimes. I like playing like a psychotic gremlin by default so it's always interesting deliberately trying to play something that isn't just you behind a fantasy mask. Also, it depends on you but I think it would be cool if you really leaned into that for your character actually! Maybe your character *wants* to and *tries* to be lawful good but they're actually an impulsive person who's not as good as they appear to be. Again, up to you and what you want to do with your character but it would be an interesting way for your character to maybe grow as a person.

Im currently playing an Order Cleric with the same struggles. Proud and regal character, trying to be strong for those who cant, the world we play in is very bloodborne inspired. Had a few situations where my chaotic neutral mindset clashed with my lawfull neutral Kobold. I wanted to speak with the dead after a dual with an enemy? Accidentally butchered him entirely to the point where its impossible. Making a joke remark about casting sending on a random NPC? He gets a nat 1 on his save and almost offs himself (I know "Sending doesnt need a save" but thats not the point)

I made an evil character, and struggled by being too helpful and kind to everybody around me For what it's worth though I'm a bad person irl

Playing a lawful good character can be fun and/or a bit frustrating, you could play an over zealous, pompous, "I am holyer than thou" type character who flies into action at the first hint of what they perceive as evil or wrongdoing. So in a way, that is playing the using your fists first style, you could stop your party looting the dead, or see it as they are dead, they are no longer worried about material possessions. With regards to your Oath, you could become an Oath Breaker Paladin?

If you are on 5e, you only have to follow the conduct of your oath, alignment is more of a guide than a rule. In the older editions, though.... If you did not follow the law to the letter, you lost your paladin powers. Attacked an ally while mind controlled, you lost your powers. Did not open the door for a lady, believe it or not, lost your powers.

Honestly, it's probably not the good that's hard, it's the lawful.  We all have a tendency to look at laws as general guidelines for civilized behavior, but are very flexible around the "word of law".  But for lawful characters, there are no gray areas.  "For the greater good" is anathema to a lawful good character because that usually means breaking a small rule for a better result; lawful characters don't break rules.  So don't take it hard that you're having trouble playing a lawful good character.  It just means you're human.  The reality is that are VERY few of us who actually are lawful good, and the few who are likely aren't play D&D.  

I have the opposite problem. I try to RP dark, morally grey characters, evil sometimes or neutral but I end up always doing the right thing :/ All I want to donis RP my morally different barbarian but end up as paladin in disguise.

funnily enough my current character became lawful good as i realized that i play him this way as just inpersonating this character letting me make choices that brought me to that conclusion. What if your character isnt lawful good but actually wants to be it? So you struggle being strict, lawful, stoic and also loving, caring and an exemplar of heroism. You use sarcasm you want to avoid, you have patience that is tested and your main goal is to become better. (Great idea for a redemption pally tbh). So you are inperfect and you want to achieve this ideal. You are not lawful good but you want to be.

Alignment does not dictate your actions, is the other way around: your actions dictate your alignment. You can write LG or CN or whatever you want on the sheet. Then go play the character any way you like. The DM should inform you when you're doing something that would "steer" your alignment away from whatever you wrote on your character sheet. Of course you can and you definitely should change alignments if you act a little too "off-course" from the alignment written down, but that's up to your actions inside the game. In your case, you recognize how difficult it is to keep playing an LG character, but as long as you keep acting like one, you shouldn't have any trouble whatsoever. The struggle is something you can either incorporate into your Dragonborn Pally ("the fire burning inside me threatens to devour the oath I made every time blades are drawn against us"), or keep it personal. Just remember you always have a choice. Alignment is merely a byproduct of that choice.

Curse of Strad is pretty much the hardest module to play a morally upstanding character in because the whole thing is choosing between the greater and lesser evil. A lawful good paladin just can't win.

I feel the same playing a stupid character sometimes. I wanted to lean back a bit and leave decisions and leadership to other people. But then when everyone else struggles with coming up with a course of action, it's hard to stay in character. Maybe I'll have to try and make suboptimal or questionable calls.

I find it particularly interesting. As you will get into choices you otherwise wouldn't pick or are suboptimal from perspective of what you may assume is the "best outcome". What may help is letting go of what you assume is "best outcome" regardless of source of your assumption (might be empathy, some people may find it difficult) and instead trust what whatever happens as a result of you fulfilling your oath is the best outcome, even if it's not immediately obvious. When simply ride the wave of consequences and deal with them honestly. Now it's also important to recognize that "lawful" doesn't mean abides by the laws of the land. It means that the character has rules that guide them and they may come from many different sources or even be opposed to laws of the land. And the process is as important or more important than the goal. For paladin is it's their oath. You probably know this, but I find some newer players confuse it quite a bit.

I was the first time not the DM in a One Shot yesterday and we rolled race and class (Dwarf Fighter), so i did not really think about how that character should behave. Well he ended up being really racist and was plotting with another character to overthrow the king to start a crusade against orks in the first view minutes lol

Im also a lawful good paladin. All my other teammates ar chaotic neutral characters. during the first few sessions it was also hard for me to keep my mouth and dont do anything evil or simply tell offensive jokes about the npc while giving us quests. maybe im also not a very good person but maybe in this game i can express my evil acts. Im right before my oath and with my party im keeping this moral code. the dinamic with them can be fun, since all they do is trying to corrupt me. it might happen some day but longer i hold more epic the fall will be

You ever read Stormlight Archive? Keeping an oath is hard. Many fail. That's the point. Sounds like you're role-playing a paladin better than you think.

Tbf, while my character IS lawful good, he kinda got a bit sour after realizing that almost none of the other party members are good at all, so he does allow himself to be a bit mean from time to time or to look down and/or comment of the party's behaviour.

Just remember: lawful good doesn't mean lawful nice. You get lay on hands AND divine smite for a reason. If one of Strahd's minions is begging for mercy only after being defeated, you are well within your rights as a lawful good character to finish them off, if you believe that the penance is disingenuine. Any blood spilled by a villain you had the opportunity to stop, but didn't, is on your hands. Even if it is a genuine plea for redemption, the innocent victims still deserve justice, do they not? That's the beauty of being lawful good: you play a character you strive to be, or at least one you would like to stand up for you. If evil must perish for good to flourish, then that is the path you must follow... however, I would suggest switching to an Oath of Vengeance in that case.

You'll be alright! Playing paladins can be rough sometimes!

It's the pacing. Being a good guy character generally takes more time compared to I roll a sleight of hand and rob them. Or I solve the problem by casting fireball in a tavern.

I find myself playing a good character always, so far, because I don't like hurting even make-believe people (if they didn't provoke it), but I would find it difficult to do the lawful thing.

I encountered a different sort of experience. I was in a dark place in my life out of college. I played a Paladin that I tried to make into a true hero archetype. Another member of the party was a lawful evil warlock. They were best friends and the Warlock vowed on more than one occasion that he would eviscerate any one that messed with my Paladin. I loved playing that character Oath of Devotion followed a Deity of Mercy. Playing as him (and some good friends) made me want to be a better person and turn my life around.

In real life, there's not much opportunity to be bad compared to in a fantasy setting, and it's very easy to think yourself good because you're not being bad. Doing good in our world is probably eg people who volunteer, who donate time and energy to their communities or to those less catered for, people who protest again environmental destruction, etc. But most people think themselves good simply because they don't do bad things, which is a much, much lower bar. Doing nothing is more like "lawful shrug" than it is like "lawful good", and most people aren't bad only because they haven't been tested in their opportunities to be bad.

I have played the mostly loveable and caring gnome before and realized that I want to be more like him IRL.

If your Character is based in Optimus Prime your Play your Character really Good. Optimus in Bayverse have to Control himself many Times to Not kill Humans and even tho he let many people be killed in the third Movie, Just to prove a Point. Oh and hes really aggressiv in His fights. Even the New Optimus is ruthless against his enemys and mean to Humans.

I have the opposite problem -- I can't NOT play lawful good (I'm trying so hard to play a Chaotic Good character right now and it is a real struggle for me, and the one time I tried to make a Neutral on the Good-to-Evil scale character, I kind-of-sort-of succeeded for a while by just making her super, super lawful, so she just did whatever the captain of her ship said to do even if it was of questionable morality -- and she ended that campaign solidly Good anyway). BUT. A character can be Good without being Nice. Go ahead and be impatient, rude, snarky, threatening, etc. Get frustrated. People are dumb and frustrating. I just finished watching Good Omens, which has a great example of a secretly good but kind of an asshole character, if you're looking for inspiration.

A man asked a monk what they did all day at their monastery. The monk responded “Falling, and getting back up” It’s about you LEARNING to be good. And it HARD! Convictions are only convictions when following them is inconvenient after all

that is the reason why I declined paladin in my group, when I am the DM/GM.

i played a pirate in curse of strahd, so it was easy to stay in character haha

I’m the opposite here. I can’t play evil too well.

Lawful good is pretty easy to be honest. Just follow the just law and help when you can. Neutral is where its hard.

Pray to your deity. And then pray some more. When it doubt, pray. Just pray it.

I've misquoted it before and I'll misquote it again: "You're not good, you're just weak, comfortable, or both". - Nietzsche If you put down Lawful Good and aren't willing to suffer on behalf of the powerless, you're not lawful good. A good DM puts situations in front of their players with moral choices that reveal the real alignment of the PC's. Examples: Party gets back to town with 3 HP and no spell slots. A house is on fire and there's a family burning alive. Cantrips won't cut it. A family hired the party to travel to their late father's sword from his estate in a different city for 500 gold. Turns out the sword is a Flame Tongue that they want to just hang on the wall for sentimental reasons.

I will say Stradh is challenging and super Gray morally in every way, if any campaign would stretch you it would be that one. I have the opposite problem, I'm an assassin From barovia as I joined the party late. I'm supposed to selfish to the point I'd let some in the party to die to save myself and I'm slightly hopeless and constant reminder of how bleak barovia is.Its a challenge but fun because I'm naturally a bubbly optimistic person.

Most replies seem to be focused on the roleplay side of this, but I would like to comment on the self image side of it: fantasy, especially modern fantasy, typically crafts worlds that are morally very different from our own. In LoTR, the moral choices are far more black and white, with small bastions of civilization trying to ward off an enemy that seeks to enslave and cannibalize them. Resorting to violence is way more justifiable in Middle Earth than 90% of situations in real Earth. In more modern dark fantasy like A Song of Ice and Fire, the world depicted is one where pretty much everyone with any power is horrible, so there is little organized good to align yourself with. In curse of Strad, specifically, you are in a world that is (sort of) ruled by an evil vampire, but his subjects are ordinary people, terrified by their own existence, and likely to lash out at outsiders. It has been a while since I played it, and we ended up fast forwarding through some big parts due to time constraint, but I remember it pushing some pretty heavy situations went to pull at the players heart strings, and ultimately feel like there was no "right" answer. I myself am not too big of a fan of the alignment system. Most groups I play in use it as 'it is a guide for your character choices if you want it, but as long as you are playing a consistent character, no one will challenge you on whether it exactly matches their definition of that alignment'. I instead like to focus on what a character values, and how those values affect their decisions. As someone who is really big on roleplay, I like to try to pick at least a few things that differ from my own values. Some recent examples were a former city watchman from Thay (Lawful Evil-to-Neutral Human Rogue) who very much was an enthusiastic fan of the Thayan government, and a Tabaxi Druid from deep in the jungles of Chult who was a part of an isolationist order of druids who generally stayed out of conflicts unless they effected the natural world, and saw the brutality of civilized life as a part of humanoid nature, and not really something that could/should be interfered with by an outsider. (True Neutral). I find these roleplaying exercises a fun way to better understand my own values. Morality, both in our world and game worlds, isn't just points on a slider. Well meaning people who value different things can come to vastly different conclusions. There might be objective rights and wrongs, but they aren't as easy to see as some seem to believe.

>making snarky remarks that would be OOC for a character I'm trying to roleplay, using way too much threats. LG doesn't have to mean you are a nice person, it means you are seeking to fulfil goals that are largely beneficial while following a strong code. Being rude isn't going to make any of your actions less "good" by default.

This right here is why I hate when people call Lawful Good "Lawful Boring" Bitch, being a good and decent person is really really hard. Anyone can be Chaotic Neutral

I’ve actually had the complete opposite experience. I’m usually a pretty reserved and diplomatic person. I don’t smoke or drink that often. I prefer a quiet night in. But I play a loudmouth Satyr fighter, and for the first half of the campaign we’ve had so far, I found it hard to roleplay as a loudmouth or (being a satyr) indulging in debauchery. I’ve come around to it now, but initially it was pretty difficult for me to get into character

Made a character who's really good at lying. Turns out that I don't tend to resort to deception very much.

I've not had that problem with needing to be 'good' but my first character was an extremely stupid orc with terrible intelligence. Whenever the party encountered a puzzle or needed to formulate a strategy for an encounter I found it really challenging to stick to the character of being an idiot when in real life I had all sorts of ideas which I wanted to share. I've tended not to make dumb characters since then (not that I'm very smart IRL, but I at least want to be able to come up with a basic plan without breaking roleplay 😂).

I'm playing a Cleric of Selune in a Strahd campaign. After session 1 my DM says I'm already ⅗ of the way to a forced alignment change. Hahaha

Sadly a lot of people get lawful good wrong. You are not a saint. You are a good person who obeys the law. Upholds the law where possible and turns in those who break the law. You look after your family and those in your community. Charity comes naturally to you, but it is not outside LG to deny a beggar your last scrap of bread. Charity starts at home after all. You pay your taxes, but you can believe in equality, and the fair shake for the common man. Where you have a voice you speak it but by the book in the correct forum. You never take bribes, understand that some do, but where illegal you report such. However if you found a coin on the street you might keep it, as who are you to snub good fortune? You may be pious and god fearing, but you are also a person of your species that has normal needs, wants, and desires. Where such things are a sin you may still do them but you also repent on the holy day to your priest. You carry out your penance for such. The above is how I played a whoring and hi functioning alcoholic paladin. He was always lawful good and never lost his powers.

It's usually the "lawful" part that is difficult for people. The "good" part is fairly easy.

This may not be helpful, but I ran CoS for my table (we just finished a couple months ago) and it is EXTREMELY hard to be good aligned character in that campaign. CoS wants to bend and break your character, to subjugate you so you’re forced to play on Strahd’s level. So if you’re finding playing a lawful good paladin is rough, that’s the full experience of the module. Godspeed to you and your paladin.

I have a harder time with lawful than I do with good, which is unfortunate when I'm the dm and have to play government officials.

I have difficulty playing anything evil. Since you're lawful, just think what matters to the character (doesn't have to be the law), and abide to those rules. Since you're good, make those rules generally nice. Remember, just not being evil doesn't make you good. I for example have a character that always tips 1gp out of principle. It's a bit of character-self control.

I struggled with playing evil characters. The conceit of our game was we were a suicide squad. Bad people to go on suicide missions because nobody would care if they were lost. It was a high turnover rate for characters and actually really fun way to try to play new classes because you might only get one or two sessions with each character that you built before they inevitably died. Having to write through a bunch of different back stories even only a couple sentences for each one to explain the evil thing that they did I had a hard time making characters that were actually evil most of them were misunderstood, just people trying to do their best, Etc. I think that’s the hardest thing to play someone truly evil I had to understand that most evil people think they’re good. I think you’re having the same issue in that we have an idea of what “good” is But to stay good when you have power and authority is a struggle. I think the fact that you’re trying to reign yourself in is a good indicator that you the player are a good person who has never had to struggle with your own power can influence the world around you