Paladin Class Preview

Monday, May 7, 2018

All it takes is a cursory browse of the Paizo forums to see that paladins are not just the most contentious class in Pathfinder, they are the most contentious conversation topic. Weeks before we previewed the class, multiple threads with thousands of posts arose in advance, filled with passionate fans with many different opinions and plenty of good ideas. Turns out, the Paizo office isn't too different.

The Quest for the Holy Grail

Early last year, I went on a sacred quest through the office and surveyed all the different opinions out there about paladins. Turns out, almost everyone had slightly different thoughts. But there was one element in common: whether they wanted paladins of all alignments, paladins of the four extreme alignments, lawful good paladins and chaotic evil antipaladins, lawful evil tyrant antipaladins, or even just lawful good paladins alone, everyone was interested in robust support for the idea that paladins should be champions of their deity and alignment. That is to say, whatever alignments paladins have, they should have an array of abilities deeply tied into that alignment.

Since that was the aspect of the paladin that everyone agreed upon, that's what we wanted to make sure we got right in the playtest. But given the limited space for the playtest, we chose to focus on getting that aspect fine-tuned for one alignment, and so in this book we're presenting only lawful good paladins. That doesn't mean antipaladins and tyrants are gone (there's even an antipaladin foe in one of the adventures!) or that the door is closed to other sorts of paladins down the road. We'll have a playtest survey on the matter, we're open to more opinions, and even among the four designers we have different ideas. But we want to focus the playtest on getting lawful good paladins right, first and foremost. If or when we do make more paladins and antipaladins, having constructed a solid foundation for how an alignment-driven champion functions will be a crucial step to making all of them engaging and different in play.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

The Code

Tell me if you've heard this one before: My paladin was brought to a court where she was forced to testify under oath to tell the whole truth, by a legitimate authority, about the whereabouts of certain innocent witnesses, but she knows that if she answers the questions, a villain is going to use that information to track down and harm the innocents. It's the "Inquiring Murderer" quandary from moral philosophy set in a way that manages to pin you between not just two but three different restrictions in the old paladin code. Sure, I can beg and plead with the judge that the information, if released, would harm innocents, but ultimately if the judge persists, I'm in trouble. These sorts of situations are some of the most common paladin threads on the forums, and they're never easy.

With the playtest presenting the opportunity, I wanted to analyze the paladin's code down to basic principles and keep all the important roleplaying aspects that make paladins the trustworthy champions of law and good we've come to expect while drastically reducing, and hopefully eliminating, the no-win situations. Here's what it looks like at the moment.

Code of Conduct

Paladins are divine champions of a deity. You must be lawful good and worship a deity that allows lawful good clerics. Actions fundamentally opposed to your deity's alignment or ideals are anathema to your faith. A few examples of acts that would be considered anathema appear in each deity's entry. You and your GM will determine whether other acts count as anathema.

In addition, you must follow the paladin's code below. Deities often add additional strictures for their own paladins (for instance, Shelyn's paladins never attack first except to protect an innocent, and they choose and perfect an art).

If you stray from lawful good, perform acts anathema to your deity, or violate your code of conduct, you lose your Spell Point pool and righteous ally class feature (which we talk more about below) until you demonstrate your repentance by conducting an atone ritual, but you keep any other paladin abilities that don't require those class features.

The Paladin's Code

The following is the fundamental code all paladins follow. The tenets are listed in order of importance, starting with the most important. If a situation places two tenets in conflict, you aren't in a no-win situation; instead, follow the most important tenet. For instance, if an evil king asked you if innocent lawbreakers were hiding in your church so he could execute them, you could lie to him, since the tenet forbidding you to lie is less important than the tenet prohibiting the harm of an innocent. An attempt to subvert the paladin code by engineering a situation allowing you to use a higher tenet to ignore a lower tenet (telling someone that you won't respect lawful authorities so that the tenet of not lying supersedes the tenet of respecting lawful authorities, for example) is a violation of the paladin code.

  • You must never willingly commit an evil act, such as murder, torture, or casting an evil spell.
  • You must not take actions that you know will harm an innocent, or through inaction cause an innocent to come to immediate harm when you knew your action could reasonably prevent it. This tenet doesn't force you to take action against possible harm to innocents or to sacrifice your life and future potential in an attempt to protect an innocent.
  • You must act with honor, never cheating, lying, or taking advantage of others.
  • You must respect the lawful authority of the legitimate ruler or leadership in whichever land you may be, following their laws unless they violate a higher tenet.

So let's break down what's the same and what's different. We still have all the basic tenets of the paladin from Pathfinder First Edition, with one exception: we've removed poison from the tenet of acting with honor. While there are certainly dishonorable ways to use poison, poisoning a weapon and using it in an honorable combat that allows enhanced weaponry doesn't seem much different than lighting the weapon on fire. However, by ordering the tenets and allowing the paladin to prioritize the most important tenets in the event of a conflict, we've cut down on the no-win situations. And of course, this opens a design space to play around with the tenets themselves, something we've done by incorporating one of the most popular non-core aspects for paladins...

Oaths

Oaths allow you to play around with the tenets of your code while also gaining mechanical advantages. For instance, the Fiendsbane Oath allows you to dish out near-constant retribution against fiends and eventually block their dimensional travel with an Anchoring Aura. Unlike in Pathfinder First Edition, oaths are feats, and you don't need an archetype to gain one.

Paladin Features

As many of you guessed when Jason mentioned it, paladin was the mystery class that gains the highest heavy armor proficiency, eventually reaching legendary proficiency in armor and master proficiency in weapons, as opposed to fighters, who gain the reverse. At 1st level, you also gain the Retributive Strike reaction, allowing you to counterattack and enfeeble any foe that hits one of your allies (Shelyn save those who strike your storm druid ally). You also get lay on hands, a single-action healing spell that not only heals the target but also raises their AC for a round to help prevent future damage. Combine that effect used on yourself with a raised shield, and you can make it pretty hard for a foe to hit you, and it helps recovering allies avoid another beating.

Lay on hands is the first of a paladin's champion powers, which include a whole bunch of elective options via feats. One of my favorites, gained automatically at 19th level, is hero's defiance, which makes a paladin incredibly difficult to take down. It lets you keep standing when you fall to 0 HP, gives you a big boost of Hit Points, and doesn't even use up your reaction! Leading up to that, you gain a bunch of fun smite-related boosts, including the righteous ally class feature that you saw mentioned in the code. This is a 3rd-level ability that lets you house a holy spirit in a weapon or a steed, much like before, but also in a shield, like the fan-favorite sacred shield archetype!

Paladin Feats

In addition to the oath feats I mentioned when talking about the code, paladins have feats customized to work with the various righteous ally options, like Second Ally, a level 8 feat that lets you gain a second righteous ally. There are also a variety of auras that you can gain to improve yourself and your allies, from the humble 4th-level Aura of Courage, which reduces the frightened condition for you when you gain it and at the end of your turn for you and your allies, to the mighty 14th-level Aura of Righteousness, which gives you and your allies resistance to evil damage. Feats that improve or alter your lay on hands include mercy feats, which allow you to remove harmful conditions and afflictions with lay on hands, up to and including death itself with Ultimate Mercy. And we can't forget potent additional reactions like Divine Grace, granting you a saving throw boost at 2nd level, and Attack of Opportunity at 6th level.

To close out, I'll tell you about one more popular non-core paladin ability we brought in, a special type of power called...

Litanies

Following their mold from Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat, litanies are single-action Verbal Casting spells that last 1 round and create various effects. For instance, litany of righteousness makes an enemy weak to your allies' attacks, and litany against sloth slows down an enemy, costing it reactions and potentially actions as well. One of the coolest story features of the litanies against sins is that they now explicitly work better against creatures strongly aligned with their sin, so a dretch (a.k.a. a sloth demon) or a sloth sinspawn treats its saving throw outcome for litany against sloth as one degree worse!

Just as a reminder to everyone, please be respectful to each other. Many of us have strong opinions about the paladin, and that's OK, even if we each have different feelings.

Mark Seifter
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Paladins Pathfinder Playtest Seelah Wayne Reynolds
1,251 to 1,300 of 1,735 << first < prev | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Excaliburproxy wrote:

Healing is more good than evil and hurting is more evil than good.

Do you want to be healed?
Yes.

Do you want to be hurt?
No

Heal good
Hurt bad

That is so insanely reductive @_@

Good hurts things all the time... And evil can often help people so that's rather flawed as an argument. If hurt was bad and heal was good, then you would have to be a complete pacifist to be good and good deities wouldn't channel negative energy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, does charisma matter to this class or...


master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...

I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!


Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I assume you're being tongue in cheek, since so many of your posts often are. ;3 But in case you aren't...

It makes sense for Divine Grace to be moved to an action. On the one hand, a passive Cha bonus to saves would completely break PF2's tighter math. On the other hand, making it a reaction gives way more options for feats and archetypes to interact with, improve or replace it. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I agree, I always saw the really good protection stuff as being a reward for the alignment restriction. If those defenses get nerfed because of balance then the restriction feels arbitrary.

Does it cost a resource? Is it charmed life all over again?


master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...

At this time we do not know.

All we know is that, presumably, this class (like every class but the Alchemist) needs Charisma for Resonance which is used to activate potions, wands, and such.

I have a concern about that, and the possible ramifications it will have on the game, but this isn't the thread for that and will need to wait until I can properly plot out characters of level 6+ to show.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I agree, I always saw the really good protection stuff as being a reward for the alignment restriction. If those defenses get nerfed because of balance then the restriction feels arbitrary.

Does it cost a resource? Is it charmed life all over again?

Mark has explicitly said on these forums that RP restrictions are NOT being used as balancing points for mechanics. There is apparently only one example in the book of a role playing restriction being used as a justification for mechanical power, and what me and several others think that likely means is probably Vow of Poverty.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I agree, I always saw the really good protection stuff as being a reward for the alignment restriction. If those defenses get nerfed because of balance then the restriction feels arbitrary.

Does it cost a resource? Is it charmed life all over again?

No way to know. I think the reason that we are discussing the alignment and the code so much is because, unfortunately, there isn't much mechanical crunch (read: any) in this blog post for us to talk about.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I assume you're being tongue in cheek, since so many of your posts often are. ;3 But in case you aren't...

It makes sense for Divine Grace to be moved to an action. On the one hand, a passive Cha bonus to saves would completely break PF2's tighter math. On the other hand, making it a reaction gives way more options for feats and archetypes to interact with, improve or replace it. :)

Lol that is fair. Finally someone gets me! but no it is hard to tell with me.

It actually did strike me as odd at first and I am still unsure about it. As I keep saying I really need to see more before I decide.

I do kind of see what your saying now that I put some thought into it. since everything is going to be balanced around adding an attribute to a save twice might make it ridiculously hard to fail a save.

I'm gonna abstain from any real solid opinion on it until I can get a full picture. I do hope we don't end up with so many reactions that I have to choose between 5-6 every turn.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Smite Makes Right wrote:


I have a sudden need for a goblin Paladin of Shelyn. Perhaps that will be my official playtest character....

"You can come and help me sing all the songs for the Eternal Rose and we can burn all the bad peoples who--"

The ETERNAL ROSEGui, I know you try really hard but you know burning them first is a bad thing, and if they die by burning to death it will be very, very sad so please don't do that. If you want to make art with fire I've heard of this new mortal invention called 'fireworks' that you will be able to make the prettiest of fires without burning anyuone alive. Now, if they DO attack you, and you have to use fire, make sure it's a pretty fire and don't make them ugly from burning, okay?


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Smite Makes Right wrote:
SteelGuts wrote:

Paladins should be Warpriests. Or « Knightly Order of X God ». And they should have the same restrictions than the Clerics. But only LG... It is 2018 already.

And Paizo lost the right to call on traditions when they introduced the Goblins as Core. Because in a world where you have Goblins as your normal adventurers, you also have Paladins of Cayden Cailean or Asmodeus.

I have a sudden need for a goblin Paladin of Shelyn. Perhaps that will be my official playtest character....

Cyouni wrote:
Athaleon wrote:
- You must act with honor, never cheating, lying, or taking advantage of others. (Good)
This is a 100% lawful tenet - honor is one that is on a solid amount of LG deities, and a few LN or LE ones...while not at all on any NG or CG ones.
This is 100% a mixed bag. Honor as an abstraction is more lawful versus anything else, but not lying nor taking advantage of others? That's good, not lawful.

I feel it worth mentioning that being honorable is one of the central tenets of Khorne's worship.


Milo v3 wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:

Healing is more good than evil and hurting is more evil than good.

Do you want to be healed?
Yes.

Do you want to be hurt?
No

Heal good
Hurt bad

That is so insanely reductive @_@

Good hurts things all the time... And evil can often help people so that's rather flawed as an argument. If hurt was bad and heal was good, then you would have to be a complete pacifist to be good and good deities wouldn't channel negative energy.

It is really quite reductive!

What would you say is a good example of a “good themed” mechanic? Healing stuff comes to me first. It is literally undoing harm which is sort of what defines evil in a lot of ethical systems (the guiding principle or liberalism is the harm principle). After healing, I would put protection (stopping harm from coming to pass).

A Paladin is a warrior of good which means he is a warrior that heals and protects stuff in addition to fighting.


Vidmaster7 wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I assume you're being tongue in cheek, since so many of your posts often are. ;3 But in case you aren't...

It makes sense for Divine Grace to be moved to an action. On the one hand, a passive Cha bonus to saves would completely break PF2's tighter math. On the other hand, making it a reaction gives way more options for feats and archetypes to interact with, improve or replace it. :)

Lol that is fair. Finally someone gets me! but no it is hard to tell with me.

It actually did strike me as odd at first and I am still unsure about it. As I keep saying I really need to see more before I decide.

I do kind of see what your saying now that I put some thought into it. since everything is going to be balanced around adding an attribute to a save twice might make it ridiculously hard to fail a save.

I'm gonna abstain from any real solid opinion on it until I can get a full picture. I do hope we don't end up with so many reactions that I have to choose between 5-6 every turn.

We know there are feats that give bonus reactions every turn. For example, you can easily make it so you can shield block twice per turn.

What I'm expecting is there will be low level feats to get a bonus use of any given reaction ability that doesn't use your "real" reaction. And then at high level, there will probably be a feat to just flat out get a second universal reaction. That might be a skill feat (Perception since it is the most common ruler of initiative?) or it might be a general feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

May we PLEASE get another line of "I will be a font of humility at all times" added to the Paladin Code?

I mentioned it before, and I think it's important to have for the class if it is going to remain Best Lawful Good only.

Designer

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I agree, I always saw the really good protection stuff as being a reward for the alignment restriction. If those defenses get nerfed because of balance then the restriction feels arbitrary.

Does it cost a resource? Is it charmed life all over again?

Mark has explicitly said on these forums that RP restrictions are NOT being used as balancing points for mechanics. There is apparently only one example in the book of a role playing restriction being used as a justification for mechanical power, and what me and several others think that likely means is probably Vow of Poverty.

I said there is only one specific restriction that comes with significant mechanical power, but that's only because the restriction crosses the line from RP restriction to also include a significant mechanical restriction. So it's still not a place in the rules where a RP restriction is being used as a justification for mechanical power.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I assume you're being tongue in cheek, since so many of your posts often are. ;3 But in case you aren't...

It makes sense for Divine Grace to be moved to an action. On the one hand, a passive Cha bonus to saves would completely break PF2's tighter math. On the other hand, making it a reaction gives way more options for feats and archetypes to interact with, improve or replace it. :)

Lol that is fair. Finally someone gets me! but no it is hard to tell with me.

It actually did strike me as odd at first and I am still unsure about it. As I keep saying I really need to see more before I decide.

I do kind of see what your saying now that I put some thought into it. since everything is going to be balanced around adding an attribute to a save twice might make it ridiculously hard to fail a save.

I'm gonna abstain from any real solid opinion on it until I can get a full picture. I do hope we don't end up with so many reactions that I have to choose between 5-6 every turn.

We know there are feats that give bonus reactions every turn. For example, you can easily make it so you can shield block twice per turn.

What I'm expecting is there will be low level feats to get a bonus use of any given reaction ability that doesn't use your "real" reaction. And then at high level, there will probably be a feat to just flat out get a second universal reaction. That might be a skill feat (Perception since it is the most common ruler of initiative?) or it might be a general feat.

Interesting. I guess as long as it doesn't get to overboard it sounds liek it could be fun. Heh Well I'm going to ready my divine grace my 2 shield blocks my aOO and my body guard ability this turn. the move attack. I could see that getting a bit uh excessive. (Players that worry to much and take forever to decide would probably have to be beaten for this to work.)


Vidmaster7 wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I assume you're being tongue in cheek, since so many of your posts often are. ;3 But in case you aren't...

It makes sense for Divine Grace to be moved to an action. On the one hand, a passive Cha bonus to saves would completely break PF2's tighter math. On the other hand, making it a reaction gives way more options for feats and archetypes to interact with, improve or replace it. :)

Lol that is fair. Finally someone gets me! but no it is hard to tell with me.

It actually did strike me as odd at first and I am still unsure about it. As I keep saying I really need to see more before I decide.

I do kind of see what your saying now that I put some thought into it. since everything is going to be balanced around adding an attribute to a save twice might make it ridiculously hard to fail a save.

I'm gonna abstain from any real solid opinion on it until I can get a full picture. I do hope we don't end up with so many reactions that I have to choose between 5-6 every turn.

I see Divine Grace as measure of the Deity's favour. I think there could be a limited permanent version of Divine Grace tied in with the Code and Anathema. Semi-permanent, functioning as long as you don't break one of the aforementioned tenants.

For Example:
* Never commit an evil act...bonus to saves vs Evil Spells
* Cause no harm to innocents through action or in action...bonus to initiative
* Act honourably...Bonus to Sense Motive (or equivilent in PF2).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:

Healing is more good than evil and hurting is more evil than good.

Do you want to be healed?
Yes.

Do you want to be hurt?
No

Heal good
Hurt bad

That is so insanely reductive @_@

Good hurts things all the time... And evil can often help people so that's rather flawed as an argument. If hurt was bad and heal was good, then you would have to be a complete pacifist to be good and good deities wouldn't channel negative energy.

It is really quite reductive!

What would you say is a good example of a “good themed” mechanic? Healing stuff comes to me first. It is literally undoing harm which is sort of what defines evil in a lot of ethical systems (the guiding principle or liberalism is the harm principle). After healing, I would put protection (stopping harm from coming to pass).

A Paladin is a warrior of good which means he is a warrior that heals and protects stuff in addition to fighting.

As mentioned, torturers are actually far more effective with healing magic than harming magic. And in general, evil loves to help people if it gives evil a long term advantage. If it gets people to trust you, gets people bound to you, or simply makes you a monetary profit, evil will happily do things that are usually considered good in common parlance.

And, as also mentioned, good deities can have negative channel and evil deities can have positive channel. Healing and harming are neutral. They flow from other aspects of your philosophy or focus, not how nice or mean you are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I agree, I always saw the really good protection stuff as being a reward for the alignment restriction. If those defenses get nerfed because of balance then the restriction feels arbitrary.

Does it cost a resource? Is it charmed life all over again?

Mark has explicitly said on these forums that RP restrictions are NOT being used as balancing points for mechanics. There is apparently only one example in the book of a role playing restriction being used as a justification for mechanical power, and what me and several others think that likely means is probably Vow of Poverty.
I said there is only one specific restriction that comes with significant mechanical power, but that's only because the restriction crosses the line from RP restriction to also include a significant mechanical restriction. So it's still not a place in the rules where a RP restriction is being used as a justification for mechanical power.

So, Mark, in the hope of giving us something else to talk about on the Paladin aside from the Code and the Alignment...

Can you share some crunch with us?

Like, you mentioned things like Smite int he blog, and you mentioned that they get spell points, how are these going to work? Is the class still Charisma-based? What is the deal there?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Smite Makes Right wrote:
SteelGuts wrote:

Paladins should be Warpriests. Or « Knightly Order of X God ». And they should have the same restrictions than the Clerics. But only LG... It is 2018 already.

And Paizo lost the right to call on traditions when they introduced the Goblins as Core. Because in a world where you have Goblins as your normal adventurers, you also have Paladins of Cayden Cailean or Asmodeus.

I have a sudden need for a goblin Paladin of Shelyn. Perhaps that will be my official playtest character....

Cyouni wrote:
Athaleon wrote:
- You must act with honor, never cheating, lying, or taking advantage of others. (Good)
This is a 100% lawful tenet - honor is one that is on a solid amount of LG deities, and a few LN or LE ones...while not at all on any NG or CG ones.
This is 100% a mixed bag. Honor as an abstraction is more lawful versus anything else, but not lying nor taking advantage of others? That's good, not lawful.
I feel it worth mentioning that being honorable is one of the central tenets of Khorne's worship.

An (extremely) evil god of Chaos who cares not from whence the blood flows, only that it flows.

Alignment, ladies and gentlemen.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:

Healing is more good than evil and hurting is more evil than good.

Do you want to be healed?
Yes.

Do you want to be hurt?
No

Heal good
Hurt bad

That is so insanely reductive @_@

Good hurts things all the time... And evil can often help people so that's rather flawed as an argument. If hurt was bad and heal was good, then you would have to be a complete pacifist to be good and good deities wouldn't channel negative energy.

It is really quite reductive!

What would you say is a good example of a “good themed” mechanic? Healing stuff comes to me first. It is literally undoing harm which is sort of what defines evil in a lot of ethical systems (the guiding principle or liberalism is the harm principle). After healing, I would put protection (stopping harm from coming to pass).

A Paladin is a warrior of good which means he is a warrior that heals and protects stuff in addition to fighting.

As mentioned, torturers are actually far more effective with healing magic than harming magic. And in general, evil loves to help people if it gives evil a long term advantage. If it gets people to trust you, gets people bound to you, or simply makes you a monetary profit, evil will happily do things that are usually considered good in common parlance.

And, as also mentioned, good deities can have negative channel and evil deities can have positive channel. Healing and harming are neutral. They flow from other aspects of your philosophy or focus, not how nice or mean you are.

You can give the torturer healing that leaves the victim in pain (subdual damage if it exists) and that would be way more evil thematically.

Also, if healing is “evil” in that it can be used to tempt and trick people than healing is roughly on the same level as “kindness” insofar as thematic evil goes.

Also, I get that SOME of the gods will have the reverse energy type, but there are thematic reasons why most good gods get positive energy that heals living things rather than negative energy that harms living things. In setting, Whatever makes that cosmically true is probably why most Paladins will get healing. I bet we will get something that lets you change that at some point.

Designer

11 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So, does charisma matter to this class or...
I frankly could care less about the alignment I frankly am still up in arms about divine grace being an action!

I agree, I always saw the really good protection stuff as being a reward for the alignment restriction. If those defenses get nerfed because of balance then the restriction feels arbitrary.

Does it cost a resource? Is it charmed life all over again?

Mark has explicitly said on these forums that RP restrictions are NOT being used as balancing points for mechanics. There is apparently only one example in the book of a role playing restriction being used as a justification for mechanical power, and what me and several others think that likely means is probably Vow of Poverty.
I said there is only one specific restriction that comes with significant mechanical power, but that's only because the restriction crosses the line from RP restriction to also include a significant mechanical restriction. So it's still not a place in the rules where a RP restriction is being used as a justification for mechanical power.

So, Mark, in the hope of giving us something else to talk about on the Paladin aside from the Code and the Alignment...

Can you share some crunch with us?

Like, you mentioned things like Smite int he blog, and you mentioned that they get spell points, how are these going to work? Is the class still Charisma-based? What is the deal there?

Your spells are indeed Charisma-based.


Milo v3 wrote:
It's also abit weird if you're the paladin of a LG deity who channels negative energy but they apparently give you tonnes of healing powers if your a paladin of them.

I feel like this is textual evidence that even if a Paladin is devoted to a deity, a Paladin's powers do not come from that deity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.


Arachnofiend wrote:
So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.

I think in this case he may have been referencing Paladin Spells in the same way a Cleric's domain gives them spells, in that spells are the new name for powers. In which case the Pally's Spell Points pool, DCs, and Spell Attacks if any will probably be based on Charisma. It's also possible that I'm wrong and they do in fact still have traditional casting but that's not the feeling I got from what non-alignment pieces are scavenge-able from the blog.


Shinigami02 wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.
I think in this case he may have been referencing Paladin Spells in the same way a Cleric's domain gives them spells, in that spells are the new name for powers. In which case the Pally's Spell Points pool, DCs, and Spell Attacks if any will probably be based on Charisma. It's also possible that I'm wrong and they do in fact still have traditional casting but that's not the feeling I got from what non-alignment pieces are scavenge-able from the blog.

Both answers seem reasonably plausible at this point. Maybe when the Ranger blog rolls around we'll get more concrete answers on this since that one will actually have room to tell us what the mechanics of the class are, lol. I would assume that if Rangers are no longer Vancian casters then neither are Paladins, and vice versa.

Designer

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.

I can get wordy when it comes to design diary type information, but either of the two topics suggested (by you and HWalsh) would use up a lot of words to fully explain in a comprehensive fashion, and I already maxed out my words for the blog to cover the elephant in the room. I will say that those who think that hero's defiance may share a name with a PF1 spell that has a similar niche, but it's a much more powerful heal than people may be giving it credit for (19 dice of healing, and it doesn't even use your reaction!). Also, some people were asking about righteous ally. It's basically what you would expect from the blog. You either get a mount, a free weapon rune (at all times, not activated via an action for a set duration as in PF1) or some sweet shield buffs, and then you can take more feats to get even cooler abilities for your ally (mount upgrades, cooler runes, more shield benefits).


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been trying to formulate and parse one of the 'disconnects' with Best Lawful Good having Paladins and Neutral Good not, and I think I've come up with why it bothers me.

This does touch slightly on RL perceptions and analogues, so please accept my apologies in advance if it goes squirrely.

A. Iomedae, the Inheritor, is effectively a Taldan deity (the Byzantine 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

B. Saranrae, the Dawnflower, is effectively a Qadiran deity (the Ottoman Empire/Persia 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

Okay, now here's the rabbit-hole my brain keeps bumping up against:

The Lawful Good Deity could be a paladin.

The Neutral Good Deity could not (as currently being offered in Playtest).

Yet they are both allies against the forces of Evil.

So why on Golarion is Iomedae NOT sharing her tactics/techniques capabilities with Saranrae?

Does she not trust the Dawnflower?

Does it feel to her as if the exclusive franchise of her particular flavor of Heavenly Goodness is inherently superior to the Dawnflower's?

Why can't the Dawnflower, the one who (with the help of other deities) *imprisoned Rovagug* the biggest and worst thing in Golarion, grant this power to Her faithful?

What strange cosmic rule allows this to happen?

I know, it's 'that's how the rules are' from an out of the box perspective, but if I were the Dawnflower I'd want my people of Goodness to focus on Being Good first? And I'd want them to be empowered as my divine champions -- after all, my ally Iomedae can make it happen for Her faithful, why can't I do it for mine?

What is the flavor to bridge this disconnect?

EDIT: Further rambling -- Evil is selfish and greedy and doesn't want to share, or if it does, it wants huge payoff for doing so.

Good works together and shares equally and fairly.

So why is one Good more important than All Good?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.
I can get wordy when it comes to design diary type information, but either of the two topics suggested (by you and HWalsh) would use up a lot of words to fully explain in a comprehensive fashion, and I already maxed out my words for the blog to cover the elephant in the room. I will say that those who think that hero's defiance may share a name with a PF1 spell that has a similar niche, but it's a much more powerful heal than people may be giving it credit for (19 dice of healing, and it doesn't even use your reaction!). Also, some people were asking about righteous ally. It's basically what you would expect from the blog. You either get a mount, a free weapon rune (at all times, not activated via an action for a set duration as in PF1) or some sweet shield buffs, and then you can take more feats to get even cooler abilities for your ally (mount upgrades, cooler runes, more shield benefits).

Wait, so do Paladins get traditional spellcasting with spell slots, or do they not? I am confused!

My assumption (based on the omission of any mention of traditional spellcasting in the blog) is that Paladins get spells via spell-points only. Mark, can you confirm or deny?


Mark Seifter wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.
I can get wordy when it comes to design diary type information, but either of the two topics suggested (by you and HWalsh) would use up a lot of words to fully explain in a comprehensive fashion, and I already maxed out my words for the blog to cover the elephant in the room. I will say that those who think that hero's defiance may share a name with a PF1 spell that has a similar niche, but it's a much more powerful heal than people may be giving it credit for (19 dice of healing, and it doesn't even use your reaction!). Also, some people were asking about righteous ally. It's basically what you would expect from the blog. You either get a mount, a free weapon rune (at all times, not activated via an action for a set duration as in PF1) or some sweet shield buffs, and then you can take more feats to get even cooler abilities for your ally (mount upgrades, cooler runes, more shield benefits).

That's fair enough, Paizo is unusually loose-lipped with designer insights so I'm grateful for whatever tidbits we get.

I'm not sure how good a free weapon rune is, though that's something we obviously don't have enough information to weigh in on. Divine Bond worked because it stacked on top of the bonuses you were already getting with your gold; to me, a free weapon rune sounds more like the "free" enhancement bonuses that classes like the Hunter got; at best it saved you some gold but wasn't that impactful because it conflicted with bonuses the game expected you to get anyways. My impression is that weapon runes fall under that same category of an expected bonus to keep up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

I've been trying to formulate and parse one of the 'disconnects' with Best Lawful Good having Paladins and Neutral Good not, and I think I've come up with why it bothers me.

This does touch slightly on RL perceptions and analogues, so please accept my apologies in advance if it goes squirrely.

A. Iomedae, the Inheritor, is effectively a Taldan deity (the Byzantine 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

B. Saranrae, the Dawnflower, is effectively a Qadiran deity (the Ottoman Empire/Persia 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

Okay, now here's the rabbit-hole my brain keeps bumping up against:

The Lawful Good Deity could be a paladin.

The Neutral Good Deity could not (as currently being offered in Playtest).

Yet they are both allies against the forces of Evil.

So why on Golarion is Iomedae NOT sharing her tactics/techniques capabilities with Saranrae?

Does she not trust the Dawnflower?

Does it feel to her as if the exclusive franchise of her particular flavor of Heavenly Goodness is inherently superior to the Dawnflower's?

Why can't the Dawnflower, the one who (with the help of other deities) *imprisoned Rovagug* the biggest and worst thing in Golarion, grant this power to Her faithful?

What strange cosmic rule allows this to happen?

I know, it's 'that's how the rules are' from an out of the box perspective, but if I were the Dawnflower I'd want my people of Goodness to focus on Being Good first? And I'd want them to be empowered as my divine champions -- after all, my ally Iomedae can make it happen for Her faithful, why can't I do it for mine?

What is the flavor to bridge this disconnect?

EDIT: Further rambling -- Evil is selfish and greedy and doesn't want to share, or if it does, it wants huge payoff for doing so.

Good works together and shares equally and fairly.

So why is one Good more important than All Good?

Seconded!

Designer

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
So putting THAT aside, can we take your post as confirmation that the Paladin does still get traditional spellcasting, presumably of the 5th level variety? It wasn't entirely clear in the blog post, to the point where many were wondering if the Paladin didn't get spells at all and simply had the points pool to reflect its various (Su) and (Sp) abilities.
I can get wordy when it comes to design diary type information, but either of the two topics suggested (by you and HWalsh) would use up a lot of words to fully explain in a comprehensive fashion, and I already maxed out my words for the blog to cover the elephant in the room. I will say that those who think that hero's defiance may share a name with a PF1 spell that has a similar niche, but it's a much more powerful heal than people may be giving it credit for (19 dice of healing, and it doesn't even use your reaction!). Also, some people were asking about righteous ally. It's basically what you would expect from the blog. You either get a mount, a free weapon rune (at all times, not activated via an action for a set duration as in PF1) or some sweet shield buffs, and then you can take more feats to get even cooler abilities for your ally (mount upgrades, cooler runes, more shield benefits).

That's fair enough, Paizo is unusually loose-lipped with designer insights so I'm grateful for whatever tidbits we get.

I'm not sure how good a free weapon rune is, though that's something we obviously don't have enough information to weigh in on. Divine Bond worked because it stacked on top of the bonuses you were already getting with your gold; to me, a free weapon rune sounds more like the "free" enhancement bonuses that classes like the Hunter got; at best it saved you some gold but wasn't that impactful because it conflicted with bonuses the game expected you to get anyways. My impression is that weapon runes fall under that same category of an expected bonus to keep up.

We do like to give you guys lots of insight, but I'm hesitant to go into a complex explanation that I think requires (to pick a random number) 500 words to fully explain the design direction unless it has a dedicated blog post or something like that. It's too easy to get an incomplete tldr from a forum post skim.

@Runes: Imagine if you had your sword in PF1, with all the stuff you like about it, but BAM now it's also flaming, or ghost touch. Something like that, which is actually much like divine bond normally does in PF1.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

I've been trying to formulate and parse one of the 'disconnects' with Best Lawful Good having Paladins and Neutral Good not, and I think I've come up with why it bothers me.

This does touch slightly on RL perceptions and analogues, so please accept my apologies in advance if it goes squirrely.

A. Iomedae, the Inheritor, is effectively a Taldan deity (the Byzantine 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

B. Saranrae, the Dawnflower, is effectively a Qadiran deity (the Ottoman Empire/Persia 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

Okay, now here's the rabbit-hole my brain keeps bumping up against:

The Lawful Good Deity could be a paladin.

The Neutral Good Deity could not (as currently being offered in Playtest).

Yet they are both allies against the forces of Evil.

So why on Golarion is Iomedae NOT sharing her tactics/techniques capabilities with Saranrae?

Does she not trust the Dawnflower?

Does it feel to her as if the exclusive franchise of her particular flavor of Heavenly Goodness is inherently superior to the Dawnflower's?

Why can't the Dawnflower, the one who (with the help of other deities) *imprisoned Rovagug* the biggest and worst thing in Golarion, grant this power to Her faithful?

What strange cosmic rule allows this to happen?

I know, it's 'that's how the rules are' from an out of the box perspective, but if I were the Dawnflower I'd want my people of Goodness to focus on Being Good first? And I'd want them to be empowered as my divine champions -- after all, my ally Iomedae can make it happen for Her faithful, why can't I do it for mine?

What is the flavor to bridge this disconnect?

EDIT: Further rambling -- Evil is selfish and greedy and doesn't want to share, or if it does, it wants huge payoff for doing so.

Good works together and shares equally and...

Even though good > lawful in the paladin code, there will still be times when a paladin will be compelled to uphold a law that a devout sarenrite (?) might find objectionable.

Perhaps Sarenrae wouldn’t want her followers to feel obligated to stand by sometimes the way they might be compelled to due to their respect for rightful authority.

I don’t think it’s anything to do with Iomedae “keeping secrets”. I think lawful good champions are just not Sarenrae’s thing. She doesn’t think lawful is an ideal worth striving for (and binding her devotees so tightly to this strict code would itself drift into lawfulness). She’d rather they have more flexibility in their fight against evil.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

I've been trying to formulate and parse one of the 'disconnects' with Best Lawful Good having Paladins and Neutral Good not, and I think I've come up with why it bothers me.

This does touch slightly on RL perceptions and analogues, so please accept my apologies in advance if it goes squirrely.

A. Iomedae, the Inheritor, is effectively a Taldan deity (the Byzantine 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

B. Saranrae, the Dawnflower, is effectively a Qadiran deity (the Ottoman Empire/Persia 'analogue' on Golarion). Sure, she has other places she's got worshippers, but overall, that seems to be one of her big places?

Okay, now here's the rabbit-hole my brain keeps bumping up against:

The Lawful Good Deity could be a paladin.

The Neutral Good Deity could not (as currently being offered in Playtest).

Yet they are both allies against the forces of Evil.

So why on Golarion is Iomedae NOT sharing her tactics/techniques capabilities with Saranrae?

Does she not trust the Dawnflower?

Does it feel to her as if the exclusive franchise of her particular flavor of Heavenly Goodness is inherently superior to the Dawnflower's?

Why can't the Dawnflower, the one who (with the help of other deities) *imprisoned Rovagug* the biggest and worst thing in Golarion, grant this power to Her faithful?

What strange cosmic rule allows this to happen?

I know, it's 'that's how the rules are' from an out of the box perspective, but if I were the Dawnflower I'd want my people of Goodness to focus on Being Good first? And I'd want them to be empowered as my divine champions -- after all, my ally Iomedae can make it happen for Her faithful, why can't I do it for mine?

What is the flavor to bridge this disconnect?

EDIT: Further rambling -- Evil is selfish and greedy and doesn't want to share, or if it does, it wants huge payoff for doing so.

Good

...

My understanding is that Sarenrae can have Paladins in PF2. She is NG, and it's likely that her Deity profile explicitly allows LG Clerics. Any Deity that allows LG Clerics can have Paladins, so Sarenrae can probably have Paladins.

1,251 to 1,300 of 1,735 << first < prev | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Paladin Class Preview All Messageboards