|1 person marked this as a favorite.|
Didn't people have a holy fit about the lashunta having different stats for females and males? Within the last month or so I want to say.
Gygax's views on women's strength aside, if the bevy of alternative classes for people who want to play a divine warrior of different alignments exists, why does the paladin need to exist? I mean, if the others are so great and the paladin is so crappy, why bother having it?
That's a fair question. If we have multiclassing and things like the Warpriest, why not Axe the Paladin entirely and just make up Archtypes for the Warpriest. A LG-ONly Warpriest with more emhpasis on smite can be called Paladin. Done...
Something else that interests me is the idea of keeping the class as is for tradition reasons, but not returning it to its roots. High stat requirements, heavy limitations on who you can deal with and how much gear and money you can have and so on. No one interested in that for tradition's sake?
Judging by the commentary on this thread, they probably would rejoice at more restrictions and requirements. That they don't enforce them at their table, however, just shows the level of hypocrisy that's going on.