seekerofshadowlight's page

I recently was re-reading the Order of the Stick webcomic.

Miko - example of how not to play a LG paladin.
O-Chul - why I want to play a LG paladin.

Sorry, magic missles should be auto-hit, and paladins should be limited to lawful good. Yes, I am a grognard.

The endless deluge comes because many people just can't handle playing Paladins. It's not a class issue, there are dozens of RPGs there where you get to play something that's bound by some arbitrary rules (SW's Jedis? WoD's almost anything? L5R *everything*?). And there's always a bunch of folks who just aren't able to play such characters.

A good number of folks found it quite fortunate, even a godsend for some. It presented a tool to help many of us get stories and concepts out of Golarion that were otherwise locked out by canon, and presented some nicely developed flavor to back it up.

It's easier to ignore the elements one doesn't want in their Golarion than it is to have to build them from scratch and have in a presentable form that can be shared with others.

I do understand that... but also—a world where EVERYTHING is a part of the world is not a world at all. One defines a setting as much as by what's not in the setting as one does by what IS in the setting. Having certain stories "locked out by canon" is a strength of a setting, in my opinion.

Kevin Mack wrote:

Uh just to point out fairly certain James Jacobs said somewhere else that the Juju Oracle's ability to create none evil undead was an oversight (much like that asmodiun paladin incident)

If that's the case, and I really hope it isn't, please consider this thread to be for those that want to run with the Juju oracle as originally written. Just want to head off yet another "no you can't do that" derail before it happens. :)

It was an oversight. In the same way the mention of "Paladins of Asmodeus" in the Asmodeus article was an oversight.

Doesn't mean you can't change things in your world, but with the exception of some ghosts, you probably won't be seeing Paizo ever publish non-evil undead, or non-evil spells or methods to control and create undead. Except when something slips through the cracks, as in the case of the Juju Oracle, unfortunately.

The official stance in Golarion is that if you're a cleric, you MUST have a patron deity. That's one of the big things that makes clerics not a different type of spellcaster.

(And yes, I wish I had a time machine so I could go back and fix the Core Rulebook so that it says that there in the Core Rulebook as well.)

You're free to say clerics don't need deities in games you run, just as you're free to say wizards don't need spellbooks or rogues don't need thieves' tools or whatever... but the baseline assumption for our campaign setting is that clerics must worship a deity.

I am not going to reply to any one specific person on this, but, as I have posted in other threads where this has come up, this is what the Inner Sea World Guide says on the topic. It does not directly answer every point, but still:

From page 235 of the Inner Sea World Guide:

False gods and dead gods cannot grant spells to clerics, but other divine spellcasting classes (such as druids or oracles) who gain their power from other sources, rather than directly from the gods, can serve these forces as champions or cultists.

and from page 236:

Clerics who follow a philosophy must select a patron deity among the philosophy’s associated religions (they gain no additional benefits from adherence to a philosophy).

James if you don't agree with this statement, then you are disagreeing with the book you helped make. And if this is the case then there needs to be an official errata.

Nightfall, stop fighting me on this and accept the rules written in the book or wait for an official errata to change this.

You're absolutely correct. I'm disagreeing with a book I helped make. I was not the ONLY one making the Core Rulebook, nor was I the lead designer. I "registered" my complaint about that line in the cleric entry when we were building the book and was more or less overruled. Possibly because that's the way it was in 3.5, and we were too timid to make that change to Pathfinder for backwards compatibility reasons.

That said, in Golarion, I do not get overruled except by the publisher.

There are elements of Golarion that just work differently than things as they're established in the Core Rulebook. Clerics being required to serve a deity is one of them.

Of course, any GM who runs a Golarion game is free to change that as they will, but that's not what the OP asked—the official stance on clerics in Golarion is that they MUST chose a patron deity.

THE REASON THIS IS THE WAY IT IS IN GOLARION
Here's why (spoilered in case someone still doesn't know the truth about one of Golarion's "deities")...

Telekinetic Bloodline
You are an anomaly, your genetic history isn't so important as the mutation that you carry now. Perhaps you believe yourself haunted, or cursed. Your power is new and strange, your ability to affect the world with your will alone is remarkable enough that you choose to seek your own destiny.

Class Skill: Knowledge (Arcana)

Bonus Spells: Unseen Servant (3rd), Levitate (5th), Fly (7th), Resilient Sphere (9th), Telekinesis (11th), Forceful Hand (13th), Reverse Gravity (15th), Telekinetic Sphere (17th), Crushing Hand (19th)

Bonus Feats: Combat Casting, Empower Spell, Extend Spell, Iron Will, Skill Focus Knowledge (Arcana), Still Spell, Silent Spell.

Bloodline Arcana: Whenever you cast a spell with the [force] descriptor increase its duration by 50%. This does not stack with the bonus granted by the Extend Spell feat.

Bloodline Powers: Your mental powers grow more prodigious, but and the powers you gain allow you to affect the world with your will alone.

Telekinetic Hand: You cause your melee weapon to fly from your grasp and strike a foe before instantly returning to you. As a standard action, you can make a single attack using a melee weapon at a range of 30 feet. This attack is treated as a ranged attack with a thrown weapon, except that you add your Charisma modifier on the attack roll instead of your Dexterity modifier (damage still relies on Strength). This ability cannot be used to perform a combat maneuver. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.

Danger Sense: Starting at 3rd level, you gain a +1 luck bonus on all of your saving throws and to your AC during surprise rounds (see Combat) and when you are otherwise unaware of an attack. At 7th level and every four levels thereafter, this bonus increases by +1, to a maximum of +5 at 19th level.

Telekinetic Trick: At 9th level you may now use your Telekinetic Hand to perform a ranged Combat Manoeuvre at any target within 30 ft. Your CMB for this check is equal to your Caster Level + Your Charisma Modifier. This uses up one of your uses of Telekinetic Hand per day.

Telekinetic Flight: At 15th level you can fly at a speed equal to your base land speed with a manoeuverability of perfect for a number of minutes per day equal to your sorcerer level. These minutes need not be consecutive.

Mental Apotheosis: At 20th level your prodigious mental might constantly effects the world around you. You have a constant telekinetic shield around you gaining DR 5/- and Energy Resistance 5 against all energy types. Furthermore your telekinetic flight now has an unlimited duration.

Coming Soon: Telepath Bloodline.

So you don't want 20+ rules because you think martial class are futile past 12 level?

I don't believe they are, but I do think that the entire d20 system itself begins to fail around that point, spellcasters or not.

The problem with epic levels is that the existing system begins to break down well before you get to 20th level. So unless the solution to epic levels is to basically switch to an entirely different (and non-d20-based) system, epic-level play is going to have some major problems.

I have a mental picture of Wes saying "Minionnnnnnnn!" in his best Monarch voice.

The idea of a divine spellcaster who plays fast and loose with the gods and worship of deities is, in its various incarnations, one that has a LOT of fun potential for characters. And as a result, that's why we built the oracle. It's one of the MAIN reasons we built the oracle, in fact (the other one being that we wanted a divine spontaneous caster).

Clerics are very much intended to be sincerely devoted to their deity, and that's why they get their powers. A cleric who's not sincerely devoted to his or her deity is an ex-cleric, as detailed in the core rulebook.

This character concept is cool... but it should be built as anything BUT a cleric. Oracle's the obvious choice, but you could do this character as a ranger, an inquisitor, or even as a bard or a witch or a sorcerer or the like. But cleric... yeah... not really the right choice for this kind of character at all.

And has been pointed out a few of the inner sea gods are some freaks. One flips genders, another might be two gods in one body, a few has the whole Bondage theme going.

Plus good old 'do as I say, not as I do' Erastil, childless never-been-married god of telling people that they oughta settle down and have families. He's like that matchmaking spinster aunt, always trying to introduce her sister's kids to people their own age, despite manifestly being the last person in the world to be dispensing relationship advice.

Stag-boy comes off a bit creepy, trying to get people to hook up so that he can vicariously have a sex life...

There's a lot of that. Pharasma, childless goddess of birth. Calistria, childless goddess of casual sex. Shelyn, childless goddess of love.

And then there's Torag, who bangs out children like he's got a 'magic hammer' for that specific purpose.

"Ah father, whom do you serve?"

"Torag, Father of Creation, Patron God of Gettin' Busy With It, whose motto is 'aim high, plan well and strike while the iron is hot'. And your iron is looking mighty hot, if ya know what I mean..."

Some of us have never read Tolkien.

... And some of us tried and failed.

Every single person posting on this board, unless they are an Ex-Black Ops, is level 1-2, 3 at best, and I highly doubt they have levels of a class with full base attack. Which is to say, level in "professional killer", because rogues, clerics, and other "fighting" classes have average. High base attack is for people who kill for a living.

Level 6 is pushing the limits of what real world people can do, and they are likely few and far between. I've seen an Ex-Navy Seal at a SCA war who was six foot three, but he could disappear in foot tall grass and sneak up on you in bright red full-plate. It was unbelievable, but it happened there on the field, and even thought I saw it, I still have a hard time believing it.

Level 10 is superhuman. Not Superman, but beyond human ability nonetheless. 15 is insane, and anything above it is people who have skill that is inconceivable to see in action.

This is part of the reason I loathed the concept of the Epic Level Handbook. Sure, I loved some of the specific ideas, but the concept itself of "epic" play was just so ridiculous to me. Anything above level 9 is epic, when you think about it from a real world perspective. And like it or not, most of the commoners in Golarion or any other setting are just as normal and limited as us real world commoners.

Someone should link the old article commenting on the "reality" of levels in a D&D world. Between it and the youtube videos, the issue is, as far as I'm concerned, dealt with to the point where its simply personal taste from this point out.

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

I disagree, again you are assuming at lest late middle ages gear is required for the paladin to exist.

No I am saying that the Paladin was given life from the combination of societal development factors, and they included things such as scientific advancement and cultural/civilisation development. Their arms and equipment were born also from such advances, but Paladins were sprung from a particular level of cultural refinement. They are the expected trappings (gear) because in order to have a Paladin, it is assumed society has advanced to that level.

Um...no. No it's not. Like, not at all. The only trapping necessary to be a Paladin is to be pure of heart, to fight for the right without question or pause, to be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause. Whether a paladin wears plate armor and wields a longsword from astride a mighty spear, or whether he stands as champion of his tribe against demonic predations with naught but a loincloth, a bone spear, and the power of his faith; whether he is part of a great knightly order, or a lone wandering do-gooder; whether he pledges himself to a noble liege, or raises the flag of freedom high...if he dreams that impossible dream, he can be and is a paladin.

Scientists tell us the Earth only has about 2 billion years left.

What can we as citizens do?

1)Promote economic equality.

2)Immediately begin building a substantial sustainable energy infrastructure, primarily wind and solar.
3)Move towards a post-scarcity society.
4)Colonize other worlds.

In other words: Star Trek, m++#%@*#$!~!s!

Hound Master (Cavalier)
Most cavaliers charge into battle atop mighty steeds, however some lack the finesse with equines required to be proficient riders. Still wishing to serve their order, hound masters choose to fight beside war hounds which are powerful animals trained for battle. A hound master has the following class features.

War Hound (Ex): At 1st level, a hound master gains the service of a loyal war hound to aid him in battle. This hound functions as a druid’s animal companion, using the cavalier’s level as his effective druid level. The creature has the same stats as a wolf.

The war hound is always considered combat trained and begins play with Light Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat. A hound master’s hound does not gain the share spells special ability. These hounds are not suitable for riding and cannot be trained to carry riders.

A hound master’s bond is strong and if the war hound dies, the cavalier may find another hound to serve him after 1 week of mourning. This new hound does not gain the link, evasion, devotion, or improved evasion special abilities until the next time the cavalier gains a level. This ability replaces mount.

Pack Tactics (Ex): At 3rd level, a hound master learns greater coordination with his war hound. When a hound master and his hound are flanking the same creature, the hound master’s flanking bonus on attack rolls increases to +4. This ability replaces cavalier’s charge.

Expert Handler (Ex): Upon reaching 4th level, the hound master may take on a second war hound; while smaller and weaker than his primary hound, it is still a useful ally. This ability functions like the war hound ability, except that the hound master's effective druid level is equal to his cavalier level – 3. In addition, this ability allows the war hounds to choose from teamwork feats when selecting feats gained from additional Hit Die. This ability replaces expert trainer.

Go For the Throat (Ex): At 11th level, a hound master has perfected fighting beside his animals. Whenever an opponent is tripped or overrun by one of his war hounds, the opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from the hound master. The target must be threatened by both the hound master and his war hound. This ability replaces mighty charge.

Kill Command (Ex): At 20th level, whenever an opponent is threatened by the hound master and both of his hounds, the hound master may issue a kill command. This is a swift action that grants both hounds an attack of opportunity on the target. A creature cannot be the target of this ability more than once per day. This ability replaces supreme charge.

I still have to detail some of the spells, but here are 4 new classes in Beginner Box style:

Hunter
At home in the frontier wilderness, the Hunter is adept at following his quarry wherever it may run. An expert at ranged weaponry, the Hunter harries her foe, savoring the victory skill and patience can provide.

Dervish
A whirling, deadly force on any battlefield, the Dervish relies on speed and grace to finish her foes with a thousand small wounds. Styling themselves after nature’s deadliest predators, the Dervish uses both body and blade to wear an opponent down and finish them off.

Shaman
A Shaman serves as both a servant and master of the forces of nature. Shamans are more at home in the wild than in the bustling cities. They summon powerful natural allies in their struggle to preserve the balance of nature.

Warlock
A Warlock is a powerful spellcaster whose magical powers come from inherited bloodlines from powerful, often otherworldly beings. A Warlock doesn’t pray, study, or commune to gain his spells- he just knows them; they are a part of him. A Warlock only knows a few spells, based on his birthright, but he can cast more spells per day than any other spellcaster, and can select from any of the spells he knows.

I don't think you can call Iomedae, Cayden and Norgorber nascent deities. That aside, I think I'm going to go with the avatar method of gods appearing in the Prime Material plane. That way only the host dies and the god is unscathed. I figure that as long as they aren't sinking islands, raising mountains, destroying nations, etc. they can move about that way unnoticed by the other gods.

Correct; Iomedae, Cayden, and Norgorber are full on deities.

Golarion basically has 3 categories of divine powers.

Deities are at the top—they don't have stat blocks and can't be killed by mortals. This is the category Iomedae, Cayden, and Norgorber are found in.

Demigods are one step lower—these are things like empyrial lords and demon lords. They some day WILL have stat blocks (once we solve the post-20th-level riddle) and can be killed by mythic mortals—their CR scores would range from about 26 to around 40, I'm guessing. This is likely the category that Iomedae, cayden, and Norgorber were in just AFTER they took the Test of the Starstone.

Nascent demigods (such as the nascent demon lords or perhaps really powerful mythic heroes) are CR 21 to CR 25. They can be killed by mortals, but it's a tough fight! This is likely the category that Iomedae, cayden, and Norgorber were in just BEFORE they took the Test of the Starstone.

Godless clerics essentially make the presence or absence of gods irrelevant. That can not help but have a tremendous impact in the way the world is shaped.

It also devalues clerics tremendously. They become nothing more than another form of wizard.

Ashiel wrote:

First, Jedi are Lawful Good

No. Jedi are not good. Jedi are not evil. Jedi are balance.

Absolutely, the concepts that people ascribe to "Grey Jedi" are actually those of a proper "Light" Jedi. You're either In Balance or Out of Balance, there's no in between the two states.

In any version of AD&D/Pathfinder/D20 I have ever played, when the levels get to the teens, that is when it is about time to start over with new characters in a new campaign.

Well, if the Fighter has a good Will save in BB, I'm not touching this. It's great that one of the bigger Fighter problem got fixed, even if accidentally :)

Pricing stuff so that it's more balanced to make new races is a noble goal, certainly. But if the cost is potentially disasterous blow-ups around countless gaming tables, then I say that price is too high.

Except when the entire point of this system is to create new races (it's a Race Building tool), not to recreate old races.

If, by chance, all of the core races had ended up at 10 points with all of their traits priced properly, then I doubt anyone would have complained. But, some of the RP costs in the playtest document make it appear as if the costing came afterwards, as a way to force each race to end up at 10 points.

Proper pricing of the building blocks has to be the priority if one wants to create a balanced, useful tool.

Honestly, if the published book tries to shoehorn all of the core races into being equal, then it will be the first core Pathfinder RPG book that I won't purchase. Any race-building point-buy system whose core assumption is flawed (in my eyes) will be fairly useless to me.

I know it might be a shocking revelation to some, but 3,5 isn't a perfect system.

One of it's weakest points is the problem on how to make PCs of differing race power level play at the same table. Granted, it's a popular problem in RPGs, but some (or actually, many) never even bothered to touch the subject knowing that it's a potential pitfall.

Sadly, 3.5 did and here's the result - folks thinking that LA/ECL were working, balanced systems.

Like the subject says, I think that Large or Tiny size races should be restricted to the Advanced or Monstrous level. The benefits of large size (for melee characters) and tiny size (for spellcasters) should be restricted in a normal campaign, I think.

Kthulhu wrote:

I've never seen a FR product from any edition that really grabbed me.

I believe that the 'best' FR supliments were actually the 2e Deities books. They had a fair amount of crunch (in the specialty priests) as well as not only the deity's history, but details on how their churches function. But YRMV of course.

I am with you on that. Faith&Avatars was so detailed and had so much great infos about the churches, the customs, the clothing and the teaching.

The loss of the Realms Panteon was the biggest loss for me when we changed to Golarion

I absolutely refuse to go on adventure without the following roles filled:

1) Cook (even prstidigitated trail rations are just not the same as crisp bacon and freshly baked biscuits)
2) Maid (seriously, the difference between huddling in a rain-soaked cloak and resting with clean sheets and a newly turned-down sleeping bag)
3) Mule (this can be an actual mule, or the party fighter. Whatev. As long as I don't have to carry all my stuff)

Roman wrote:

Anyway, my point is that if WotC could do it with Dark Sun in 4e, there is no reason why they couldn't do the same with Forgotten Realms in 5e.

Or it would be viewed as a horrible idea by those that actually enjoy the current Realms content and history. Frankly, if they did this I can't say I'd drop FR all together but it would be a slap in the face, pandering to a very vocal minority who can't grasp the idea of progress or take due criticism of the 1375 DR Realms.

Yes, this probably will anger a lot of "old-school" Realms fans but I don't really care at this point. I've played it their way for 10+ years and FINALLY when the Realms is done in a way which I like, it'll be scrapped because a few throw a tantrum?

Yes, all of us who enjoyed the Realms through...

The deaths of several gods, including Mystra

The loss of Tilvertown

The Hoard invasion

The death of major characters and the throwing of Cormyr into chaos as a result

The rise of three major deities.

The death and rise of the Blackstaff

The reclusive elves making a return and a new land.

The founding of the Silver Marches.

Are unable to grasp the ides of 'progress'.

*yawn* And who's throwing a tantrum at the idea of fixing the madness of the Spellplauge, which is impossible by any standard of Realms history?

Needs more cowbell.

Prestige classes should be in the adventure paths, not the rule books.

They should be campaign specific.

They were originally designed to be a way for the GM to add a little extra color to the world by giving, for example, the elite guard of the king a specific set of abilities/powers, more powerful than feats. They need to return to those roots.

PrCs went off the rails when the later game designers started using them as a way to sell more books by offering munchkins pluggable power sets for optimization tricks.

Hello All!

I'm in the process of converting the LoF AP to the Savage Worlds rules. I will keep this thread updated as I go along and hope that all of the other SW experts out there chime in with some of their suggestions. Here are some of my general thoughts as I do the converting.

First of all-it's Savage Worlds, so it had better be Fast! Furious! Fun!. I don't want to get hung up converting every skill point and feat into SW. I want to make this easy for me.

Second-3.5 requires magic items galore and Savage Worlds doesn't. This might be the hardest thing to change in the minds of my players. Their PCs get their "goodies" in the form of edges, skills and attributes; not in magic items. Saying that, I will still have magic items, but a lot of them will be limited use or one-use. I will save weapons and armor for truly special occasions (like Tempest).

Ok, here's my first conversion-the bad guys in HotK...gnolls.

Gnoll
Extra
Parry:6 Toughness:6 Pace:6"
Language: Gnoll
Ag d6
Sm d4
Sp d6
Str d8
Vi d6
Skills: Fighting d6, Shooting d6, Notice d4
Edge: Darkvision-No penalties for dim or dark lighting
Battleaxe(d6 dam 2d8) Bow (d6 dam 2d6)

More to come...

Because the designers wanted to incentivize the use of these "cool new weapons."

Personally, I consider the scizore to be a punching dagger, with punching dagger stats, just as I consider a naginata to be a glaive, and a kama to be a sickle. A rose by any other name...

Oo, are we going to argue what level fictional characters are? I love it when people try to claim 12th level town guards exist.

Houserule documents can be viewed/downloaded at my Google Site.

Previous discussions can be found here.

Design work by Kirth Gersen.
Playtesting by myself, houstonderek, Andostre, Jess Door, and silverhair2008.
Proofreading and editing by Christopher Hauschild and too many others to list.
Thank you all for your feedback.

Kirth, I'm sorry for the horrible title. Not sorry enough to change it however. ;)

Liches, which are undead by sheer force of personality and desire for power, cry?

Well, whatever works.

And OF COURSE the Paladin would oppose whatever Evil arose to take Asmodeus' place. And if Balance came for him, he'd challenge one of THEM to take the place of Evil, if they must INSIST on Evil having to exist. It's not his responsibility to right the Balance, it's his to fight Evil, all the time, everywhere. If they want Evil, suck it and do their job. If they want to do Evil's job and fight him, he's more then willing to comply if they're doing Evil's work.

Just because they already know what Asmodeus is going to do in the future does not make him the best option. Having one more force for good in the past could change a LOT of things.

And it's funny how ages fallen to Evil exist all the time, but when an Age falls to Good, Neutrality must rise to oppose it. Classic.

==Aelryinth

We dragged our dead bard through the desert for about three weeks to resurrect him. Well, we really could afford only reincarnation, so we suddenly got a nice little kobold... so we sold our loot, spare organs and parrents to slavery to have him cast a wish on himself to change to human again.

The wording of the wish was: "I want my body back in exactly the same condition as it was three days before"

*Kazzap*

Stinking bard cadaver lies on the sandy ground.

Serving Asmodeus/Hell, even against Demons, is basically shouting out to the world "Good can't do what needs to be done against Demons, serve Asmodeus and He will save you, like He is saving me!"

Thus, you are spreading his dogma, convincing souls to follow that path and leading them to Hell, even if you never preach a word for Him and do nothing but fight in his name.

And that is spreading the word, writ and infamy of Evil, and making Good appear weak. No paladin can do this and remain a paladin. It is undercutting Good of the finest, subtlest sort.

==Aelryinth

The pinning monk reminded me of this...

>playing half orc monk
>decide to play something beyond weeaboo 'i am a master of martial arts'
>spend 100 gp on inlaid mask with intricate tribal designs sewn on the side with a 'fin'
>BECOME LOS TIBURON, THE SHARK OF THE LAND, MASKED WRESTLER
>take feats revolving around grappling
>grapple EVERYTHING
>EVERYTHING
>EVERY. *&^%$#. THING.
>including, but not limited to, a bear
>final part of campaign
>OH CRAP DRAGON
>dragon acts like a boss, ducking into water and popping up to use breath weapon
>*&^% that, I'm charging him
>brother, playing warforged fighter, assists my MIGHTY LEAP into the air, where I pose in mid-air, shouting about the HONOR OF THE MASK
>TACKLE A *&^%$# DRAGON
>deal unarmed damage, latch on, take deep breath in preparation for the underwater struggle
>dragon goes up. forgot they can actually fly.
>DM gives me option to let go before he goes up. Heck with that, I'm still wrestling.
>200 FEET IN THE AIR, STILL WRESTLING A DRAGON AND DEALING UNARMED DAMAGE
>Dragon actually starts hurting me. Have to come up with a plan. BRILLIANCE STRIKES ME.
>"I roll to pin."
>Entire table is silent.
>I roll to 'pin' his wings behind his back, so he can't fly anymore.
>ENTIRE TABLE IS LEANING OVER SO I CAN MAKE MY ROLL OF DESTINY
>NATURAL. *&^%$#. TWENTY.
>I pin the dragon's wings, sending it and me hurtling into ground. I have six seconds to make my final statement.
>"I AM LOS TIBURON! And I am...a lucha!!!"
>Dragon's neck snaps on impact
>Through sheer luck or GM fiat, possibly both, I survive with -4 HP
>Cleric puts me back at one, picks me up, holding one arm into the air
>My brother immediately bangs his shield twice, making a bell noise
>Party's bard/diplomancer: "And the winner is....Los Tiburon!"
>high fives all around

And that was the story of how I made it to level four.

Elthbert wrote:

Gygax chose the word Paladin, not knight, They come from the tales of Charlemagnes paladins not the knights of the round table. And Charlemagnes paladins were pargaons of Virtue, even unto death.

Gygax also envisioned DnD as a competitive game where the DM tries to screw over the players as much as possible. I have the same kind of feelings for him as I do for Gene Roddenberry. I respect him as the creator of the world, but strictly following his vision does nothing but hurt the franchise.

I disagree strongly, there is no competition between players and DM's and never was, Dm's can kill players at anytime, and Gygax of all people knew that, I also disagree that folliwing his vision has hurt the franchise, 2nd edition hurt the franchise, 3rd edition tried to restore some of the vision, ( though it departed from it in other ways, and I think it helped the franchise. Regardless, the portion of the discussion you are commenting on was what paladins were based on, they were not based on the knights of the round table. If they were, they would be knights, not paladins. Paladins are the perfect knight, good, honorable, devoted to honor and chivalry and rightousness, defenders of the True Faith (whatever that is in your world), of the weak and the innocent, they keep their word, they keep faith. THey are not inconstent, they are not chaotic. They are based on a major western literaty tradition, Charlemagnes Paladins.

Clerics represent the warrior priest already, the saint who wields miracles, the prophet who calls down fire, the High priest who summons angels to fight for his god, or the high preist of the death cult, who calls people to strangle the innocent in thir sleep, and pulls feinds from the depth of Hell to bring darkness to the land, and robs the dead of their rest.

THe paladin is not supposed to be the warrior priest, the paladin is the saint who wields steel and heart and bravery, but his miracles are personal, not dramatic, he cannot split the sea, or summon plagues, he can heal the wounded through the touch of his hand, can bless his sword and have it strike down the wicked. When the wall is breached, and the evil hordes swarm in it is the paladin who stands in the breach, and if needed dies in it.

He does not sleep around, nor drink too much, nor lie, nor insult his superiors no matter how stupid their superiors might be. They are Paladin's, not something else.

Now As for tradition being a stupid reason for doing things, I couldn't disagree more. Obviously there are plenty of others here who agree with me. Regardless, my point was precisely that the paladin was based on a particular western literary tradition, that that tradition was not the Knights of the Round Table, the the concept of a Paladin falling comes from this literary tradition, and that it is an essential to the nature of the class that they be LG.

You are free to disagree, I suspect that that is becuase you see a class as nothing more than a list of powers and skills, I do not. I have no problem with Assassins being required to be evil either, This is despite the fact that I can't thinkf any assassin class abilities that ould break the game in the hands of a good perosn. Yet Assassination is just not a Good thing, I am sure that moral relativist can argue that sometimes it is, but fortunatly, in D&D/ Pathfinder Good and Evil are not debateable they are tangable, real things. Society's devoted to good and order are given the paladin to defend them. Evil gets plenty of things all to itself, Chaos gets to be chaotic (which while not so ideal in the real world has some real advantages in an RPG, LG gets Paladins and not much else.

{some really good points}

The other problem is when somebody looks at the paladin, likes the powers, likes the idea of being able to claim the authority, then decides that they want to be mean and bad-ass with it, and tries to find an interpretation of lawful good that reads more like chaotic douche ...

Knowing that some of my players frequent this site, I feel compelled to say that I would never allow a dragon to be mounted.

That being said, the PCs are invited to ride inside any dragon of their choosing...

Nope.

And I believe none every will. James Jacobs has commented on this - they're not really interested in statting out the gods.

Best you're ever going to get is stats for demon princes, lesser demigods, etc., and that only if Paizo ever creates a above-20 ruleset.

Actaully, if we decide we're NEVER going to do a post-20th-level ruleset, that also opens the doors wide for us to stat demon lords and demigods. I've statted up plenty of CR 28 to CR 32 demon lords in my time, and they work fine without epic level rules. The thing is that WHATEVER we choose to do, I want things like demigods and demon lords and what-not to represent the top tier of bad guys you'd fight, be that in a game that goes to 20th level, or to 30th level, or to 36th level (my current favorite nomination), or to 100th level. Until we know FOR CERTAIN what our level cap is... I can't design demon lords to serve as end-time boss monsters because I don't have any metrics to base their powers on.

In Pathfinder & Golarion, we have essentially 3 different ranks of "deity."

1) NASCENT DEITIES: We have things like nascent demon lords (like Treerazer) who can grant spells but are only CR 21 to CR 25. These guys are meant to fill the role of "let's kill an evil god as a capstone for this 1st to 20th level campaign" basically.

2) DEMIGODS: These guys are what mortals can (in theory) fight and defeat if the mortals are powerful and lucky enough. Demigods include things like demon lords, the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, and some regional deities like Achaekek (the mantis god) or Besmara (the pirate goddess). Whatever "CR" demigods end up at will occupy about the same niche as nascent deities do right now—+1 to +5 over whatever that ultimate, final level cap ends up being.

3) DEITIES: These are NOT things mortals can fight. They can oppose them, and given the right combination of legendary feats, they can even be defeated, but they won't ever have stat blocks. At least, not unless we decide to do a "Deity level ruleset" or something like that, but even then... I'm not keen on letting actual combat stats out for deities. The game would probably have to be completely different to accommodate that type of play experience.

A note about Mythic level play: I've seen lots of folks worry that post 20th level play (something I've been calling "Mythic levels") would basically just be a bunch of impossible to defeat overpowered PCs who never meet anything that challenges them. Let me be clear—that is NOT what I envision these rules would be for. The types of stories I'd want to be able to tell (in the form of adventures) that would require Mythic level rules would be things like, "Go into the Abyss and defeat the demon lord," or "Face off against the ten-thousand-strong orc army with only you and your three friends," or "Create a new world for your followers to live on and then defend it from horrific things that want to destroy it," or "Go to the outer planes and work directly for the deities themselves," or "Take the test of the Starstone to become a demigod" and so on. Could you do these story lines withe the current rules? Sure... but it'd feel weird and be kinda awkward and in some cases would require some new rules support. Would these stories not challenge PCs? Not if they were done right.

Whew... that kinda turned into an essay. Sorry about that. Been a lot of "epic level threads" lately and I wanted to get all that off my chest, I guess! :-)

Any RavingDork thread.

I pretty much play by the book, except for my steps-based level advancement system.

The mention of paladins of Asmodeus is probably the most embarrasing flavor error Paizo's published, in my opinion. It's a development error—references to paladins worshiping Asmodeus should have been cut.

It's true that the "within one alignment step of your god" is for clerics, but even though it's not spelled out that way for anyone who worships a deity... if you AREN'T within one alignment step of a deity, you're basically doing one of two things:

1) You're worshiping and serving your deity in a way that the deity approves and won't get you labeled a blasphemer, and thus you are, by default, roleplaying a character who is within one step of your deity's alignment anyway, regardless of whatever you wrote down on your character sheet, and so you should just change your alignment to one of those. If that means you're no longer lawful good, you're no longer a paladin. Case closed.

2) You're NOT worshiping and NOT serving your deity in a way that the deity and its church approves—by striving closer to lawful and good in order to retain your paladinhood, you're going against the scriptures of your deity, who wants worshipers who are more chaotic, more evil, or just plain neutral. You're in an organization, but you're blatantly NOT following the organization's rules. You're being disruptive, rebellious, heretical, and blasphemous. None of those are lawful acts—they're all chaotic acts, and as such should drop you from lawful good and paladinhood very very very quickly. You shift toward chaotic alignment and are no longer a paladin. Case closed.

The only way you could have a paladin of Asmodeus is if you removed the requirement that a paladin has to be lawful good. And in my opinion, that'd be like saying a fighter can't use weapons or a wizard can't cast spells. Being lawful good is the fundamental core of what a paladin is in this game (real-world "paladins" as examples of non-lawful good behavior are irrelevant), and if you remove that, you should just remove the entire class from your game and replace them with cavaliers or martial clerics or rangers or inquisitors.

Okay, who else reading this got hooked in by the title?

...

That said, the title has planted a bug in my brain that I can't get out; the cavalier is the perfect mix of arrogance, superiority, and raw machismo for making Old Spice Guy.

I just need to learn the class in order to write him up.

Hello gamers. Look at your character, now back to me, now back to your character, now back to me. Sadly, he isn't me, but if he stopped using his boring old core class and switched to APG Cavalier he could be more like me. Look down, now back up, where are you? You're charging across the field of battle as the character your character could be like. What's in your hand? Back at me. It's a +5 magical lance with an orc skewered upon it. Look again. The orc is now DIAMONDS. Anything is possible when you're a Cavalier and not a core class. I'm on a horse.

Let's make something very, very clear.

If you aren't following RAI as intended, I am unimpressed with your build.

Lawyering a loophole to make your Uber-build doesn't not impress me. It depresses me actually. And I don't think you are a rules genius, but rather I think it is a sad and pathetic person who feels the needs to subvert rules in an imaginary world in order to succeed.

Because really, is there anything more sad than having to cheat in a role playing game among friends?

When you are reading the rules, and you have two options: One that seems reasonable and one that seems broken, if you choose the broken one you are wrong.

Seriously, you are wrong.

Developers are trying to make a game that is challenging, balanced, and fair.

Don't be the jerk who is trying to break the game.

Please, I'm begging you. After reading some of the people who post on here ridiculous rules subversion (I am looking at you Eidelon threads) half of the problems could be solved by asking the simple questions "What is the rule as intended".

You don't win if you are subverting the rules, no matter what lawyering you do. You aren't smarter than the Devs or the system, you just have a weak DM. And in the same way a child who doesn't get punished isn't awesomely petulant, they are a spoiled brat, you aren't brilliant, you are just...well to quote the Dude, if you are that guy then "You're not wrong Walter, you're just an..."