paizo.com Recent Posts in Variations on the paladin?paizo.com Recent Posts in Variations on the paladin?2012-11-15T19:29:54Z2012-11-15T19:29:54ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Saernhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#452012-01-13T18:33:34Z2007-02-25T18:02:47Z<p>Yes, it operates as a combined <i>earthquake</i> and <i>firestorm</i> with a 100-foot radius at caster level 20th. I think one use per month would be more appropriate; when I made the thing, I saw the doomknight standing on a hill, destroying an entire castle or city core with this one ability. One could make it take a minute to activate as well, but that removes a lot of its potential use in a real combat situation.</p>Yes, it operates as a combined earthquake and firestorm with a 100-foot radius at caster level 20th. I think one use per month would be more appropriate; when I made the thing, I saw the doomknight standing on a hill, destroying an entire castle or city core with this one ability. One could make it take a minute to activate as well, but that removes a lot of its potential use in a real combat situation.Saern2007-02-25T18:02:47ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Arctarishttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#442012-01-13T18:33:33Z2007-02-25T17:33:59Z<p>Saern, in regards to your Doomknight; I like it! It has just the right flavor for a campaign I am working on. The daily use of the Apocalypse ability is a little over powered but it could be fixed. Did you specify how much damage it did?</p>Saern, in regards to your Doomknight; I like it! It has just the right flavor for a campaign I am working on. The daily use of the Apocalypse ability is a little over powered but it could be fixed. Did you specify how much damage it did?Arctaris2007-02-25T17:33:59ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Steven Purcellhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#432012-01-13T18:33:32Z2007-02-25T06:49:32Z<p>A thought occurred to me don't forget Dragon 310 through 312 for ideas!</p>A thought occurred to me don't forget Dragon 310 through 312 for ideas!Steven Purcell2007-02-25T06:49:32ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Steven Purcellhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#422012-01-13T18:33:32Z2007-02-25T06:34:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tatterdemalion wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Peruhain of Brithondy wrote:</div><blockquote> In defense of paladins, I think they ARE an archetype of fantasy, and I don't think they have to be played as though you have a stick up your...</blockquote><p>I agree, but I do think that the archetype you allude to, and the paladin class itself, is based upon a spectacularly uncompromising moral code that is hard to get around and still stay true to the spirit or letter of the rules. IMO :)
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Peruhain of Brithondy wrote:</div><blockquote>...not, as Saern noted above, cookie-cutter modifications to make a CE "anti-paladin" that's merely a mirror image of the original class...</blockquote><p>This is a matter of personal preference, though I'm beginning to sense that my opinion is in the minority. I'm happy to go the UA route: the paladin class stays mostly intact in it's structure and abilities, with minor modifications for each alignment represented. The alternative is to create entirely new classes for each alignment (or other) variant — and I'm ill at ease with adding to an ever-growing list of classes.
<p>I do think some mechanism should be added to make them more deity-specific. My solution will likely be to grant them access to one clerical domain, which might compensate for the lack of meaningful new abilites at higher levels (as suggested by Peruhain).</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Jack </blockquote><p>Personally, I can see the value of BOTH approaches and no one ever said they're mutually exclusive. Why not make use of several concepts, that way you can fill particualr niches more effectively.Tatterdemalion wrote:Peruhain of Brithondy wrote: In defense of paladins, I think they ARE an archetype of fantasy, and I don't think they have to be played as though you have a stick up your...
I agree, but I do think that the archetype you allude to, and the paladin class itself, is based upon a spectacularly uncompromising moral code that is hard to get around and still stay true to the spirit or letter of the rules. IMO :) Peruhain of Brithondy wrote:...not, as Saern noted above,...Steven Purcell2007-02-25T06:34:14ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?delveghttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#412012-01-13T18:32:17Z2007-02-09T21:38:41Z<p>The <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> Cloistered Cleric</a> is an excellent skill instead of fighting variant.</p>
<p>As far as Paladins go, one of the best that I've read was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deed_of_Paksenarrion" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Paksenarrion</a>, who does an excellent job of being good and taking on a lot of Paladin traits, without taking on "stick" aspects.</p>The Cloistered Cleric is an excellent skill instead of fighting variant.
As far as Paladins go, one of the best that I've read was Paksenarrion, who does an excellent job of being good and taking on a lot of Paladin traits, without taking on "stick" aspects.delveg2007-02-09T21:38:41ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Tatterdemalionhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#402012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T17:54:24Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rothandalantearic wrote:</div><blockquote>I wanted to point out here Tatter that the Paladin is actually one of the only core classes that gives you solid roleplaying guidelines...</blockquote><p>Point taken. That's a benefit for many, but my players and I tend to revel in going 'outside the box.' That might very well explain some of our aversion — it's hard to get too far outside the paladin's box, <i>because</i> of the roleplaying guidelines.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Saern wrote:</div><blockquote>I agree with Kahoolin- a non-LG paladin <i>isn't</i> a paladin.</blockquote><p>Arguably true. If I had designed the game, I probably would have gone a more UA-type route — make a class called a <i>holy warrior</i> (or whatever), where the LG version is what we today call paladin.
<p>Regard again :)</p>
<p>Jack</p>Rothandalantearic wrote:I wanted to point out here Tatter that the Paladin is actually one of the only core classes that gives you solid roleplaying guidelines...
Point taken. That's a benefit for many, but my players and I tend to revel in going 'outside the box.' That might very well explain some of our aversion -- it's hard to get too far outside the paladin's box, because of the roleplaying guidelines. Saern wrote:I agree with Kahoolin- a non-LG paladin isn't a paladin.
Arguably true....Tatterdemalion2007-02-09T17:54:24ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Fatespinner (RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#392012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T17:37:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Saern wrote:</div><blockquote>However, I will pose another question- if clerics aren't supposed to be the default priest, what is? I don't have a problem with them not being the defaults, but the rules don't state a clear alternative. Experts with ranks in Heal, Knowledge (religion), and Spellcraft? </blockquote><p>Adepts, most likely. However, in my campaigns I tend to use the 'cloistered cleric' variant from UA as the 'majority' of priests in the world. It makes more sense to me that only a minority of the holy men (and women!) of the world would be trained to use a variety of weapons, heavy armors, and shields. Most priests are essentially wizards with divine spells and turning ability.
<p>Obviously, the more martial the deity, the higher the cleric-to-'priest' ratio.</p>Saern wrote:However, I will pose another question- if clerics aren't supposed to be the default priest, what is? I don't have a problem with them not being the defaults, but the rules don't state a clear alternative. Experts with ranks in Heal, Knowledge (religion), and Spellcraft?
Adepts, most likely. However, in my campaigns I tend to use the 'cloistered cleric' variant from UA as the 'majority' of priests in the world. It makes more sense to me that only a minority of the holy men (and...Fatespinner (RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32)2007-02-09T17:37:56ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Saernhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#382012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T16:57:07Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kurocyn wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Just want to chime in here real quick...</p>
<p>Saern, wow. I really like the Doom Knight class. But I also felt that the Apocalypse was a little bit too much... like the idea though. </p>
<p>I applaud you for the pestilence ability. Very nice touch. Balances the remove disease of the paladin nicely. </p>
<p>And the fell bolt, again, very nice. ^ ^</p>
<p>Mind if I use the class? </p>
<p>-Kurocyn</p>
<p>post scriptum - Count me in the "Death to all paladins camp" </blockquote><p>I would be honored. :) Just tweak Apocalypse as you see fit (I think once a month sounds good).Kurocyn wrote:Just want to chime in here real quick...
Saern, wow. I really like the Doom Knight class. But I also felt that the Apocalypse was a little bit too much... like the idea though.
I applaud you for the pestilence ability. Very nice touch. Balances the remove disease of the paladin nicely.
And the fell bolt, again, very nice. ^ ^
Mind if I use the class?
-Kurocyn
post scriptum - Count me in the "Death to all paladins camp"
I would be honored. :) Just tweak Apocalypse as you...Saern2007-02-09T16:57:07ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Jebadiah U.https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#372012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T16:50:23Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Celestial Healer wrote:</div><blockquote><p> This is my wish list for a new edition (Pelor grant that it not come too soon):</p>
<p>A Champion-ish class that can be tailored to individual deities/ethoi to replace paladins, blackguards, and the like.</p>
<p>A Cleric that isn't quite so martial. More spell-casting oriented, lower HD, etc. That way there will be less overlap with the Champion, above.</p>
<p>My biggest wish (somewhat related): Both of these classes are equally adept at healing, as are druids and any other healers. I would love it if players could have many choices when taking on a healer role without sacrificing how effectively they can keep their party on the mend. </blockquote><p>Ditto.Celestial Healer wrote:This is my wish list for a new edition (Pelor grant that it not come too soon):
A Champion-ish class that can be tailored to individual deities/ethoi to replace paladins, blackguards, and the like.
A Cleric that isn't quite so martial. More spell-casting oriented, lower HD, etc. That way there will be less overlap with the Champion, above.
My biggest wish (somewhat related): Both of these classes are equally adept at healing, as are druids and any other healers. I...Jebadiah U.2007-02-09T16:50:23ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Kurocynhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#362012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T16:33:28Z<p>Just want to chime in here real quick...</p>
<p>Saern, wow. I really like the Doom Knight class. But I also felt that the Apocalypse was a little bit too much... like the idea though. </p>
<p>I applaud you for the pestilence ability. Very nice touch. Balances the remove disease of the paladin nicely. </p>
<p>And the fell bolt, again, very nice. ^ ^</p>
<p>Mind if I use the class? </p>
<p>-Kurocyn</p>
<p>post scriptum - Count me in the "Death to all paladins camp"</p>Just want to chime in here real quick...
Saern, wow. I really like the Doom Knight class. But I also felt that the Apocalypse was a little bit too much... like the idea though.
I applaud you for the pestilence ability. Very nice touch. Balances the remove disease of the paladin nicely.
And the fell bolt, again, very nice. ^ ^
Mind if I use the class?
-Kurocyn
post scriptum - Count me in the "Death to all paladins camp"Kurocyn2007-02-09T16:33:28ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Celestial Healerhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#352012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T16:28:17Z<p>This is my wish list for a new edition (Pelor grant that it not come too soon):</p>
<p>A Champion-ish class that can be tailored to individual deities/ethoi to replace paladins, blackguards, and the like.</p>
<p>A Cleric that isn't quite so martial. More spell-casting oriented, lower HD, etc. That way there will be less overlap with the Champion, above.</p>
<p>My biggest wish (somewhat related): Both of these classes are equally adept at healing, as are druids and any other healers. I would love it if players could have many choices when taking on a healer role without sacrificing how effectively they can keep their party on the mend.</p>This is my wish list for a new edition (Pelor grant that it not come too soon):
A Champion-ish class that can be tailored to individual deities/ethoi to replace paladins, blackguards, and the like.
A Cleric that isn't quite so martial. More spell-casting oriented, lower HD, etc. That way there will be less overlap with the Champion, above.
My biggest wish (somewhat related): Both of these classes are equally adept at healing, as are druids and any other healers. I would love it if players...Celestial Healer2007-02-09T16:28:17ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Aunorhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#342012-01-13T18:32:16Z2007-02-09T16:06:03Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tatterdemalion wrote:</div><blockquote>...But the paladin is a uniquely narrow class, with fewer choices than any other. And more people hate it that any other — it's a jarring anomaly in the game.</blockquote><p>That is the point and that is the power (for a DM) of the Paladin.
<p>Paladin’s can simply make a campaign AWESOME!</p>
<p>If done properly the Paladin is the greatest tool for a DM, you can steer the entire campaign by forcing the Paladin to go the direction you need him to go.</p>
<p>I tend to shower the Paladin with everything he could hope for, make him the most central figure in the group from the perspective of COMBAT only.</p>
<p>The party needs him… his is the Lancelot… he goes… the party goes. </p>
<p>However, everything outside of combat makes the Paladin a pain.</p>
<p>Things must be kept secret… information to him must be limited. </p>
<p>As strong holds are raised, the stakes become higher, the rumors and questions become greater and greater… </p>
<p>Think about it… what a high pedestal this knight has been placed… do you think the player of the Paladin wants to fall from grace… all he is held in strangle hold of his grace… and his friends around him have placed all of this at risk.</p>
<p>Stick to the rules… grow the Paladin in to a strong force of might, law and good… and temp all around him to betray him in secret (by small measure)… time and again… until a tipping point is reached.</p>
<p>The fall of a Paladin is AWESOME in its effect… and the path back to atonement can form character bonds you can’t believe…</p>
<p>Force Paladins play to the letter of the law… and shades of grey al around him.</p>Tatterdemalion wrote:...But the paladin is a uniquely narrow class, with fewer choices than any other. And more people hate it that any other -- it's a jarring anomaly in the game.
That is the point and that is the power (for a DM) of the Paladin. Paladin’s can simply make a campaign AWESOME!
If done properly the Paladin is the greatest tool for a DM, you can steer the entire campaign by forcing the Paladin to go the direction you need him to go.
I tend to shower the Paladin with...Aunor2007-02-09T16:06:03ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Saernhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#332012-01-13T18:32:15Z2007-02-09T15:21:24Z<p>You could make clerics have a chained selection available at first or second level, like rangers with their combat styles. They could choose to be skilled, militant, or some other option.</p>
<p>I kind of like the idea of just experts being the typical priest, since I had a thread not too long ago bemoaning the overabundance of healing magic for a game world's NPC population, which I consider bad for storylines. The only problem I would then have is deciding when to make someone a cleric and when to make them a mundane priest. I already have trouble deciding when to make that same choice between an expert with a lot of Knowledge skills and a wizard.</p>You could make clerics have a chained selection available at first or second level, like rangers with their combat styles. They could choose to be skilled, militant, or some other option.
I kind of like the idea of just experts being the typical priest, since I had a thread not too long ago bemoaning the overabundance of healing magic for a game world's NPC population, which I consider bad for storylines. The only problem I would then have is deciding when to make someone a cleric and when...Saern2007-02-09T15:21:24ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Peruhain of Brithondyhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#322012-01-13T18:32:14Z2007-02-09T02:45:28Z<p>In answer to Saern, I've been playing with the idea of opening the cleric class up even further so that they are not specifically "divine warrior" types. Why should a cleric of Boccob or Fharlanghn or Olidammara wear plate armor and carry a mace? Stupid. Why should they even have heavy armor and shield proficiencies? So, I'm playing with the idea of letting clerics trade in those proficiencies in exchange for either (a) more feats specifically appropriate to their religious orders, or (b) more skill points per level. (I'm partial toward campaigns that make great use of skills). Let some clerics not be very martially-inclined at all. Let some be even more martially inclined than they already are by granting them access to more feats keyed to their deity's favored weapon. Etc.</p>
<p>As for non-elite, non-martial clerics like the village priest, if you want them not to have access to magic power (weren't most priests in Dragonlance like this), make them experts, otherwise you can make them adepts with a spell list modified to be appropriate to their deity (an easy way to do this is to say they have access to spells on one or more of their deity's domain lists as part of the normal spells they prepare. If you don't want to overpower the class, replace one spell per day with a domain spell and allow them to pick one domain only.</p>In answer to Saern, I've been playing with the idea of opening the cleric class up even further so that they are not specifically "divine warrior" types. Why should a cleric of Boccob or Fharlanghn or Olidammara wear plate armor and carry a mace? Stupid. Why should they even have heavy armor and shield proficiencies? So, I'm playing with the idea of letting clerics trade in those proficiencies in exchange for either (a) more feats specifically appropriate to their religious orders, or (b)...Peruhain of Brithondy2007-02-09T02:45:28ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?kahoolinhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#312012-01-13T18:32:14Z2007-02-09T02:36:35Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Saern wrote:</div><blockquote>I agree with Kahoolin- a non-LG paladin <i>isn't</i> a paladin. It's something else, which is why I made the Doomknight (good call on the use frequency, Fatespinner!). It <b>is</b> different from the paladin, because it is a completely different archetype.</blockquote><p>There is definitely an archetypal evil warrior in fantasy media that is more than just a reversed paladin. I think the Doomknight is a pretty good go at defining them as a base class.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Saern wrote:</div><blockquote>I for one like barbarians and bards being allowed only as non-lawful, druids having to be some type of neutral, and paladins only as LG. It gives flavor with its structure, without which I feel these classes would be much more bland.</blockquote><p>I agree with you there too.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Saern wrote:</div><blockquote>However, I will pose another question- if clerics aren't supposed to be the default priest, what is? I don't have a problem with them not being the defaults, but the rules don't state a clear alternative. Experts with ranks in Heal, Knowledge (religion), and Spellcraft? </blockquote><p>Something like that. Perhaps an Adept, with a deity specific spell list? Default priests should definitely be an NPC class, as I can't see any reason why the priests of ALL religions would be capable warriors (and clerics <i>are</i> capable secondary combatants) with high hit points. There is definitely a gap in D&D for divine casters who are not at all combat oriented. That's why I suggested a caster with poor BAB and D4 Hit Dice earlier, as a better fit for the priest archetype. Clerics are much more like Sohei from Oriental Adventures, but the existence of the paladin makes this less obvious.Saern wrote:I agree with Kahoolin- a non-LG paladin isn't a paladin. It's something else, which is why I made the Doomknight (good call on the use frequency, Fatespinner!). It is different from the paladin, because it is a completely different archetype.
There is definitely an archetypal evil warrior in fantasy media that is more than just a reversed paladin. I think the Doomknight is a pretty good go at defining them as a base class. Saern wrote:I for one like barbarians and bards being...kahoolin2007-02-09T02:36:35ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Saernhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#302012-01-13T18:32:14Z2007-02-09T02:07:00Z<p>•sigh• Every month, there's a thread about paladins, and the first few times, I posted up my views. If you want in depth stuff, look up the other three paladin threads. To simplfy- they aren't sticks in the mud unless you make them that way, and aren't nearly as limiting as some people initially assume.</p>
<p>I agree with Kahoolin- a non-LG paladin <i>isn't</i> a paladin. It's something else, which is why I made the Doomknight (good call on the use frequency, Fatespinner!). It <b>is</b> different from the paladin, because it is a completely different archetype.</p>
<p>I for one like barbarians and bards being allowed only as non-lawful, druids having to be some type of neutral, and paladins only as LG. It gives flavor with its structure, without which I feel these classes would be much more bland.</p>
<p>However, I will pose another question- if clerics aren't supposed to be the default priest, what is? I don't have a problem with them not being the defaults, but the rules don't state a clear alternative. Experts with ranks in Heal, Knowledge (religion), and Spellcraft?</p>*sigh* Every month, there's a thread about paladins, and the first few times, I posted up my views. If you want in depth stuff, look up the other three paladin threads. To simplfy- they aren't sticks in the mud unless you make them that way, and aren't nearly as limiting as some people initially assume.
I agree with Kahoolin- a non-LG paladin isn't a paladin. It's something else, which is why I made the Doomknight (good call on the use frequency, Fatespinner!). It is different from the...Saern2007-02-09T02:07:00ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Rothandalantearichttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#292012-01-13T18:32:14Z2007-02-09T01:44:02Z<p>KnightErrantJR touched on something I think is key to making the paladin. Code of Conduct, these written in stone rules that they must follow or fall from grace. What other class has such great roleplaying aspects? </p>
<p>Speaking toward making non-LG paladins this Code of Conduct idea makes it as easy as you can ask for. The LG Code of Coduct says yadda yadda yadda... Follow it, and you are granted the following abilites. For other alignments just create a new code! How simple.</p>
<p>I would have no problems allowing a paladin from the UA set as long as the player and I came up with a written Code of Conduct for the character to follow. Its like handing an actor his motivations before he steps on stage!</p>
<p>-Roth</p>KnightErrantJR touched on something I think is key to making the paladin. Code of Conduct, these written in stone rules that they must follow or fall from grace. What other class has such great roleplaying aspects?
Speaking toward making non-LG paladins this Code of Conduct idea makes it as easy as you can ask for. The LG Code of Coduct says yadda yadda yadda... Follow it, and you are granted the following abilites. For other alignments just create a new code! How simple.
I would have no...Rothandalantearic2007-02-09T01:44:02ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Rothandalantearichttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#282012-01-13T18:32:14Z2007-02-09T01:28:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tatterdemalion wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Durendal wrote:</div><blockquote>Here's a thought... When the PHB says a Paladin won't associate with anyone it knows to be evil, it really makes me wonder - shouldn't this be true of anyone who is LG...</blockquote><p>I don't think so. <i>Lawful Good</i> isn't a synonym for uncompromising — <i>paladin</i> is. Which is part of the reason I so dislike the class — such limits on roleplaying :/
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Durendal wrote:</div><blockquote>To the point anyway, I'm generally in favor of the UA pally's, although I agree that some of the variations come off simplistic. Perhaps if there was a means of tying Paladins to one of their god's domains... ??? </blockquote>I think you're spot-on here. I'm willing to take the UA variants as written, but customizing the paladin to his/her deity is an <i>excellent</i> idea. </blockquote><p>I wanted to point out here Tatter that the Paladin is actually one of the only core classes that gives you solid roleplaying guidelines. This may not be the case with all groups, but my boys and girls sometimes have a hard time "roleplaying" their characters. Much of their own personality bleeds through no matter what they have given me as a back story.
<p>With the paladin yes, you have a narrower range of where your character can go, but some players Need that structure to help them play the game and enjoy it. </p>
<p>For the record, we do have one paladin in our group and he plays his part with relish and takes all the ribbing with a half smile.</p>
<p>just my two coppers,
<br />
-Roth</p>
<p>now back to reading the rest of the posts after Tatters...</p>Tatterdemalion wrote:Durendal wrote:Here's a thought... When the PHB says a Paladin won't associate with anyone it knows to be evil, it really makes me wonder - shouldn't this be true of anyone who is LG...
I don't think so. Lawful Good isn't a synonym for uncompromising -- paladin is. Which is part of the reason I so dislike the class -- such limits on roleplaying :/ Durendal wrote:To the point anyway, I'm generally in favor of the UA pally's, although I agree that some of the variations...Rothandalantearic2007-02-09T01:28:34ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Kirth Gersenhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#272012-01-13T18:32:13Z2007-02-08T23:54:52Z<p>I like paladins. I don't even mind playing LG ones as written, but my favorite is to muliclass them with those great splatbook feats like "Devoted Performer," et al. I've played a paladin/bard (great fun!), a paladin/psychic warrior (think Duncan Idaho from Dune), and, one of my favorites, a barbarian/paladin (he thought his "rage" was a holy spiritual trance). And, honestly, I really don't see why everyone dumps on them so much. I mean, yeah, they suck compared to clerics, but ALL classes suck compared to clerics unless you're in a campaign where skill points matter a lot.</p>I like paladins. I don't even mind playing LG ones as written, but my favorite is to muliclass them with those great splatbook feats like "Devoted Performer," et al. I've played a paladin/bard (great fun!), a paladin/psychic warrior (think Duncan Idaho from Dune), and, one of my favorites, a barbarian/paladin (he thought his "rage" was a holy spiritual trance). And, honestly, I really don't see why everyone dumps on them so much. I mean, yeah, they suck compared to clerics, but ALL classes...Kirth Gersen2007-02-08T23:54:52ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?kahoolinhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#262012-01-13T18:32:13Z2007-02-08T23:07:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Larry Lichman wrote:</div><blockquote>As for portraying this role with a Cleric, the Cleric will always fall short of the Paladin for combat. Clerics take longer to improve their attack bonus/# of attacks than Paladins do, and are restricted on the weapons they use. This makes the Paladin a more formidable combat class than the Cleric, just as the Cleric is a more formidable spellcaster.</blockquote><p>But to balance the game you have to make sacrifices. You want to be a holy warrior, cool, you get divine powers BUT suffer in terms of combat ability. The paladin (if we are talking pure game stats and not fantasy archetypes) fills an unecessary niche of being sort of like a cleric (the clear holy/unholy warrior archetype) but better at fighting and worse at holiness. But hey, maybe some people think the paladin is better than the cleric as a class,a nbd represents the archetype of holy warrior better. All I'm saying is that they fill the same niche in the game but their divine/combat abilities are balanced differently. The cleric's are balanced more evenly, and not only that the cleric is more open in terms of character concept. The paladin has all this baggage of being some sort of a LG Grail Knight, most of it actually built into his rules.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Larry Lichman wrote:</div><blockquote><p>As for a Lawful Bard, Chaotic Monk, or Non-Neutral Druid, why not? As long as there's a good reason for the difference in alignment, it should be possible. Maybe the Lawful Bard is the son of the town's sheriff and never left the town? Or the Chaotic Monk is from a monastery that became cursed, resulting in an alignment shift in its membership? Or the Non-Neutral Druid's grove became polluted by the refuse of a neighboring town, causing him to turn to evil?
</p>
</blockquote><p>I agree, but we aren't talking about individual characters here with valid background reasons for their traits. We're talking about entire new classes with multiple members that are just like the paladin only not LG.
<p>Let me put it another way: To demand paladins of other alignments with different codes of honour is sort of like saying "the druidic ethos is too restrictive. There should be an order of LG city-based druids who don't care about nature. Instead of their nature-based powers they get powers to detect and smite evil, and their spells are different. Other than that they are just druids." My point is, how is that a druid?</p>
<p>The mention of the Champion class someone made above sounds interesting. I can understand the desire for a class like this, but it needs to be open and not tied much to any archetype, like the other base classes. I'm still convinced that the paladin is tied too much to a particular archetype which, as KnightErrantJr said, is not that central to fantasy anymore. </p>
<p>I just think rather than make nine different types of paladins with magical warhorses/nightmares and laying on hands/curse hands, it might be more efficient to make a base class that can be easily turned to any alignment or code, like the cleric. The champion sounds like such a class, but of course it's easier for Monte Cook because he doesn't have to deal with the existence of Good and Evil like in regular D&D!</p>
<p>OK that's my 2 cents for what it's worth. Hopefully I didn't confuse the discussion too much...</p>Larry Lichman wrote:As for portraying this role with a Cleric, the Cleric will always fall short of the Paladin for combat. Clerics take longer to improve their attack bonus/# of attacks than Paladins do, and are restricted on the weapons they use. This makes the Paladin a more formidable combat class than the Cleric, just as the Cleric is a more formidable spellcaster.
But to balance the game you have to make sacrifices. You want to be a holy warrior, cool, you get divine powers BUT suffer...kahoolin2007-02-08T23:07:13ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Dragonchess Playerhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#252012-01-13T18:32:13Z2007-02-08T22:51:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tatterdemalion wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Peruhain of Brithondy wrote:</div><blockquote> In defense of paladins, I think they ARE an archetype of fantasy, and I don't think they have to be played as though you have a stick up your...</blockquote><p>I agree, but I do think that the archetype you allude to, and the paladin class itself, is based upon a spectacularly uncompromising moral code that is hard to get around and still stay true to the spirit or letter of the rules. IMO :)
</p>
</blockquote><p>Like the historical code of chivalry, which it's based on, the paladin's code is <i>supposed</i> to be difficult to follow. The code is what <i>makes</i> the paladin into a holy warrior instead of a fighter. Of course, the DM and the rest of the party shouldn't be causing the paladin extra grief by deliberately setting up no-win situations or working against the paladin's code, either.
<p>Paladins (of any variant) in a party change the dyanamic of the entire campaign. They cause the conflicts between Good/Evil and Law/Chaos to become a central theme for just about every adventure. Some groups enjoy this and others don't.</p>
<p>Using the rules for variant and/or prestige paladins in UA is always an option for integrating them more fully into a campaign. Each variant should follow a different, but equally restrictive, code that he/she swears to uphold.</p>Tatterdemalion wrote:Peruhain of Brithondy wrote: In defense of paladins, I think they ARE an archetype of fantasy, and I don't think they have to be played as though you have a stick up your...
I agree, but I do think that the archetype you allude to, and the paladin class itself, is based upon a spectacularly uncompromising moral code that is hard to get around and still stay true to the spirit or letter of the rules. IMO :)
Like the historical code of chivalry, which it's based on, the...Dragonchess Player2007-02-08T22:51:19ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Bling Blinghttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#242012-01-13T18:32:13Z2007-02-08T22:39:18Z<p>Not that I have much to add here, but I'm in favor of making paladins more of a title than a class, that is, simple fighter/clerics that serve as the militant champions of their faith. IMHO, paladins as a stand-alone class aren't necessary. As fighter/clerics, they have much more flexibility with far fewer restictions and they don't require any tweeking of powers to make them faith-specific; their chosen domains already do that. Keep it simple, I say.</p>Not that I have much to add here, but I'm in favor of making paladins more of a title than a class, that is, simple fighter/clerics that serve as the militant champions of their faith. IMHO, paladins as a stand-alone class aren't necessary. As fighter/clerics, they have much more flexibility with far fewer restictions and they don't require any tweeking of powers to make them faith-specific; their chosen domains already do that. Keep it simple, I say.Bling Bling2007-02-08T22:39:18ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Tequila Sunrisehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#232012-01-13T18:32:13Z2007-02-08T21:40:17Z<p>How do I feel about tweaking the paladin? Hahaha, need I even answer?</p>
<p>Naturally, I'm all for tweaking the paladin. When I run a game, one of the first house rules on the list is 'disregard alignment restrictions and universal codes of conduct' which makes paladins available to every god. If that's too simple for one of my players, I've got nothing against stealing a class from somewhere else (like UA or Saern) or making my own.</p>How do I feel about tweaking the paladin? Hahaha, need I even answer?
Naturally, I'm all for tweaking the paladin. When I run a game, one of the first house rules on the list is 'disregard alignment restrictions and universal codes of conduct' which makes paladins available to every god. If that's too simple for one of my players, I've got nothing against stealing a class from somewhere else (like UA or Saern) or making my own.Tequila Sunrise2007-02-08T21:40:17ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Larry Lichmanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#222012-01-13T18:32:10Z2007-02-08T16:07:12Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">kahoolin wrote:</div><blockquote><p> One more thing though, the paladin is such a strong archetype that a paladin who is not LG and doesn't ride a horse and smite evil is not really a paladin IMO. It's just a holy warrior of a non-LG faith, and should probably be portrayed with a cleric. It seems odd to demand non-LG paladins as if every alignement has a right to them. Should there be lawful bards or chaotic monks? How about non-neutral druids?
</p>
</blockquote><p>Why shouldn't all faiths have access to a Paladin, if all faiths have access to Clerics? Shouldn't each faith have a warrior granted special abilities by his/her Patron Deity to become a Crusading Knight for Defending the Faith? The methods and abilities may differ, but each faith should have their own version. The variants in UA allow this to happen with a minimum of work by Players or DMs. Saern's awesome post is another option that works well to serve this same role.
<p>As for portraying this role with a Cleric, the Cleric will always fall short of the Paladin for combat. Clerics take longer to improve their attack bonus/# of attacks than Paladins do, and are restricted on the weapons they use. This makes the Paladin a more formidable combat class than the Cleric, just as the Cleric is a more formidable spellcaster.</p>
<p>As for a Fighter taking the role, they do not gain access to the gifts a Paladin is granted by his/her Patron Deity in exchange for their faith and loyalty. They may get more feats, but abilities such as Detect Evil, Immunity to Disease, and Aura of Courage (among others) cannot be gained by a straight Fighter.</p>
<p>If you feel the role of Paladin can be better suited by cross classing, why not cross class the Paladin? Take the Paladin up to middle to high levels (8-10), then branch off. If you want more combat, branch into Fighter. Sure, you can never level up in Paladin again after branching off, but most Paladin's abilities are granted at lower levels, which allows your character access to the abilities a straight Fighter would never otherwise gain.</p>
<p>Taking it another step, why not do the same with a Cleric? Cross into Cleric after Paladin, and you'll have a devout follower who is strong in combat, and beginning to take the next step in becoming closer to his/her deity.</p>
<p>As for a Lawful Bard, Chaotic Monk, or Non-Neutral Druid, why not? As long as there's a good reason for the difference in alignment, it should be possible. Maybe the Lawful Bard is the son of the town's sheriff and never left the town? Or the Chaotic Monk is from a monastery that became cursed, resulting in an alignment shift in its membership? Or the Non-Neutral Druid's grove became polluted by the refuse of a neighboring town, causing him to turn to evil?</p>
<p>The beauty of D&D is that it is adaptable. Any class/alignment combination can be played if there is a good reason for it, either in a character concept, or a storyline leading to an adventure.</p>kahoolin wrote:One more thing though, the paladin is such a strong archetype that a paladin who is not LG and doesn't ride a horse and smite evil is not really a paladin IMO. It's just a holy warrior of a non-LG faith, and should probably be portrayed with a cleric. It seems odd to demand non-LG paladins as if every alignement has a right to them. Should there be lawful bards or chaotic monks? How about non-neutral druids?
Why shouldn't all faiths have access to a Paladin, if all faiths have...Larry Lichman2007-02-08T16:07:12ZRe: Forums: 3.5/d20/OGL: Variations on the paladin?Durendalhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2h8os?Variations-on-the-paladin#212012-01-13T18:32:10Z2007-02-08T16:04:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">kahoolin wrote:</div><blockquote>One more thing though, the paladin is such a strong archetype that a paladin who is not LG and doesn't ride a horse and smite evil is not really a paladin IMO. It's just a holy warrior of a non-LG faith, and should probably be portrayed with a cleric.</blockquote><p>Okay, I can see that, point taken...by me anyway.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">kahoolin wrote:</div><blockquote>Should there be lawful bards or chaotic monks? How about non-neutral druids?</blockquote><p>Yes, yes, and why not.kahoolin wrote:One more thing though, the paladin is such a strong archetype that a paladin who is not LG and doesn't ride a horse and smite evil is not really a paladin IMO. It's just a holy warrior of a non-LG faith, and should probably be portrayed with a cleric.
Okay, I can see that, point taken...by me anyway. kahoolin wrote:Should there be lawful bards or chaotic monks? How about non-neutral druids?
Yes, yes, and why not.Durendal2007-02-08T16:04:02Z