I'm making a half-elf who's goal is to carve out a nation of/for other half-elves so they can have a homeland of sorts, and also inspires his allies in battle.
CHA is the obvious stand out stat. I'd also want him to be a decent front-line combatant, so paladin seems the obvious choice. I'm leaning towards the Holy Tactician archetype, but I have no idea on its effectiveness. Leadership is also pretty much a given.
My character is pretty much completely flexible, the only requirement being he remains a half-elf. I just wanted advice on which direction to go, feats etc.
Sorry, forgot to mention stats would be 20 point buy. I was thinking 16, 10, 14, 8, 10, 17 (15+2). Not really designed to be min/maxed, spread stats to be a good fighter and a competent leader.
Im actually making a class that fits this called a tactician. They aren't necessarily "leaders" persay, but their abilities make them very well-suited for the job. EDIT: take a look at the Leadership feat. If you want to go a route that has animal companion or mounts (or if you use a mount at all) you can, at later levels, look into adding a monstrous mount (see the feat) which pretty much makes it possible to ride a pegasus or even a dragon (Pretty awesome for a leader of a nation)
I like the sound of this, wyvern would probably be my choice, intelligent but don't stop and chat with the spellcaster every step of the way.
It sounds like you want a Daring Champion Cavalier to me. That way you get great leadership with Tactician and you will have a decent charisma for panache.
You'll want to choose Dual Minded, since your will save won't be the best. Order of the Lion sounds good to me for this character.
Paladins are notoriously bad rulers. Their code of conduct and the standards they hold themselves to, are qualities completely unsuited to rulership of anything other than a shiny lollipop-kingdom, where nothing ever goes wrong and nobody is trying anything nefarious.
If you really want it to, any class can become a ruler, since in most cases, a good ruler is defined by his decision-making, not his personal capabilities.
But when that is said and done, if you want something with mechanics that ties into ruling, I'd suggest Bard or a Cavalier.
-Nearyn
Cavalier of any type, especially a Daring Champion, will work.
5 levels of an Exemplar Brawler grant you access to Tactician, as well as counting all your Brawler levels as Cavalier levels for your Tactician ability, includes Cha- and leadership-based abilities, PLUS the use of Inspire Courage (this is important)
These two classes together give you access to the Battle Herald class without having to dip into Bard (for those non-magic campaigns).
A Lv1 Daring Champion Cavalier, lv5 Exemplar Brawler, lvX Battle Herald would be pretty cool, especially if you guys are going to lv15+.
----
The Sensei Monk also gives you Inspire Courage at lv1.
A Lv4 Daring Champion Cavalier, Lv1 Sensei Monk, LvX Battle Herald is thus equally as nasty, and more-quickly accessed, though you lose out on Martial Flexibility with the Tactician ability
Battle Herald is what I would go for instead of Paladin. Cavalier/Bard or Cavalier/Cleric (Evangelist) is how you get there. It really works well with Leadership, and if you end up in mass combat you rock even harder.
Paladins are notoriously bad rulers. Their code of conduct and the standards they hold themselves to, are qualities completely unsuited to rulership of anything other than a shiny lollipop-kingdom, where nothing ever goes wrong and nobody is trying anything nefarious.
If you really want it to, any class can become a ruler, since in most cases, a good ruler is defined by his decision-making, not his personal capabilities.
But when that is said and done, if you want something with mechanics that ties into ruling, I'd suggest Bard or a Cavalier.
-Nearyn
I will second this, if only on the idea that you might not face too many evil opponents. War is based off of conflicts of interest and loyalties lying on different sides. Most people tend to just be neutral sorts caught up in politics far larger than they are.
And since you are trying to build a racial nation when that race has no traditional land (which could be expanded upon through light skirmishes, negotiation, and alliances), then you are going to have to go on quite a bit of conquest, which might involve a lot of neutral opponents.
Overall, cavalier has a similar taste to paladin, but it is much, much more flexible morally. As people have suggested, daring champion can be nice, mostly because it can do sword and board without trading damage or a ton of feats (so you can get great AC). Regular cavalier with maybe beast rider archetype to get something nice and toothy can be good too, since it can serve as a flank buddy when charging is not an option.
Paladins are notoriously bad rulers. Their code of conduct and the standards they hold themselves to, are qualities completely unsuited to rulership of anything other than a shiny lollipop-kingdom, where nothing ever goes wrong and nobody is trying anything nefarious.
I'm not sure I agree with this. One example of a historical figure that I think pretty closely followed a Paladin-style code would be George Washington. I'm sure that other examples could be brought up as well.
The idea that cheating, lying, selfishness and similar behavior is the key to building a long term prosperous society seems fairly silly to me.
I certainly don't want to derail this into a historical discussion of America's goodness and flaws. I expect most though would say that George Washington had a pretty strong moral code that would generally be considered lawful and good, and that he was at least above average as a leader. Presuming we can all accept that much we can move beyond any particular historical quibbles and accept my illustration.
Granted, any Paladin as a ruler will face moral issues. That should be true of anyone as a ruler. I would submit though that the only successful foundation to build a prosperous society would be be at least leaning good. Evil can be successful, particularly in the short term, as a parasite on a good society, but you can't really build anything long term based on those fundamental precepts. Really, that is why we consider those things to be 'evil'.
I believe a Paladin would make a very good ruler. I will admit though that such a person would have to think long and hard about aspects that usually a PC can sidestep. Such as just war theory and similar philosophical exercises.
I would say that the American Revolution had a lot of advantages absent in this case.
The Americas were a vast spread of land that acted as the raw material producer in that imperial relationship. The revolutionaries were also defending their home turf, and the royal armies had to go through a huge trip across the ocean in order to send supplies and troops. The Americas also had an advantage in the fact that Britain had enemies- the French were willing to lend expertise and supplies.
In this case, there is no geographical advantage, since there is no land currently under half elf control (unless this setting just has that). So getting a foothold would be the first priority.
Without a political mess like in Kingmaker, where there is a large amount of good land that is left unclaimed by a large power due to fear of retaliation against expansion, the easiest way to get land is to ally yourself with a larger power. For instance, providing aid in some plan for conquest by a friendly party (lets say an elf kingdom with big plans). Then you might be able to get some degree of captured land as part of the deal. Of course, if that does happen, it is likely because the larger power decided to use you as a buffer nation against the people you took land from (and other enterprising neighbors).
Overall, when you start from nothing, you have to think in the short term just to have ANYTHING to use for the longterm. So lie, cheat, and steal until you have enough to go legit. That is how the Italian mafia went.
The problem with "Washington was a paladin" is that Washington had no abilities whatsoever of a Paladin, even in a fantastical sense.
Lay on Hands? Nope.
Smite Evil? Nope.
Mercies? Divine Bond? Channel Energy? Nope, Niet, Nein.
Was he Lawful Good? Well... maybe.
The Battle of Trenton SERIOUSLY brings into question just how "Lawful" Washington really was, considering it was a sneak attack against drunken mercenaries on what was always considered a day of armistace. If Washington was Lawful Good, he was Lawful Good with Leanings towards Douchebag for certain.
Washington was a much more like a Cavalier, specifically a Strategist Cavalier.
He may well also have been a Battle Herald, with Inspire Courage granted by a non-spellcaster class (Sensei Monk, Exemplar Brawler, etc.).
When considering whether a paladin might make a good ruler of a nation, I think it's important to step back and remember that not every paladin is a demon-slaying Iomedaean.
Consider Abadar, for example:
- Protect roads and keep travelers from harm. Abadar paladins don't care whether you're good or evil, whether you're trading in wheat or tobacco. If you're keeping the peace and not harming anyone, a paladin of Abadar will fight to preserve your freedom to use the roads.
- Bandits are a plague. Really not an issue at all. All kingdoms consider bandits to be a problem, and a kingdom ruled by a paladin of Abadar would simply prioritize dealing with such threats over others.
- Corruption in the courts is the greatest corruption of civilization. Adherents of Abadar believe that the courts must remain fair and impartial in order to uphold the tenets of civilization. They're not going to put up with evil nobles trying to buy their way out of a conviction, but neither would they condone convicting someone simply because they have committed evil acts other than those they are accused of.
- I am an aid to markets. A nation led by a paladin of Abadar would be all about trade and commerce. They don't tolerate theft or deceit, but nobody likes theft and most modern countries spend large sums combating problems with deceit. Consider that 'deceit' in the market means things like selling flour bulked up with plaster or selling vials of colored water as 'potions'. This doesn't mean merchants can't bargain for better prices, just that they can't cheat their clients.
- I make opportunities and teach others to recognize them. A paladin of Abadar would be all about having a strong education system, building schools and libraries, but isn't going to force people into taking advantage of the opportunities given. Abadar is all about showing that civilization is superior... and thus people will always willingly choose its benefits.
I really see no reason that a paladin of Abadar wouldn't be a perfectly ideal candidate for ruling a kingdom. Paladins lead by example, but only the most egregious zealots expect everyone else to actually live up to their high standards.
|
The best leaders are flexible. When you have the resources to act kindly you do so, when your kingdom is in jeopardy you take whatever options are available. A paladin will constantly narrow down his portfolio of options.
Though depending on the goal and approach of the country's growth, different characters will be better / worse suited.
- An army producing military country would be best at expanding and would need a strong leader. Someone who can head out and practically offer themselves up as the army will. A paladin can't be this. A barbarian, ranger or similar class but with more skills would work. While a Fighter doubtfully would be enough and a Bard would propably be assasined.
- A conspiring nation, using the ill-will of it's nations to turn themselves on eachother would benefit from an intelligent Bard, Wizard or the like.
The leader should reflect his people. Though a bard or other skill-oriented 6-skillranked class become the best available classes unless you expect to be able to have a trustworthy and effective court.
If you want melee combat character, remember that the team is more important than the individual person in a war. An intelligent cleric will fall short with a 20pt buy. Check out the "Base classes", those are typically based of combinations of martial and support classes, built into 1 class.
The warpriest, inquisitor & the various barbarian spin-offs should fit your concept.
Though an investigator would be a nice replacement of the bard.
Cavalier/bard(or cleric) into battle herald. You would be the strong knightly leader who buffs his allies to overcome the odds. Really fun to play, and very customize-able.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BbS5z7Ls4D7IejlbIONq0NJyQtPK1wWJU2olTXw lRUA/pub
Link to battle herald guide.
Really like all the suggestions, and thank you to everyone for answering. Cavalier, maybe Warpriest will be the classes I'll look into, and possibly the battle herald.
The character would remain a front line warrior, someone with a dream and is prepared to fight for it, relying on strength of arms and sheer willpower to achieve his goals. He would have a more skill orientated character as a close friend to help out with actions that require a nit more planning and cunning.
Being English, I only know the barebones of American history, but I can reflect on our own monarchs when deciding a code and alignment:
Alfred the Great- Lawful Good. Perhaps the best king we've ever had. Unified a split country and held off the Danes, establishing modern courts, currency and military organisation.
William the Conqueror- Chaotic Neutral. Kept a brutal stranglehold on England with force, and caused a medieval apartheid between Normans and Saxons, however, paved the way for the Middle Ages in England.
John I- Neutral Evil. A week, greedy and vicious king, he plotted to steal the throne from his brother, warred on his own people and went back on his sworn word with Magna Carta. Also lost the crown jewels fleeing in the marshes.
Richard the Lionheart- Lawful Neutral. Spent most of his reign abroad at war, apparently couldn't even speak English. Still, he was loved by his people. Killed on the battlefield.
Edward I- Lawful Neutral. Able, strong, religious and educated, but also intimidating and ambitious. His subjects feared and respected him rather than loving him, he was an able politician and led conquests of Wales and Scotland. Not a man for second chances.
Henry V- Neutral. Won the famous battle of Agincourt, more interested in France than England. Strong willed, and sometimes merciless, he ordered the execution of French prisoner to prevent them rising up if the enemy broke his lines. Trusted the common man as well as nobles.
To me, it seems a much more flexible strategy would be needed if a country were to rise up from near nothing. If I was assured of the backing of a large population, it might not be an issue, but this character is essentially building a half elf Israel without the help of the UN.
To me, it seems a much more flexible strategy would be needed if a country were to rise up from near nothing. If I was assured of the backing of a large population, it might not be an issue, but this character is essentially building a half elf Israel without the help of the UN.
Worse than that, the people you are working with do not even have much of a shared religious background, nor a sense of unity because the land was their ancestor's homeland.
Instead, you have a race which is often made up of freewilled wanderers who might decide to flake and go back to wandering if things get though.
I seriously believe that making a mercenary group, and using that to build up a military force, wealth, and connections first would be a wise idea.
Adding magic to the mix:
Armor
Breastplate of Command 25,400 gp -- +2 Cha checks, +2 Leadeship score, +2 Fear Save to troops <360'
Rings
Ring of the Ecclesiarch 28,500 gp -- +5 Diplomacy, +5 K(Religion), double followers, followers get +4 Will vs Enchantment
Rods
Suzerain Scepter 20,000 gp -- +5 Diplomacy, K(Nobility), 1/d Good Hope 7 allies, double followers, Bless on cohort/companion/familiar/mount/animal charmed or summoned, moral bonus on such add +1
Wondrous Items
Lord's Banner (Crusades) 100,000 gp -- 40' radius Hallow
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+1) 27,500 gp -- Cha +1 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+2) 55,000 gp -- Cha +2 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+3) 82,500 gp -- Cha +3 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+4) 110,000 gp -- Cha +4 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+5) 137,500 gp -- Cha +5 inherent bonus
Crown of Conquest 24,600 gp -- +4 Intimidate, critting triggers a Prayer, +1 Leadership, followers/cohort get +1 attack & save vs. fear
Diadem of Inspiring Rule 4,500 gp -- +3 Leadership
Imperial Army Greathelm 29,000 gp -- +3 Leadership, followers/cohort get +1 attack & save vs. fear
Laurel of Command 30,000 gp -- swift to grant +2 attack, save, skill, ability checks for a turn, 1/day/person
Be careful of bonus types, as a number are the same.
/cevah
Edit: forgot the site name in the link. :-(
Adding magic to the mix:
Armor
Breastplate of Command 25,400 gp -- +2 Cha checks, +2 Leadeship score, +2 Fear Save to troops <360'
Rings
Ring of the Ecclesiarch 28,500 gp -- +5 Diplomacy, +5 K(Religion), double followers, followers get +4 Will vs Enchantment
Rods
Suzerain Scepter 20,000 gp -- +5 Diplomacy, K(Nobility), 1/d Good Hope 7 allies, double followers, Bless on cohort/companion/familiar/mount/animal charmed or summoned, moral bonus on such add +1
Wondrous Items
Lord's Banner (Crusades) 100,000 gp -- 40' radius Hallow
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+1) 27,500 gp -- Cha +1 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+2) 55,000 gp -- Cha +2 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+3) 82,500 gp -- Cha +3 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+4) 110,000 gp -- Cha +4 inherent bonus
Tome of Leadership and Influence (+5) 137,500 gp -- Cha +5 inherent bonus
Crown of Conquest 24,600 gp -- +4 Intimidate, critting triggers a Prayer, +1 Leadership, followers/cohort get +1 attack & save vs. fear
Diadem of Inspiring Rule 4,500 gp -- +3 Leadership
Imperial Army Greathelm 29,000 gp -- +3 Leadership, followers/cohort get +1 attack & save vs. fear
Laurel of Command 30,000 gp -- swift to grant +2 attack, save, skill, ability checks for a turn, 1/day/person
Be careful of bonus types, as a number are the same.
/cevah
Edit: The Lord's Banner should be (Leadership), but that appears to be MIA. The Laurel, while good, does not actually impinge on the Leadership feat. [search error.]