|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and no longer is bravery and clarity eminating from Tronan.
Hm. To be honest, paladin auras don't function in my game this way, because if they did, you wouldn't need detect good to detect them (and that's in the description of the spell.
So in my game, the sheriff might not have a clue at all, that Tronan is a Paladin (Class). And if Dalmert had proven as especially worthy, benevolent and pure of heart in the past, this might get Tronan actually in a lot of difficulties, even if he can prove that he has the class abilities of a paladin.
The thing is, we (the players) know that a paladin (class) won't lie. The sheriff most probably only knows that paladins claim to never lie.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I'm sorry for your loss, Mrs Dalmert. I found a guy called Tronan standing over his body, carrying a blood-stained sword. Apparently they'd been arguing."
"You've arrested Tronan, then?"
"No, he seemed like a good guy, and he said he hadn't done anything wrong, so I let him off with a warning."
"How did you know Tronan was a good guy?"
"You know, just a feeling. I became more confident just being around him. I'm sure a guy like that wouldn't break the law. Maybe Dalmert had it coming."
"You are a terrible Sherriff."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay.. wall of text warning
Aaaaand because of this whole thread the world I run for my housemates kids now has an entire order of paladins without paladin class levels that are just as respected and trusted if not more so then chosen or classed paladins because they don't get fancy gewgaws for following the code.. just more hardship.Aaaaaand because of this I did the same thing... Then made them all evil beings who abuse their power and went hidden for so long because they could. One person who was evil got in, got power, and since nobody could detect it, and there was no way to notice that anyone fell, they became an evil organization who have crushed all opposition while fooling the populace that they are good.
They are the next enemy for the PCs to crush, when a real Paladin shows up and realizes something is up with the fact that one of these "Paladins" is evil aligned.
EDIT:
To add... Also what bonuses are you giving class Paladins then? If they are suddenly deemed as "lesser" because they get divine power, then what normal class abilities do they get? Because Fighters get extra feats, and other classes get things for their class. Without Paladin abilities Paladins are really lame warriors... So if they are going to get the reputation for getting "gewgaws" then they should actually GET "gewgaws" that other classes don't...
So I recommend all class paladins in your world be given 1 feat per level and weapon/armor training to make up for the fact that their CLASS ABILITIES aren't actually any stronger than other class's abilities yet you are claiming, in universe, that they are.
Sounds to me like you just made a world where the entire planet thinks less of Paladins simply because they have divine abilities that put them on par with other classes...
Like I said... This is just some DM's dislike of Paladins OOC manifesting in game.
Universe actually.. it's a magical space faring game. Nope. No one thinks less of paladins or any of the ethical warriors in my universes because of anything.. they just don't think any more of them because of it. Paladins are preferred to antipaladins of course because no one want's a neighbor who wants to burn down your house and do unmentionable things with your misses.. But they recognize that paladins have an agenda that doesn't always mesh with theirs and treat them accordingly. They just figure someone who holds to a code without their devotion to it being so strong it gives them mystic powers might be slightly less b&+*#!# insane and open to reason.
No I don't hate paladins.. What I hate is the idiocy that keeps perpetrating that alignment and roleplaying checks make up for design balances. The alignment system in it's current form is fairly dodgey in its actual mechanics at best. The paladin code and ability loss for it's violation are better and more hard coded then alignment so it is a better step in the wrong direction at least since really you can pull the idea out of it's alignment roots and make up your own codes for other moral and ethical focused or inspired warriors. I should also point out I have zero interest in Golarion. Pathfinder is a system for me not a setting just like 3.5 was I care about the chassis here not the fluff. Lawful good being the only ones in the divinely inspired but not directly tied to worship sandbox is in a word stupid. Giving paladins a mechanical bonus because people don;t always shower them with love and respect is equally stupid. I also don't penalise people who want to play a weird race by making torch and pitchfork happy mobs show up to burn them all the time because guess what ? That's not a balance. We have ECL for that.
So what I'm going to do is break it down into what paladins have and what other classes have that has a vaguely close design space. Because paladins being special is fluff only really.
And here is the required rubber stamp boiler plate. The following bits are my opinion and I could care less if you agree or don't. I don't care if you listen to me or don't. This is my way. Not the right way, not the best way, not the one true way. It's the one I like.
First off paladins have smite. In the hands of a player for most games this ability is great since as a hero a large portion of what your fighting will be things that are evil. This is pretty good its a powerful damage boost for important fights. Alright so what do other stabby dudes have in the role ? Barbarians have rage and rage powers for it, fighters have weapon training, rangers have favored enemies. Barbarian has the in most situations easiest to use bonus since rage hard for the GM to mess with, followed by the fighter since he just needs the right weapon group, Then we have the paladin's smite and finally the rangers favored enemy since it needs the most GM cooperation to work. Other classes have abilities that are close enough, Inquisitors have judgements and bane, bards have performance, monks get flurry and increases damage dice and so on. Swashy falls sort of flat because his damage boost just keeps them in line with the other martials unboosted for the most part. Is being the antithetical opposition to a force unique to good ? No. Should it be ? Well that's an opinion but mine is also no. Fortunately since some other things get smite without the baggage the rules agree with me. Huzzah. Paladins aren't snowflakes in the damage adders here and theirs isn't always the best so this ones a wash. Moving on.
Divine grace. Hoah boy this is the most iconic one to me. Belief in oneself and ones nature as a paragon of what one represents is positively dripping with thematic badassery. Crunch wise this ability is also just the t#%* and for the longest time this bonus to saves was more or less exclusive without fairly serious investment. This ability makes sense with the code and is one of the few reasons I can see for it's justification. This one is aesthetics and function flowing into a beautiful whole. Does anything else have this as a freebie ? Nope. Monks just get all good saves, Superstition can come close and fighters get a sort of with the WM handbook. Does unflagging devotion to an ideal nail itself firmly to lawful good? Well no. They do hold hands very nicely though but since their chaotic evil buddies get it obviously this sort of thing is more tied to a code then an alignment. Cool fairly unique defensive ability. Props.
Lay on hands and it's riders. So this one is definitely all about the good since teh healz and we'll ignore the minor flavor fail of it just being better when used selfishly as a pool of bonus hit points. No one else has this nearly as good. Barby gets rage and some rage powers and a chance to use the least used polyhedron in the game at every level. Fighter gets some middling armor use bits, monk gets some ac, there are probably a few others but paladin shines here because it makes him probably the hardest someb@~@& to kill his faith pushing him on where less devoted men would fall. Oh and i guess he's good so.. he can help out bob too instead of just face murdering the bad guy... Cool i guess.
Bond thingy. So you get a wonder horse for acting in ways Roy Rogers would approve of. A'aight sure.. Functions as druid... wait So scratch the magic animal comes with good behavior since animal companions are popular and honestly not super hard to get. Good ability but not much inherant flavor. As for the Weapon bond.. Every time a bell rings another angel gets shoved into a sword to help you kill stuff.. Well it doesn't rhyme and a billion other classes have a way of the i'm awesome so is my stabby thing trope. It can be good
Spells. Every alignment has spells. These are the paladins situation buttons much like the fighter feats and the barbarian rage powers of limited use or situational bennies we all know spells are good we also know nearly everyone has them and a fair margin have better ones.
So going through all this Paladins are just a class.. a bunch of numbers that you combine with other numbers to give a flavor paint job to play whatever you want to play. The paladin ones aren't better enough for me to care at all about the hoops it has to jump through to get them especially since I don't believe any alignment is inherantly harder or more restrictive to play than any other and despite the several dozen times you've said otherwise I'm going to disagree.
Always.
Forever.
Is the paladin cool ? Hells yeah. Should it be alone as a force in the universe as an ethical enforcer ? Well That's an opinion question. I say no because there's really no sense behind it. It's arbitrary. We obviously have different games and different playstyles and both of us should go to bed probably go to bed thankful we don't play in the same circles. You think the paladin is an awesome ball of special and you don;t want anyone else to dirty it up with their dirty dirty ideas ? What evs. But seriously you've got to drop whatever it is you're doing that makes it seem like you think your way is the right way to play.
This thread got me curious, and I managed to find a brain disorder that Paladins get as a class feature. Link.. It's pretty interesting, I think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
I also find it mind-boggling that an entire order of good-aligned people could not determine someone was unfit for the order without magic. We kind of already do that in the real world.
No. You only think you do.
;-0
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please forgive me for not believing you are actually doing this.Totally forgiven, but I also totally am.
It makes a good story.
I'm going to stop you right there. Yes, it makes a good story. So does an individual who despite not having any grace from a god/idea (no super powers, in other words) is still willing and able to put themselves forward and do all the things a paladin would without the blessings that they get. No protections, nothing more than what they or anyone else might be able to do.
As reward for their righteousness, these holy champions are blessed with boons to aid them in their quests: powers to banish evil, heal the innocent, and inspire the faithful.
So with no reward from on high someone is still willing to be a Hero with a capital H and probably put their life in danger for others against things better left to the A Team.
As for your "you can FEEL their aura" .. how? How do you know that you aren't braver because there is a six foot bad@$$ with a glowing sword and shining armor standing right there ready to kill everything that is threatening your village? I know I'd feel braver with a Navy SEAL in full combat gear helping out!
No one has said that these people are better than a paladin, but rather that without common means of spreading the word it is quite possible that Bob the Hero that told everyone that he's a paladin because he felt a calling to destroy the demon hordes threatening the village is just Bob the Fighter. He just wasn't good enough to make the class, never got the chance, or the Gods just overlooked him and he STILL goes out everyday and does the job, not asking for special powers or dispensation.
To me, that is a damned good story.
You could call them zealot Paladins. They not only claim to be Paladins, but they believe it as well.
1:Take one fighter and add true believer feat free.
2:Give them lay on hands, but it cures all subdual and illusionary damage. Usually not lethal damage, but see heal.
3:Heal, use magic device, and knowledge religion become class skills. Thus they can stabilize.
4:Although they cannot channel energy, they can turn undead as if they could. They strongly present their holy symbol and shout "begone" in game only.
5:Will save is +1 every other level.
Disadvantages: They cannot use a standard holy sword as more than a +2 sword, but an intelligent sword can activate it's self whenever it sees fit. When they find a horse and claim they called for it, everyone else around can roll to disbelieve.
Advantages: A dead magic zone will not affect them other then to make them more confident in their calling. Some holy magic items require true believer to fully function. Not only will people view them as trustworthy, but they will always seek penance over becoming a normal fighter.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How you can, for example, strip out a Paladin's powers (or kill one) through 1 sentence in some situations.
(Wanna kill a Paladin of Iomedae? Have a Fighter who is CN say, "I challenge you to a duel, steel against steel, without your God's healing.")
And this is a good thing why?
There are no ways around Paladin safeguards. You can't fake them out. One evil act is all it takes.
If you can establish conclusively whether someone has the paladin class and whether they have fallen, it is pretty safe. However, I do not think that you've demonstrated that there is an easy way to identify paladins. Even if you can automatically determine when you are affected by an Aura of Courage specifically (and I'd like to see the rules supporting that claim), your example admits that if Tronan has an archetype giving up that feature he isn't readily recognizable as an unfallen paladin and doesn't get the trust he deserves.
If one or two iconic features are used as paladin identification, paladins without those features are going to be mistaken for non-paladins. Which may be an acceptable tradeoff for most people in the setting but sucks for paladins who do trade away those features.
I also find it mind-boggling that an entire order of good-aligned people could not determine someone was unfit for the order without magic. We kind of already do that in the real world.Slowly. That is how it happened. They started with good intentions but over time they were warped. If you dare stand against the First Knight then you are obviously evil, since the higher ups are corrupted new Knights that get funny ideas meet unfortunate accidents while on patrol.
...(next post)...
It's based on the idea that a Paladin has built-in safeguards. Non-Pallies don't.
The thing is that a goodly Order that knows it doesn't have built-in safeguards is going to build in some safeguards. Like a trio of Second Knights that have the authority to overrule or even replace the First Knight if they vote unanimously (useful not just in cases of corruption but instances where the First Knight's judgment may be impeded somehow). Or a few inquisitors as "Internal Affairs" (possibly classed inquisitors who would fall for being corrupted themselves). Or, since we have magic, a symbol of office that the First Knight can only use as long as he maintains a LG alignment. None of which are completely fail-safe, but they make it pretty unlikely that someone in power would slip into corruption without a strong effort on someone's part to subvert the safeguards. This is why TOZ finds it unlikely that such an organization would just naturally become corrupted.
If the Order can't handle these kinds of safeguards how would you expect them to make sure that their order contained only individuals of the paladin class?
And as UnArcaneElection pointed out, relying too heavily on the paladin class's built-in safeguard could lead to a ton of trouble if a non-paladin does sneak in and receives absolute trust as a result - or even if an actual paladin falls dramatically at the wrong moment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't need to know someone to be an ally. The Paladin would count a law officer as an ally 9/10 times.Well, the thing is: Aura of Good doesn't do anything and it doesn't put bystanders under any power for sure. It only defines how a paladin would detect under the influence of a detect good spell. So, no, the Sheriff (assuming he can't cast 'detect good') wouldn't feel anything. Same with the other auras. As long as he isn't an ally of the Paladin (in which case he would know him personally and what he is about), he simply doesn't feel anything.
That would depend entirely on the government employing said law officer.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The kool-aid those Order of Light guys bring to the monthly village picnic must be pretty good.
Kool-Aid is delicious; I don't see a problem with drinking it!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait a second, weren't the first classes of DND Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic User, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apropos to the discussion.
I'll probably not making many friends saying that to one of the cornerstones of this community but after I called out HWalsh for his condenscending way of talking about other peoples' gamestyle, I think it's only fair to mention that those kinds of (veiled) personal attacks are equally unconstructive.
I really would like to see us go without that. And as I'm surely no paladin, feel free to call me out in return at the next opportunity.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're right. Sorry. The parallels were just too exact for me to pass up!
But, like I said, you're right. I really should have let the opportunity pass, rather than act on it. That's true of just about everything I post under the Kullen avatar, come to think of it -- it's like me saying to myself, "Dude, don't post that," and then I go and do it anyway. Low Will save, maybe.
The only thing I quibble with in your rebuttal is the use of the word "veiled." I think it was pretty damned overt!
|
|
I think it was pretty damned overt!
Hey, I put it in parentheses. :D
It's something I tend to do just in case that I read too fast and misunderstood something. I've learned the hard way how easy it is to misunderstand things even when using my mother tongue. So I guess I'd rather be twice as careful when reading things here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've learned the hard way how easy it is to misunderstand things even when using my mother tongue.
Mit mir, Sie können auch Deutsch sprechen. Aber, mein Deutsch ist jetzt nicht so gut.
Ok. I got curious and started digging through books and I think I see where some of this magical identifying paladins may come from.
All paladins, regardless of background, recognize in each other an eternal bond that transcends culture, race, and even religion. Any two paladins, even from opposite sides of the world, consider themselves comrades.
The Pathfinder Core doesn't include this, thankfully, and good riddance to it.
Let's dig some more!
If a paladin should ever knowingly and willingly perform on evil act, he or she loses the status of paladinhood immediately and irrevocably.
Ah, there's that immediately that is missing in the Pathfinder version.
Incidentally, there are a heck of a lot more restrictions on the AD&D paladin than the Pathfinder. Limited number of items, not much cash, and much less ability to play with non-evil neutrals for a single mission.
So, to sum up. Mr. HWalsh, many of the ideas that you are putting forth for the paladin do not, near as I can tell, come from the current game we're discussing. Pathfinder moved away from some of the ideas from AD&D and 3.5. Paladins no longer become just an ordinary fighter FOREVER -- yeah, no atonement for you AD&D paladin -- and do not automatically put forth a wi-fi paladin-only broadcast allowing them to identify each other.
Here's a paladin that was contemporaneous with Anderson's.
See if that doesn't further muddy the waters.
In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not?
Not necessarily.... It could be Hedda the wise woman who's a witch. Could be Sal the mad Necromancer whose potions might not be that restorative. (especially if it's a potion of magic missle; target=drinker .:)
Same thing goes for Paladins. Paladin is a game term for our use. It might happen to be the word in Taldane, but it's probably quite different in Tien Xia or Vudra, or someone who was chosen directly by a celestial power might not know the word at all.
Not fallen. "Many are called but few are chosen." The Zealot Paladin or whatever you end up calling them, were not chosen. They had an aptitude for fighter, but not Paladin.
I'm not interested in if the concept should be allowed. More about how it would work.
In the Golarion universe, you would call someone who brews potions and restoratives an Alchemist, would you not?Not necessarily.... It could be Hedda the wise woman who's a witch. Could be Sal the mad Necromancer whose potions might not be that restorative. (especially if it's a potion of magic missle; target=drinker .:)
As far as I'm aware, the most common source of commercially available curative potions is a temple, so I'm going to say Clerics and Adepts with Brew Potion.
^Safeguards are good, as long as you don't get complacent because of them. If you get complacent about safeguards, you are less likely to notice when somebody finds a way around them.
There are no ways around Paladin safeguards. You can't fake them out. One evil act is all it takes.
{. . .}
Famous last words . . . .
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait a second, weren't the first classes of DND Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic User, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling?
OD&D is a bit before my time, but I think the first classes were Fighting Man, Magic User, and Thief? Either thief or cleric wasn't in the first published stuff and was added later.
I'm pretty sure by the second "Edition" of D&D (the blue tinged softcover book, still pre-AD&D) the classes were as you describe. Certainly by B/X they were that list of seven.
I'm not sure if the paladin first appeared in a Dragon issue or if it was first in 1e AD&D but it hasn't been around since the very beginning.
Oddly, BECMI allowed evil paladins "officially" long before 3e came out with Blackguards...in the Companion set any Lawful 9th level+ fighter could choose to become a paladin. BECMI had no good/evil axis, and Lawful character were "generally" good, but it wasn't a requirement.
Wait a second, weren't the first classes of DND Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic User, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling?OD&D is a bit before my time, but I think the first classes were Fighting Man, Magic User, and Thief? Either thief or cleric wasn't in the first published stuff and was added later.
I'm pretty sure by the second "Edition" of D&D (the blue tinged softcover book, still pre-AD&D) the classes were as you describe. Certainly by B/X they were that list of seven.
I'm not sure if the paladin first appeared in a Dragon issue or if it was first in 1e AD&D but it hasn't been around since the very beginning.
Oddly, BECMI allowed evil paladins "officially" long before 3e came out with Blackguards...in the Companion set any Lawful 9th level+ fighter could choose to become a paladin. BECMI had no good/evil axis, and Lawful character were "generally" good, but it wasn't a requirement.
Yeah that was back when the alignment flavor was all sort of a rip of.. erm.. homage of Moorcocks stuff. Chaos and Law as absolutes were both not to good for human kind but law was 'better' because once again no one wants a neighbor who's going to ser their house on fire.
|
|
Well, you're right in so far as that my post could be misinterpreted as HW saying that there is a (and only one) right way to play the game. Which wasn't the case.
Though the part you quoted was meant more in a general way, because it's something we all tend to do more or less with things we are enthusiastic about. I didn't want to single out HW with it. I can see where my shortcut can be seen as intentional, but it wasn't meant this way. I have to be honest though, that from reading his posts,I do think that HWalsh is thinking in absolutes regarding at least some parts of the game. I could have done better separating my thoughts from what I actually tried to transfer with my post though.
Apart from that I still stand by the part of my post that I'm actually critizising HWalsh's choice of words with
You'll probably also see (further down the thread, when talking to Kirth) that I don't try to be one-sided. Because I do agree, that piling on anyone doesn't help to make a case. It only helps stopping meaningful discussions.
Yeah that was back when the alignment flavor was all sort of a rip of.. erm.. homage of Moorcocks stuff. Chaos and Law as absolutes were both not to good for human kind but law was 'better' because once again no one wants a neighbor who's going to ser their house on fire.
And, interestingly enough, Moorcock took that idea from -- you guessed it -- Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions, so we've come full circle.