Paladin Class Preview

Monday, May 7, 2018

All it takes is a cursory browse of the Paizo forums to see that paladins are not just the most contentious class in Pathfinder, they are the most contentious conversation topic. Weeks before we previewed the class, multiple threads with thousands of posts arose in advance, filled with passionate fans with many different opinions and plenty of good ideas. Turns out, the Paizo office isn't too different.

The Quest for the Holy Grail

Early last year, I went on a sacred quest through the office and surveyed all the different opinions out there about paladins. Turns out, almost everyone had slightly different thoughts. But there was one element in common: whether they wanted paladins of all alignments, paladins of the four extreme alignments, lawful good paladins and chaotic evil antipaladins, lawful evil tyrant antipaladins, or even just lawful good paladins alone, everyone was interested in robust support for the idea that paladins should be champions of their deity and alignment. That is to say, whatever alignments paladins have, they should have an array of abilities deeply tied into that alignment.

Since that was the aspect of the paladin that everyone agreed upon, that's what we wanted to make sure we got right in the playtest. But given the limited space for the playtest, we chose to focus on getting that aspect fine-tuned for one alignment, and so in this book we're presenting only lawful good paladins. That doesn't mean antipaladins and tyrants are gone (there's even an antipaladin foe in one of the adventures!) or that the door is closed to other sorts of paladins down the road. We'll have a playtest survey on the matter, we're open to more opinions, and even among the four designers we have different ideas. But we want to focus the playtest on getting lawful good paladins right, first and foremost. If or when we do make more paladins and antipaladins, having constructed a solid foundation for how an alignment-driven champion functions will be a crucial step to making all of them engaging and different in play.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

The Code

Tell me if you've heard this one before: My paladin was brought to a court where she was forced to testify under oath to tell the whole truth, by a legitimate authority, about the whereabouts of certain innocent witnesses, but she knows that if she answers the questions, a villain is going to use that information to track down and harm the innocents. It's the "Inquiring Murderer" quandary from moral philosophy set in a way that manages to pin you between not just two but three different restrictions in the old paladin code. Sure, I can beg and plead with the judge that the information, if released, would harm innocents, but ultimately if the judge persists, I'm in trouble. These sorts of situations are some of the most common paladin threads on the forums, and they're never easy.

With the playtest presenting the opportunity, I wanted to analyze the paladin's code down to basic principles and keep all the important roleplaying aspects that make paladins the trustworthy champions of law and good we've come to expect while drastically reducing, and hopefully eliminating, the no-win situations. Here's what it looks like at the moment.

Code of Conduct

Paladins are divine champions of a deity. You must be lawful good and worship a deity that allows lawful good clerics. Actions fundamentally opposed to your deity's alignment or ideals are anathema to your faith. A few examples of acts that would be considered anathema appear in each deity's entry. You and your GM will determine whether other acts count as anathema.

In addition, you must follow the paladin's code below. Deities often add additional strictures for their own paladins (for instance, Shelyn's paladins never attack first except to protect an innocent, and they choose and perfect an art).

If you stray from lawful good, perform acts anathema to your deity, or violate your code of conduct, you lose your Spell Point pool and righteous ally class feature (which we talk more about below) until you demonstrate your repentance by conducting an atone ritual, but you keep any other paladin abilities that don't require those class features.

The Paladin's Code

The following is the fundamental code all paladins follow. The tenets are listed in order of importance, starting with the most important. If a situation places two tenets in conflict, you aren't in a no-win situation; instead, follow the most important tenet. For instance, if an evil king asked you if innocent lawbreakers were hiding in your church so he could execute them, you could lie to him, since the tenet forbidding you to lie is less important than the tenet prohibiting the harm of an innocent. An attempt to subvert the paladin code by engineering a situation allowing you to use a higher tenet to ignore a lower tenet (telling someone that you won't respect lawful authorities so that the tenet of not lying supersedes the tenet of respecting lawful authorities, for example) is a violation of the paladin code.

  • You must never willingly commit an evil act, such as murder, torture, or casting an evil spell.
  • You must not take actions that you know will harm an innocent, or through inaction cause an innocent to come to immediate harm when you knew your action could reasonably prevent it. This tenet doesn't force you to take action against possible harm to innocents or to sacrifice your life and future potential in an attempt to protect an innocent.
  • You must act with honor, never cheating, lying, or taking advantage of others.
  • You must respect the lawful authority of the legitimate ruler or leadership in whichever land you may be, following their laws unless they violate a higher tenet.

So let's break down what's the same and what's different. We still have all the basic tenets of the paladin from Pathfinder First Edition, with one exception: we've removed poison from the tenet of acting with honor. While there are certainly dishonorable ways to use poison, poisoning a weapon and using it in an honorable combat that allows enhanced weaponry doesn't seem much different than lighting the weapon on fire. However, by ordering the tenets and allowing the paladin to prioritize the most important tenets in the event of a conflict, we've cut down on the no-win situations. And of course, this opens a design space to play around with the tenets themselves, something we've done by incorporating one of the most popular non-core aspects for paladins...

Oaths

Oaths allow you to play around with the tenets of your code while also gaining mechanical advantages. For instance, the Fiendsbane Oath allows you to dish out near-constant retribution against fiends and eventually block their dimensional travel with an Anchoring Aura. Unlike in Pathfinder First Edition, oaths are feats, and you don't need an archetype to gain one.

Paladin Features

As many of you guessed when Jason mentioned it, paladin was the mystery class that gains the highest heavy armor proficiency, eventually reaching legendary proficiency in armor and master proficiency in weapons, as opposed to fighters, who gain the reverse. At 1st level, you also gain the Retributive Strike reaction, allowing you to counterattack and enfeeble any foe that hits one of your allies (Shelyn save those who strike your storm druid ally). You also get lay on hands, a single-action healing spell that not only heals the target but also raises their AC for a round to help prevent future damage. Combine that effect used on yourself with a raised shield, and you can make it pretty hard for a foe to hit you, and it helps recovering allies avoid another beating.

Lay on hands is the first of a paladin's champion powers, which include a whole bunch of elective options via feats. One of my favorites, gained automatically at 19th level, is hero's defiance, which makes a paladin incredibly difficult to take down. It lets you keep standing when you fall to 0 HP, gives you a big boost of Hit Points, and doesn't even use up your reaction! Leading up to that, you gain a bunch of fun smite-related boosts, including the righteous ally class feature that you saw mentioned in the code. This is a 3rd-level ability that lets you house a holy spirit in a weapon or a steed, much like before, but also in a shield, like the fan-favorite sacred shield archetype!

Paladin Feats

In addition to the oath feats I mentioned when talking about the code, paladins have feats customized to work with the various righteous ally options, like Second Ally, a level 8 feat that lets you gain a second righteous ally. There are also a variety of auras that you can gain to improve yourself and your allies, from the humble 4th-level Aura of Courage, which reduces the frightened condition for you when you gain it and at the end of your turn for you and your allies, to the mighty 14th-level Aura of Righteousness, which gives you and your allies resistance to evil damage. Feats that improve or alter your lay on hands include mercy feats, which allow you to remove harmful conditions and afflictions with lay on hands, up to and including death itself with Ultimate Mercy. And we can't forget potent additional reactions like Divine Grace, granting you a saving throw boost at 2nd level, and Attack of Opportunity at 6th level.

To close out, I'll tell you about one more popular non-core paladin ability we brought in, a special type of power called...

Litanies

Following their mold from Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat, litanies are single-action Verbal Casting spells that last 1 round and create various effects. For instance, litany of righteousness makes an enemy weak to your allies' attacks, and litany against sloth slows down an enemy, costing it reactions and potentially actions as well. One of the coolest story features of the litanies against sins is that they now explicitly work better against creatures strongly aligned with their sin, so a dretch (a.k.a. a sloth demon) or a sloth sinspawn treats its saving throw outcome for litany against sloth as one degree worse!

Just as a reminder to everyone, please be respectful to each other. Many of us have strong opinions about the paladin, and that's OK, even if we each have different feelings.

Mark Seifter
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Paladins Pathfinder Playtest Seelah Wayne Reynolds
1,551 to 1,600 of 1,735 << first < prev | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Unless you use that, and take the good with the bad and understand that paladins too can do messed up stuff and still keep their banner in check, so it won't matter if the class remains lawful good.

Its... Twitchy...

Paladins can't really do messed up stuff and keep their banner in check. Its actually hard to do so. I agonized for hours and hours trying to find a loophole in the current Paladin code and I couldn't find one.

The closest that you come to with, "Messed up stuff" is that if they are in a (very rare) situation where the only way to save someone is to do something evil they are likely to let the person die. The problem is, as one of the devs pointed out, the scenario put forth made no sense and is all but impossible to set up.

I mean, sure...

If the Paladin caught a street urchin stealing food, and the place he was in had strict laws, and the person he stole from was demanding that the child be arrested, the Paladin would arrest the child.

However that isn't likely to be the case.

More likely is the Paladin offering to pay for whatever the child stole, or asking the shop owner for leniency in pressing charges. If the shop owner outright refused, then, yes I see a Paladin turning the kid in. Though that is about as messed up as it gets.

So... Under the current code as laid out in this blog... What messed up stuff do you think they can get away with?

I'm not getting banned. THIS IS A TRAP!!!!

Details might get into, well, messed up territory. My favorite prestige class in 3.5 was the Grey Guard, because it has all the loop holes baked in, and includes some debuff and harm abilities in conjunction with lay on hands. It's still lawful good, but they're basically the black opps of lawful good. If we can get that, I don't know who will b***h.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


I wouldn't call Captain America a paladin.

I'd call him a soldier.

Soldiers have to make tough calls and do things that the average civilian would NEVER dream of doing, on a daily basis.

...and that sometimes means doing really BAD things to people, whether or not they are BAD people, because that's what one has been told to do.

Cap doesn't do those things.

In the comics this was actually a thing, the government was always a little twitchy with him simply because he was very fast to refuse to do those bad things. He cited, on multiple occasions, that he wouldn't follow an unlawful order. When the government actually tried to make him, he responded by resigning his commission.

This was the reason why the character US Agent was created. He was a Captain America replacement. US Agent would. Cap wouldn't. Cap totally fits the Paladin archetype.

Liberty's Edge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Bringing that horrible storyline is almost like saying Thor is a frog.


master_marshmallow wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Unless you use that, and take the good with the bad and understand that paladins too can do messed up stuff and still keep their banner in check, so it won't matter if the class remains lawful good.

Its... Twitchy...

Paladins can't really do messed up stuff and keep their banner in check. Its actually hard to do so. I agonized for hours and hours trying to find a loophole in the current Paladin code and I couldn't find one.

The closest that you come to with, "Messed up stuff" is that if they are in a (very rare) situation where the only way to save someone is to do something evil they are likely to let the person die. The problem is, as one of the devs pointed out, the scenario put forth made no sense and is all but impossible to set up.

I mean, sure...

If the Paladin caught a street urchin stealing food, and the place he was in had strict laws, and the person he stole from was demanding that the child be arrested, the Paladin would arrest the child.

However that isn't likely to be the case.

More likely is the Paladin offering to pay for whatever the child stole, or asking the shop owner for leniency in pressing charges. If the shop owner outright refused, then, yes I see a Paladin turning the kid in. Though that is about as messed up as it gets.

So... Under the current code as laid out in this blog... What messed up stuff do you think they can get away with?

I'm not getting banned. THIS IS A TRAP!!!!

Details might get into, well, messed up territory. My favorite prestige class in 3.5 was the Grey Guard, because it has all the loop holes baked in, and includes some debuff and harm abilities in conjunction with lay on hands. It's still lawful good, but they're basically the black opps of lawful good. If we can get that, I don't know who will b***h.

The thing is, the Black Ops idea doesn't work with Paladins. Above all else they *cannot* do a single evil act. That is, again, why Hellknights are probably preferred by governments. The Hellknight will follow orders no matter what. The Paladin will tell a King to shove off if they tell them to do something evil. They won't even do evil to save a million people.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Paladinosaur wrote:
Bringing that horrible storyline is almost like saying Thor is a frog.

He was a frog though, they even alluded to it in the movies.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Unless you use that, and take the good with the bad and understand that paladins too can do messed up stuff and still keep their banner in check, so it won't matter if the class remains lawful good.

Its... Twitchy...

Paladins can't really do messed up stuff and keep their banner in check. Its actually hard to do so. I agonized for hours and hours trying to find a loophole in the current Paladin code and I couldn't find one.

The closest that you come to with, "Messed up stuff" is that if they are in a (very rare) situation where the only way to save someone is to do something evil they are likely to let the person die. The problem is, as one of the devs pointed out, the scenario put forth made no sense and is all but impossible to set up.

I mean, sure...

If the Paladin caught a street urchin stealing food, and the place he was in had strict laws, and the person he stole from was demanding that the child be arrested, the Paladin would arrest the child.

However that isn't likely to be the case.

More likely is the Paladin offering to pay for whatever the child stole, or asking the shop owner for leniency in pressing charges. If the shop owner outright refused, then, yes I see a Paladin turning the kid in. Though that is about as messed up as it gets.

So... Under the current code as laid out in this blog... What messed up stuff do you think they can get away with?

I'm not getting banned. THIS IS A TRAP!!!!

Details might get into, well, messed up territory. My favorite prestige class in 3.5 was the Grey Guard, because it has all the loop holes baked in, and includes some debuff and harm abilities in conjunction with lay on hands. It's still lawful good, but they're basically the black opps of lawful good. If we can get that, I don't know who will b***h.

The thing is, the Black Ops idea doesn't work with Paladins. Above all else they *cannot* do a single evil act. That is, again, why...

So like, if we just had swappable codes then we could both play the characters we like?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
So like, if we just had swappable codes then we could both play the characters we like?

No. Because "swapping the code" would make the class you were playing not a Paladin.

Not only that, the fact that it could happen would make the Paladin no longer a Paladin as they belong to an order than can even do that.

There is no way to get the black ops Paladin and retain Paladins as a thing.

Edit to add:

This is why this debate exists. I, personally, can never consent to, and must oppose, any initiative to get non-Lawful Good Paladins, or even Paladins that can perform evil actions without falling. I can't even apologize for that, because I feel it is right to do so and I can't compromise on something if I feel it is right.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I assume we are talking about the standard universe Captain America and not the Ultimate version who I am very certain wasn't close to a paladin.

Also, I'll take Sparhawk for a paladin.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
knightnday wrote:

I'd like to submit to have the word "honor" removed from the paladin's code. The rest of the line can stay, but honor does not always indicate the whole bit about lying, cheating, or not taking advantage of others.

That is a fantasy romanticized idea of what an honorable person might not do, not the reality of what often happened. Especially if the individual were of higher status than someone else.

SF Debris actually has a rather instructive video relating to that, explaining the concepts of 'external' and 'internal' honor by way of how Worf and Klingons in general differ on what they perceive to be 'honorable'.


knightnday wrote:

I assume we are talking about the standard universe Captain America and not the Ultimate version who I am very certain wasn't close to a paladin.

Also, I'll take Sparhawk for a paladin.

The Ultimates was a darker universe. Captain America, Ultimate Captain America, and MCU Captain America are all different characters. MCU Captain America is a weird amalgamation of Captain America and Ultimate Captain America.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So like, if we just had swappable codes then we could both play the characters we like?

No. Because "swapping the code" would make the class you were playing not a Paladin.

Not only that, the fact that it could happen would make the Paladin no longer a Paladin as they belong to an order than can even do that.

There is no way to get the black ops Paladin and retain Paladins as a thing.

What if the different codes were gated by a feat, so the default paladin is your paladin, and I can take a single feat that opens us up to more variance? Seems like we're doing that with oaths, would you be okay with some oaths giving us different options, like an "oath of freedom" that let's us play MCU cap, where comic cap is the default?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've been following this thread but staying out as I don't really have a dog in this fight. However, I do have two (well, maybe three) comments.

First: Cap is a Paladin, he's following the PF2 code and has/will violate the 4th tenet to keep the other three. Thanos is not, he's a Zealot (my term for the non-paladin sacred warriors)

Second: A question for those of you wanting multiple alignment 'paladins'.

Do you actually want the full package? Do you want to find your character tied to tenets so important that you can lose everything by violating them? Because, to me, that potential sacrifice is part and parcel of a Paladin.

Also (and slightly tongue in cheek) do you really want to be responsible for multiplying the should my Paladin have fallen threads by 9?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Spiral_Ninja wrote:

I've been following this thread but staying out as I don't really have a dog in this fight. However, I do have two (well, maybe three) comments.

First: Cap is a Paladin, he's following the PF2 code and has/will violate the 4th tenet to keep the other three. Thanos is not, he's a Zealot (my term for the non-paladin sacred warriors)

Second: A question for those of you wanting multiple alignment 'paladins'.

Do you actually want the full package? Do you want to find your character tied to tenets so important that you can lose everything by violating them? Because, to me, that potential sacrifice is part and parcel of a Paladin.

Also (and slightly tongue in cheek) do you really want to be responsible for multiplying the should my Paladin have fallen threads by 9?

Ha,

9x∞=∞ , so no change in that ;)


master_marshmallow wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So like, if we just had swappable codes then we could both play the characters we like?

No. Because "swapping the code" would make the class you were playing not a Paladin.

Not only that, the fact that it could happen would make the Paladin no longer a Paladin as they belong to an order than can even do that.

There is no way to get the black ops Paladin and retain Paladins as a thing.

What if the different codes were gated by a feat, so the default paladin is your paladin, and I can take a single feat that opens us up to more variance? Seems like we're doing that with oaths, would you be okay with some oaths giving us different options, like an "oath of freedom" that let's us play MCU cap, where comic cap is the default?

I'm sorry. No.

The core of the Paladin is the code, the core of that code, is they can never perform an evil act. That is where the "Narrative Power" of the class comes from.

(And yes, the Paladin class should have narrative power with anyone who can identify them as a Paladin.)

If you can identify someone as a Paladin, there is narrative power there, power that simply doesn't exist with any other Lawful Good character, or any other Good character period. Why?

There. Is. No. Loophole.

Whatever it looks like they did, whatever it was, it wasn't evil.

That complete assurance is a narrative thing.

Also, it is a narrative disadvantage too... If you are an evil lawmaker, you know if someone is a Paladin, how you can manipulate them, and more importantly exactly where they are going to draw the line. If you want to get rid of one? There are plenty of ways.

Such as sending them with a squad of Hellknights who are under orders to kill any members of the squad who refuse to follow orders. Then setting up a situation where the Paladin cannot follow the orders given (such as, go here, then open this envelope to get your instructions) just make sure those instructions, those orders, are something the Paladin will have to refuse.

These are AMAZING narrative things that could work with other characters too, but there is ambiguity. If say a Lawful Good Fighter, for example, is in the same situation they can follow the evil order. One infraction won't make them fall, and they may even figure out WHY the order was given, thus tipping them off to follow it.

Where the Paladin he might realize exactly what the order was trying to do, but he still has to refuse it, meaning he's been walked right into an ambush where his own allies (who aren't evil) will have to fight and/or kill him.

This is even more painful because if they aren't evil you also limit the Paladin's special advantages against evil opponents.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
graystone wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Whatever time this is for you guys right now (11:38 for me), I usually get off work roughly 4.5-5 hours ago. But I'm a paizo messageboarder for life, since before working here, so I'm often found around here long past the time when I probably should be.
LOL Yep, I'm a "paizo messageboarder for life" too. Here it's 2:46. ;)
:Fistbump:

Paizo Messageboarders for life? Oh dear. Is there time off for good behavior?

Just kidding! Hmm = ‘Happy messageboard maven.’ (I’m certain that’s what my parents meant to name me.)

Hmm


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Spiral_Ninja wrote:

Second: A question for those of you wanting multiple alignment 'paladins'.

Do you actually want the full package? Do you want to find your character tied to tenets so important that you can lose everything by violating them? Because, to me, that potential sacrifice is part and parcel of a Paladin.

Oh buddy, you think you can scare me with Codes and losing something if you break them?

My Samurai was nearly moved to kill himself, because (No joke!) he participated in a pie eating contest and it had... unforeseen consequences.

Bring. It. On.

:)


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So like, if we just had swappable codes then we could both play the characters we like?

No. Because "swapping the code" would make the class you were playing not a Paladin.

Not only that, the fact that it could happen would make the Paladin no longer a Paladin as they belong to an order than can even do that.

There is no way to get the black ops Paladin and retain Paladins as a thing.

Edit to add:

This is why this debate exists. I, personally, can never consent to, and must oppose, any initiative to get non-Lawful Good Paladins, or even Paladins that can perform evil actions without falling. I can't even apologize for that, because I feel it is right to do so and I can't compromise on something if I feel it is right.

OK, I'm not a Paladin. I'm a Bravo, or a Laughing Knight, or a Holy Liberator or whatever the heck else.

And I'm not part of your order, so you don't belong to an order that can do that.

Our powers are similar, but so are those of a Cleric of Asmodeus and a Cleric of Calistria.

Incidentally, you know what God is specifically described as refusing to compromise his ideals? Cayden Cailean. He was famous in mortal life for refusing and walking away from jobs that offended his morality. You might say he planted himself beside that rier of Truth and said "You move."


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Spiral_Ninja wrote:

I've been following this thread but staying out as I don't really have a dog in this fight. However, I do have two (well, maybe three) comments.

First: Cap is a Paladin, he's following the PF2 code and has/will violate the 4th tenet to keep the other three. Thanos is not, he's a Zealot (my term for the non-paladin sacred warriors)

Second: A question for those of you wanting multiple alignment 'paladins'.

Do you actually want the full package? Do you want to find your character tied to tenets so important that you can lose everything by violating them? Because, to me, that potential sacrifice is part and parcel of a Paladin.

Also (and slightly tongue in cheek) do you really want to be responsible for multiplying the should my Paladin have fallen threads by 9?

Yes, the whole package.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Spiral_Ninja wrote:

Do you actually want the full package? Do you want to find your character tied to tenets so important that you can lose everything by violating them? Because, to me, that potential sacrifice is part and parcel of a Paladin.

Also (and slightly tongue in cheek) do you really want to be responsible for multiplying the should my Paladin have fallen threads by 9?

Yes and, um, maybe? I've said before, but I think the code is fine as it is. Let anyone from any alignment try to live up to it, and if they fail, that's on them. They knew the code when they signed the dotted line.

Of course I would like to see more base codes available, but the idea of any character trying to live up to a code, whatever the exact details of that code may be, is pretty cool. There's a wealth of literature about people tying themselves to extraplanar entities for power, swearing oaths of chasity or oaths of vengeance or buying a contract against their first born son. Witches do it. Summoners do it. Cavaliers of every alignment follow the edicts of their orders, so we know its possible for a chaotic character to follow simple instructions if they get something in return for it (lawful characters of course don't need the reward, the rules themselves are the reward).

I suppose that is what I wanted to see out of the paladin class. A cavalier with extraplanar ties that focused on those ties instead of their mount.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
So like, if we just had swappable codes then we could both play the characters we like?

No. Because "swapping the code" would make the class you were playing not a Paladin.

Not only that, the fact that it could happen would make the Paladin no longer a Paladin as they belong to an order than can even do that.

There is no way to get the black ops Paladin and retain Paladins as a thing.

What if the different codes were gated by a feat, so the default paladin is your paladin, and I can take a single feat that opens us up to more variance? Seems like we're doing that with oaths, would you be okay with some oaths giving us different options, like an "oath of freedom" that let's us play MCU cap, where comic cap is the default?

I'm sorry. No.

The core of the Paladin is the code, the core of that code, is they can never perform an evil act. That is where the "Narrative Power" of the class comes from.

(And yes, the Paladin class should have narrative power with anyone who can identify them as a Paladin.)

If you can identify someone as a Paladin, there is narrative power there, power that simply doesn't exist with any other Lawful Good character, or any other Good character period. Why?

There. Is. No. Loophole.

Whatever it looks like they did, whatever it was, it wasn't evil.

That complete assurance is a narrative thing.

Also, it is a narrative disadvantage too... If you are an evil lawmaker, you know if someone is a Paladin, how you can manipulate them, and more importantly exactly where they are going to draw the line. If you want to get rid of one? There are plenty of ways.

Such as sending them with a squad of Hellknights who are under orders to kill any members of the squad who refuse to follow orders. Then setting up a situation where the Paladin cannot follow the orders given (such as, go here, then open this envelope to get your instructions) just make sure those...

So even if the game is the better for it, you're opposed to having a generic 'knight's' chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a nigh parallel way, as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation be the default, and we get taxed character resources to have a chance to play our versions as well? Even if more specific Golarion based characters (like hellknights) could easily use the same rules without needing to waste page count or time writing it in a separate book, the release time of which is no where near determinate?

That seems inclusive.

I'm trying to find some sort of middle ground. If you aren't willing to consider any other option, then why are you getting so hostile when other posters simply have a different opinion or desire?

It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

Liberty's Edge

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Captain America is chaotic, from how he entered the Armed Forces to his tactics in the military afterwards AND while in the service of SHIELD and the Avengers.

Captain America's stance on law strikes me as exactly in line with Abador's (the god of law) expectations of his followers. Captain America is a great example of Lawful Good.


Revan wrote:

OK, I'm not a Paladin. I'm a Bravo, or a Laughing Knight, or a Holy Liberator or whatever the heck else.

And I'm not part of your order, so you don't belong to an order that can do that.

Our powers are similar, but so are those of a Cleric of Asmodeus and a Cleric of Calistria.

Incidentally, you know what God is specifically described as refusing to compromise his ideals? Cayden Cailean. He was famous in mortal life for refusing and walking away from jobs that offended his morality. You might say he planted himself beside that rier of Truth and said "You move."

It isn't just the name.

The powers come with that name. The idea is that there isn't supposed to be something similar to the Paladin. The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing else is a Paladin. Nothing else has the powers of the Paladin. They are singular and unique.

That is important to making the Paladin the Paladin.

I understand that you may not understand, or agree with where I am coming from, but this isn't something I can be convinced of.

The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing should be like it mechanically, lore-wise, or otherwise.


Abadar is the true ultimate tyrant, not bane....

anyway, I hope they do open up the paladin to any good and have a high paladin archtype that you must be LG to take..... with an even stricter code


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
Revan wrote:

OK, I'm not a Paladin. I'm a Bravo, or a Laughing Knight, or a Holy Liberator or whatever the heck else.

And I'm not part of your order, so you don't belong to an order that can do that.

Our powers are similar, but so are those of a Cleric of Asmodeus and a Cleric of Calistria.

Incidentally, you know what God is specifically described as refusing to compromise his ideals? Cayden Cailean. He was famous in mortal life for refusing and walking away from jobs that offended his morality. You might say he planted himself beside that rier of Truth and said "You move."

It isn't just the name.

The powers come with that name. The idea is that there isn't supposed to be something similar to the Paladin. The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing else is a Paladin. Nothing else has the powers of the Paladin. They are singular and unique.

That is important to making the Paladin the Paladin.

I understand that you may not understand, or agree with where I am coming from, but this isn't something I can be convinced of.

The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing should be like it mechanically, lore-wise, or otherwise.

Then they shouldn't be in the Core book and share the same design space with the other classes. Regulate them and anything else 'singular' and 'unique' to another book down the line. That way they can be properly treated with the deference you see and a more in depth look can be done. Might head off a few of these threads.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Paladinosaur wrote:
Bringing that horrible storyline is almost like saying Thor is a frog.

BLASPHEMY!

Walt Simonson's run on THOR was AWESOME!
The FROG OF THUNDER! BETA-RAY BILL! ICONIC!!!
He made Thor fun to read again! 3+ years of greatness!


master_marshmallow wrote:
It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

This here exemplifies why this thread wont move from place as well as why this concept, and honestly no new concept, was added to the paladin already.

There is no such a thing as a perfect solution, cause the entire issue rests on a subjective matter. What one feels and another person feel might simply not match. Some clearly feel this wont ruin the paladin, others do, me included btw. This bar wont ever move unless for a miracle suddenly a lot of folk stop feeling like they curently do.

I mean, lets be real guys, do you think the folk at paizo didnt think of this solution, and probably many others, themselves? What followed is probably what followed here, people simply wont ever agree with the feeling the class passes and how this changes it. The bar again, didnt move.


master_marshmallow wrote:

So even if the game is the better for it, you're opposed to having a generic 'knight's' chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a nigh parallel way, as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation be the default, and we get taxed character resources to have a chance to play our versions as well? Even if more specific Golarion based characters (like hellknights) could easily use the same rules without needing to waste page count or time writing it in a separate book, the release time of which is no where near determinate?

That seems inclusive.

I'm trying to find some sort of middle ground. If you aren't willing to consider any other option, then why are you getting so hostile when other posters simply have a different opinion or desire?

It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

Okay, first let me tell you what I feel the disconnect is...

"So even if the game is the better for it, you're opposed to having a generic 'knight's' chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a nigh parallel way, as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation be the default, and we get taxed character resources to have a chance to play our versions as well?"

See, here is I think where the core disagreement is...

You say, "Even if the game is the better for it" as though that is a factual objective statement. That is a completely subjective personal interpretation.

What you should be saying is:

"So even if I feel the game is the better for it, you're opposed ot having a generic "Knight's" chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a night parallel waym as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation to be the default, and we get taxed character resources to have a chance to play our versions as well?"

And the answer is...

Yes. If you plan on using the Paladin as that chassis, yes. Because while you feel that the game is better for it, I don't. I feel the game is better for having the Paladin be completely unique, with nothing being like it.

I wouldn't, and am not, opposed to a completely different class with completely different abilities completely different attached lore, that is in no way mechanically or in a narrative manner similar to the Paladin that has different oaths or what have you to serve a different purpose.

The Paladin's strength lies in the fact that there is nothing mechanically like it.

Allowing such does weaken the Paladin.

Suddenly it goes from:

"The Paladin can do no evil. This is a complete and total hardline stance. So if someone is claiming that the Paladin did something evil and he still has his powers, then we know the person is wrong."

to

"The Paladin can totally do evil. If they took a feat."

Which puts the Paladin in doubt and completely rips apart their narrative power.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So, then, I assume you're opposed to Warpriests, Cavaliers, Clerics, Hellknights, Antipaladins, the goddess Saernrae, Sorcerers whose Celestial bloodline is flavored as a pact with the Heavens...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

First off I have to apologize to Paizo and Jason in particular because on a reread of the blog i realize i fell into the group think trap!

Nowhere in the blog does it say that abilities we give to a paladin will remain paladin exclusive abilities. In fact they are explicit it presenting that there maybe more paladins down the line of other alignments. Just that they want to get the LG one right first and then go from there.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:
The thing is, the Black Ops idea doesn't work with Paladins. Above all else they *cannot* do a single evil act. That is, again, why Hellknights are probably preferred by governments. The Hellknight will follow orders no matter what. The Paladin will tell a King to shove off if they tell them to do something evil. They won't even do evil to save a million people.

I think a Paladin would consider a million lives more important than his personal honor and powers, and would press the proverbial button even at the cost of falling.

Quote:
"The Paladin can do no evil. This is a complete and total hardline stance. So if someone is claiming that the Paladin did something evil and he still has his powers, then we know the person is wrong."

He could have received Atonement in that time.

Quote:
The powers come with that name. The idea is that there isn't supposed to be something similar to the Paladin. The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing else is a Paladin. Nothing else has the powers of the Paladin. They are singular and unique.

Antipaladins have most of the same abilities, albeit with Good penciled out and replaced with Evil. How close can some other class be to a Paladin, mechanically, without getting too close and therefore killing it?

Several pages back, I outlined a hypothetical Code of Honor for a Chaotic Good Paladin analogue. As it turned out, the only tenet that really needed to be changed was the lowest-priority rule (uphold individual liberty rather than legitimate authority).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

Pivoting away from the argument, this post brings to mind something I brought up earlier in the thread, alternate classes and how they will work. Because you're right, the paladin chassis is going to be the most expedient method to make a first level Hellknight, if that's something Paizo so desires. Although quite a few of the bits Mark has teased throughout the thread will be inappropriate, the base class described in the blog is fine.

But, really, how WILL alt-classes work? Archetypes we have a little bit of info, but I would need something more than a set of optional class feats to make a Hellknight out of a paladin chassis, I think. Perhaps not, but perhaps so. Are we getting prestige classes? How might they work?

I honestly think the direction they're taking in regards to archetypes is less than ideal, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong. I would rather archetypes continue to be what they are in PF1, something that changes the bones of the class, while we got something new like "subclasses" that went after the meat, and just added more options.

Edit: Oooh, maybe THAT's how prestige classes will work. The name even kind of fits, even if it doens't fit our current definition of it. You are a member of your class, but you are just different, and have abilities and proficiencies that set you even more apart than the class lets you as it is. So we could have a cardinal prestige class, with no armor, no weapon groups save a staff, but access to a few cantrips and lots more skill feats.


HWalsh wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

So even if the game is the better for it, you're opposed to having a generic 'knight's' chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a nigh parallel way, as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation be the default, and we get taxed character resources to have a chance to play our versions as well? Even if more specific Golarion based characters (like hellknights) could easily use the same rules without needing to waste page count or time writing it in a separate book, the release time of which is no where near determinate?

That seems inclusive.

I'm trying to find some sort of middle ground. If you aren't willing to consider any other option, then why are you getting so hostile when other posters simply have a different opinion or desire?

It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

Okay, first let me tell you what I feel the disconnect is...

"So even if the game is the better for it, you're opposed to having a generic 'knight's' chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a nigh parallel way, as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation be the default, and we get taxed character resources to have a chance to play our versions as well?"

See, here is I think where the core disagreement is...

You say, "Even if the game is the better for it" as though that is a factual objective statement. That is a completely subjective personal interpretation.

What you should be saying is:

"So even if I feel the game is the better for it, you're opposed ot having a generic "Knight's" chassis that we can juxtapose into other class interpretations who function in a night parallel waym as far as the game math is concerned, even if we are willing to let your interpretation to be the...

But you could like, just not take the feat.

And there is precedent dude, a Hellknights base class chassis would be amazing, especially since it really enforces the armor focus of the class. It's Golarion too.

Facts matter before throwing shade.


knightnday wrote:
Then they shouldn't be in the Core book and share the same design space with the other classes. Regulate them and anything else 'singular' and 'unique' to another book down the line. That way they can be properly treated with the deference you see and a more in depth look can be done. Might head off a few of these threads.

I understand that you feel that way, I do not, however, feel that way. I feel that the Paladin is important to the genre, and even though it is not a super inclusive class, because of its importance to the genre and the fact that it has been a core part of D&D and Pathfinder for so long it can be in the game.

I do not feel that a few pages in the book on this class will harm the book at all. I do feel that it not being in the core will harm the book and the game as a whole.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Nox Aeterna wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

This here exemplifies why this thread wont move from place as well as why this concept, and honestly no new concept, was added to the paladin already.

There is no such a thing as a perfect solution, cause the entire issue rests on a subjective matter. What one feels and another person feel might simply not match. Some clearly feel this wont ruin the paladin, others do, me included btw. This bar wont ever move unless for a miracle suddenly a lot of folk stop feeling like they curently do.

I mean, lets be real guys, do you think the folk at paizo didnt think of this solution, and probably many others, themselves? What followed is probably what followed here, people simply wont ever agree with the feeling the class passes and how this changes it. The bar again, didnt move.

It's well-documented in studies that, in general, beliefs held emotionally will almost never be swayed by argument or evidence. For topics like this, I rarely hold any hope that the other side will be swayed by anything I say. The point is to influence people who are on the fence, who could very well be developers.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Spiral_Ninja wrote:

Second: A question for those of you wanting multiple alignment 'paladins'.

Do you actually want the full package? Do you want to find your character tied to tenets so important that you can lose everything by violating them? Because, to me, that potential sacrifice is part and parcel of a Paladin.

Also (and slightly tongue in cheek) do you really want to be responsible for multiplying the should my Paladin have fallen threads by 9?

Full package, a holy warrior available for each faith. Holy warriors for Irori. Holy warriors for Pharasma. Holy warriors for Lamashtu. A warrior class that is not some personification of the diety or an aspect, but a warrior for the faith, empowered by the faith. A class code about treatment of the faith and the followers of the faith and adherence to the strictures and anathema of the diety. Even if we were restricted to lawful good, I hoped that there would be more differentiation between gods than paladin code + anathema.

I would like to see "falling" be handled largely as a GM and player conversation (a cooperative story telling point that leads to changes in the character rather than a point of antagonism between them). I would like for the actual "fall" to have three primary paths: temporary fall plus quest for redemption; loss of faith; and conversion of faith.

I also thought that it would be neat to have a litany/chant used at will with a longer cast time (maybe a minute) to divine whether a course of action is in line with the faith. More of an automatic knowledge check than a divination. It would be something that would be a parachute for players with cruel DMs and perhaps have minor side benefits (identifies you as faithful, unnerves or distracts faithful and/or outsiders of opposing faiths, etc).

That's what I would like, but I am not getting my hopes up.


Revan wrote:
So, then, I assume you're opposed to Warpriests, Cavaliers, Clerics, Hellknights, Antipaladins, the goddess Saernrae, Sorcerers whose Celestial bloodline is flavored as a pact with the Heavens...

Not at all. They aren't the Paladin. There is no problem with them. The Paladin isn't just a Holy Warrior, nor is it just the warrior of a God, nor just a Knight. I have no issue with Warpriests, Cavaliers, Clerics, or Hellknights. No issue with Sorcerers either.

Antipaladins - While named badly - I am okay with because they are the complete opposite of a Paladin and have a singularly unique place in the lore.

Almost nobody is going to confuse a Paladin and an Antipaladin.


HWalsh wrote:
knightnday wrote:
Then they shouldn't be in the Core book and share the same design space with the other classes. Regulate them and anything else 'singular' and 'unique' to another book down the line. That way they can be properly treated with the deference you see and a more in depth look can be done. Might head off a few of these threads.

I understand that you feel that way, I do not, however, feel that way. I feel that the Paladin is important to the genre, and even though it is not a super inclusive class, because of its importance to the genre and the fact that it has been a core part of D&D and Pathfinder for so long it can be in the game.

I do not feel that a few pages in the book on this class will harm the book at all. I do feel that it not being in the core will harm the book and the game as a whole.

Yes, I understand your point of view. You REALLY REALLY like the paladin the way it is and don't want it to change.

That said, the game existed before it. The game can exist without it for a few months or even year if it is that special so they can get it right. After all, isn't that what Jason Bulmahn suggested in his post upthread?

A lot of the classes and archetypes that we won't see for a while are equally important to the game and the genre. If they can wait, certainly the paladin could as well.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

Antipaladins - While named badly - I am okay with because they are the complete opposite of a Paladin and have a singularly unique place in the lore.

Almost nobody is going to confuse a Paladin and an Antipaladin.

In other words, it's okay for some things to be mechanically similar to the Paladin. And Antipaladins can run the gamut of Evil so why can't their opposite number run the gamut of Good?


Athaleon wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
The thing is, the Black Ops idea doesn't work with Paladins. Above all else they *cannot* do a single evil act. That is, again, why Hellknights are probably preferred by governments. The Hellknight will follow orders no matter what. The Paladin will tell a King to shove off if they tell them to do something evil. They won't even do evil to save a million people.

I think a Paladin would consider a million lives more important than his personal honor and powers, and would press the proverbial button even at the cost of falling.

Quote:
"The Paladin can do no evil. This is a complete and total hardline stance. So if someone is claiming that the Paladin did something evil and he still has his powers, then we know the person is wrong."

He could have received Atonement in that time.

Quote:
The powers come with that name. The idea is that there isn't supposed to be something similar to the Paladin. The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing else is a Paladin. Nothing else has the powers of the Paladin. They are singular and unique.

Antipaladins have most of the same abilities, albeit with Good penciled out and replaced with Evil. How close can some other class be to a Paladin, mechanically, without getting too close and therefore killing it?

Several pages back, I outlined a hypothetical Code of Honor for a Chaotic Good Paladin analogue. As it turned out, the only tenet that really needed to be changed was the lowest-priority rule (uphold individual liberty rather than legitimate authority).

And how would you KNOW they have powers or not? Other classes have smite, lay on hands, auras, mounts, spells, ect... That and a vindictive bastard can 100% say they are a paladin, smite some 'evil', protect with his Aura of Courage, cast paladin only spells... Heck, they could even still be LG or CE or anything in between.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Athaleon wrote:
I think a Paladin would consider a million lives more important than his personal honor and powers, and would press the proverbial button even at the cost of falling.

I do not think a Paladin would, well they could, but they would fall. It is supposed to be part of what makes a Paladin a Paladin. The Paladin doesn't not do evil to keep his powers, a Paladin believes that not doing evil is right, that not doing evil is more important than those lives. That is what it takes to be a Paladin.

Quote:
Quote:
"The Paladin can do no evil. This is a complete and total hardline stance. So if someone is claiming that the Paladin did something evil and he still has his powers, then we know the person is wrong."
He could have received Atonement in that time.

That is a possibility, yes, though unlikely. There are a whole lot of reasons that wouldn't exactly work so well. It would require a high level Cleric to do the atonement, then the Paladin would have to be willing to lie about what happened. It opens a can of worms that makes it a very unlikely series of events.

Quote:
Quote:
The powers come with that name. The idea is that there isn't supposed to be something similar to the Paladin. The Paladin is the Paladin and nothing else is a Paladin. Nothing else has the powers of the Paladin. They are singular and unique.
Antipaladins have most of the same abilities, albeit with Good penciled out and replaced with Evil. How close can some other class be to a Paladin, mechanically, without getting too close and therefore killing it?

A Paladin and an Antipaladin are literally the exact opposite. Their powers function completely differently.

The Anti detects evil, the pallie detects good.
The Anti causes damage with his touch, the pallie heals it.
The Anti makes people feel fear, the Pallie courage.

This is also a special case, like the Paladin, in that the Anti is intended to be a dark reflection.

Quote:
Several pages back, I outlined a hypothetical Code of Honor for a Chaotic Good Paladin analogue. As it turned out, the only tenet that really needed to be changed was the lowest-priority rule (uphold individual liberty rather than legitimate authority).

Save for, I do not believe that following a code that they didn't personally write is a chaotic thing to do. I do not feel, for a second, that a Chaotic Good would not violate the code if to do so meant saving someone. Period.

I do not believe that you are going to be able to convince me to come to your side on this, in this matter I have given enough thought that I cannot be moved. It would require you to change an outlook that I believe strongly in and have for my entire life about a class I have had a personal attachment to for 29 years. My first character ever in D&D was a Paladin. I was drawn to it then, I am drawn to it now.


Athaleon wrote:
Nox Aeterna wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
It's not like there's not precedent for what we want. I think having different oaths which start new class feat chains within the same class build up is the perfect solution.

This here exemplifies why this thread wont move from place as well as why this concept, and honestly no new concept, was added to the paladin already.

There is no such a thing as a perfect solution, cause the entire issue rests on a subjective matter. What one feels and another person feel might simply not match. Some clearly feel this wont ruin the paladin, others do, me included btw. This bar wont ever move unless for a miracle suddenly a lot of folk stop feeling like they curently do.

I mean, lets be real guys, do you think the folk at paizo didnt think of this solution, and probably many others, themselves? What followed is probably what followed here, people simply wont ever agree with the feeling the class passes and how this changes it. The bar again, didnt move.

It's well-documented in studies that, in general, beliefs held emotionally will almost never be swayed by argument or evidence. For topics like this, I rarely hold any hope that the other side will be swayed by anything I say. The point is to influence people who are on the fence, who could very well be developers.

An interesting view, but i wonder how many people "on the fence" even are for anyone to influence, cause i check this thread often and honestly by this point it is pretty much the same folk, with the same views, playing in a circle where one side says A, the others says B and it just keeps going and going.

I personally doubt even more the devs making the calls are on the fence about anything when creating such a project, but then again, cant and wont speak for the devs here.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay, this thing about the Paladin somehow having narrative power. How? Short of the NPCs literally being able to see the Paladin's character sheet, how would they know? How is the fact of a Paladin being a Paladin such an unerringly recognizable thing? Especially when being a deity would have to be even more unerringly recognizable (hello, the nation of Razmiran).

Show me the observable difference between these two.

LG Wizard 19. He has no levels in Paladin, not now and he didn't retrain out of them prior. He nevertheless follows the code and keeps that behavior as though he was one.

LG Paladin 1 Wizard 19. Because he is primarily a Wizard, he does his Paladin-y things through the lens of his Wizard abilities. That is how he best contributes to the fight against evil. So much so that he has never smited a person, nor used Detect Evil. So if he fell but stayed LG, no one would notice. Heck, his 19 levels of LG Wizard provide a Moderate Aura of Good that would actually drown out his Faint Aura of Good from his 1 level of Paladin, and similarly disguise its absence.

Plus, there's the Vindictive Bastard. And don't say it's an Ex-Paladin. That's just how you qualify to go VB in the first place. For the purpose of how the game works, he's a Paladin. Based on how archetypes work, you trade your existing abilities for the new ones the archetype gives you. Ex-Paladins have nothing to trade, but the VB gets his abilities as replacements for all those Paladin class features. Ergo, he's a Paladin and counts as one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

New oath feats that swap your code all have a line that says: "by taking this feat your class name becomes ___________"

Problem solved.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
And how would you KNOW they have powers or not? Other classes have smite, lay on hands, auras, mounts, spells, ect... That and a vindictive bastard can 100% say they are a paladin, smite some 'evil', protect with his Aura of Courage, cast paladin only spells... Heck, they could even still be LG or CE or anything in between.

Yeap... a vindictive bastard can say they are a paladin, as much as any other fallen paladin can.

By that point you can have a paladin CE with no powers, who also arent a vindictive bastard and they will also say they are a paladin :P, true, but that aint gonna get you far haha.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:
Revan wrote:
So, then, I assume you're opposed to Warpriests, Cavaliers, Clerics, Hellknights, Antipaladins, the goddess Saernrae, Sorcerers whose Celestial bloodline is flavored as a pact with the Heavens...

Not at all. They aren't the Paladin. There is no problem with them. The Paladin isn't just a Holy Warrior, nor is it just the warrior of a God, nor just a Knight. I have no issue with Warpriests, Cavaliers, Clerics, or Hellknights. No issue with Sorcerers either.

Antipaladins - While named badly - I am okay with because they are the complete opposite of a Paladin and have a singularly unique place in the lore.

Almost nobody is going to confuse a Paladin and an Antipaladin.

They are all mechanically or lorewise similar to the Paladin. They follow strict codes of conduct, and/or they wield divine power and perhaps blend it with Martial skill, and/or they are insanely dedicated and unyielding in their beliefs, and/or they *explicitly have Paladin abilities.*

People might not mistake an Antipaladins for a Paladin. But they could 100% make that mistake for a Cleric, a Cavalier, especially a Warpriest...


master_marshmallow wrote:

But you could like, just not take the feat.

And there is precedent dude, a Hellknights base class chassis would be amazing, especially since it really enforces the armor focus of the class. It's Golarion too.

Facts matter before throwing shade.

I appreciate that you are passionate and that you believe that your logic is stronger than mine. I appreciate and applaud that you are trying to convince me to accept your way thinking.

However,

I have, at length, numerous times in this thread explained that there isn't really a precedent from my point of view. I have explained, many times, that it doesn't matter if *I* can play a character who is lawful good, who follows the code, etc.

For me it is about the place of the Paladin in the lore and of the world.

I have explained this so many times that I actually built a notepad file so I just had to copy and paste the response.

I am tired of that cyclical conversation.

So, I will state it simply:

"It does not matter if I can personally do something, it is about the place of the Paladin in the world."

I implore you, please do not seek to challenge that statement. I ask that you simply accept that those are my beliefs.


master_marshmallow wrote:

New oath feats that swap your code all have a line that says: "by taking this feat your class name becomes ___________"

Problem solved.

I refer you to the statement I made on the previous page about this. I am not going to keep explaining it over and over again. This does not solve the problem.

This, to me, would destroy the class. I would not feel an attachment to the Paladin, I would not be able to play them anymore, I would quit the game.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps the point isn't to change your mind or convince you, but rather the largely quiet audience and the devs who are listening as well.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tectorman wrote:
How is the fact of a Paladin being a Paladin such an unerringly recognizable thing?

Paladin local #358 union card? Tin star of goodness? Nametags [hi, I'm a paladin!]? Big glowing arrow in the sky? I've been asking this for a while and haven't gotten a satisfactory answer.

Nox Aeterna wrote:
graystone wrote:
And how would you KNOW they have powers or not? Other classes have smite, lay on hands, auras, mounts, spells, ect... That and a vindictive bastard can 100% say they are a paladin, smite some 'evil', protect with his Aura of Courage, cast paladin only spells... Heck, they could even still be LG or CE or anything in between.

Yeap... a vindictive bastard can say they are a paladin, as much as any other fallen paladin can.

By that point you can have a paladin CE with no powers, who also arent a vindictive bastard and they will also say they are a paladin :P, true, but that aint gonna get you far haha.

The thing is, the vindictive bastard still HAS paladin powers. Spells, arua, smite. SO a paladin can do an evil act and still have powers afterwards which was the point. What tells the random person on the street that it's a paladin [normal] or a paladin [vindictive bastard]?


knightnday wrote:
Perhaps the point isn't to change your mind or convince you, but rather the largely quiet audience and the devs who are listening as well.

Meh well, not like we cant keep playing in circles till the next blog post hit, hey maybe even further than that.

Who knows, maybe mark will drop more class features at some point. That would be something.

1,551 to 1,600 of 1,735 << first < prev | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Paladin Class Preview All Messageboards