Deadaussiegamer's page

@Rysky, I completely agree which is why I think the change in name is something needed. Crusaders can be good or evil and their fate is often tied with who they devote themselves to.

This is a much more versatile use of the precious core class slot than the very restricted but traditional "Paladin".

@HWalsh <heartbreak> though I'm sure people said the same thing when people were told Dwarves can now be Wizards.

@AnimatedPaper, I think there are a tons of ways to play heroes but tying it to just the one alignment and archetype seems like it'll end up creating more work for what is effectively already available. Clerics have the right idea and paladins should follow suit.

@ HWalsh,

If we all band together we can move mountains! <epic pose>

@Long John

Much like a Cleric serves their god, so should the Crusader. In this edition with multi-classing the way it currently is, the Paladin seems very lack luster. As a whole it would simply be a martial class with a knights code that affords them faith based supernatural and spell-like powers.

1)I would like for Crusaders to be Lawful in alignment and gain their powers from following their oath rather than just being good. While a martial cleric or even a fighter could work, it's still lacking the whole idea of the "Knight's Code" where they swore their lives and blades to their kingdom, church or cause and gaining supernatural/spell-like powers.

2)You would only need a Good and an Evil option, with Neutral being free to decide between the two the same way that Clerics currently do. I believe it's less about saving booking but creating a better launching platform for other character options than the Paladin currently does.

------------

Don't worry man I love being challenged cause it means I forge my ideas better and explain it for those who take the time to read it.

I don't see it as depriving the other classes from being unique. To the contrary it would be about a base form (that being the Crusader or Knight) shaping into the various types of Knight.

A Crusader that takes on a necromantic style = Death Knight, Crusader that becomes a recruiter = Herald, a Crusader who serves a Daimyo = Samurai. This is for me a stronger method of designing your paladin/anti-paladin/grey guard etc than simply having the paladin and archetyping it later.

----------------

@Athaleon - Yes it has and I've brought it up before but it doesn't make it less of a good idea. It's not about making the Paladin LG, but changing the paladin all together and having the Crusader become the staple in it's stead.

Think like the Cavalier who has the option of becoming a Paladin or Blackguard and later a whole score of other things based on the archetypes.

Hi guys,

All I ask is that you keep an open mind while reading this post and to leave a comment if you think this idea holds merit.

My suggestion is the Paladin needs to be reskinned and retooled into something neutral like the Cleric.

Playing a cleric is great because you can be a cleric of any god. Their disposition and domain define what powers you get given, but for whatever reason the Paladin is trapped as a GOOD character.

What I propose is the Paladin class should be renamed to "The Crusader" and be a class that can go between good or evil based on who they pledge their allegiance to. The Crusader would function identically to the current paladin, however the Anathema would change to follow the Cleric's. In addition some opposed class features should be included to accomodate the evil and neutral members of the new class.

By doing this the Crusader will offer a wider variety of character options and lay the foundations for expansions and archetypes into any kind of Divine Champion. An Aesmodean Crusader corrupting the living with contracts and tyranny or an Iomedan Crusader who fights for righteousness, both now have their feet firmly planted on a solid class foundation.

---------------------------------------------------

I believe the changes required to bring this idea to fruition would be a very minor, but would offer a very substantial benefit later on down the track for Pathfinder 2nd Edition.

If you've read this thread and like the idea please let me know in the comments below. I know everyone loves the idea of paladins and the thought of losing something so familiar is a terrifying prospect, but I honestly believe this would be such a strong move and I hope there are many others that believe it would be as well.

Much Love Gang! Happy Playtesting

Okay so here's a question.

While engaged in Starship combat several players wish to try and board a hostile enemy vessel while the remainder continue to harry the enemy ship.

With starship combat turns not having a time requirement, how would you play the boarding party's rounds compared to the phases of ship combat?

At present I'm thinking 2 rounds combat = 1 phase (so 6 rounds per full starship phase).