The main reason is because we at Paizo are big fans of the paladan, and more to the point, the traditions of the game.
I am pretty sure I mentioned that. Something along the lines of "I am tired of the 1e/2e nostalgia [...]." But I digress. You miss the point I was hitting at. And miss it hard judging by the rest of the post.
The paladin has been in the game since before the 1st edition AD&D rules,
To be frank. I. Don't. Care. This is not D&D. You are not WotC. Is Pathfinder its own game or is it the old fogies' shot at WotC for changing the game between the old versions and attempting to relive the "glory day" of 1e and 2e?
Anyway... the paladin isn't going anywhere because we at Paizo and a SIGNIFICANT amount of our customers like him.
I like the Paladin and like what was done with the class and its abilities. That has NOTHING to do with the point I was making.
I like the Paladin and like what was done with the class and its abilities. That has NOTHING to do with the point I was making.
But it has everything to do with the point James was answering, namely your question "Is there any reason the Paladin class can't be tossed out and replaced with a Fighter/Cleric or Cavalier/Cleric?".
You may have just considered that a sarcastic one-shot. Your answer when *you* failed to answer the point that similar concepts, for other alignments, can be easily modeled with options that currently exist.
Can the Paladin be easily modeled as well? *YES*
Why does it still exist? For all the reasons James mentioned. Simply, it's special. It's completely biased, totally unfair, and all that. But that's how Paizo and most of us want it. We want the Paladin to be special.
Damn right if it's not LG it's not a paladin and has no point what so ever.
But it has everything to do with the point James was answering, namely your question "Is there any reason the Paladin class can't be tossed out and replaced with a Fighter/Cleric or Cavalier/Cleric?".
Christ, I will spell it out for you people.
That is the exact argument being used (at least by the person quoted) why we don't need/shouldn't have "Paladins" of other extreme alignments. THAT was the point I am making. If X class can be made by combination of Y and Z class, WHY DO WE HAVE X CLASS?! And if X class is necessary for U bs reason, then why is the argument valid for proposed classes?Your answer when *you* failed to answer the point that similar concepts, for other alignments, can be easily modeled with options that currently exist.
Please stop replying to me before you give me an aneurysm.
But that's how Paizo and most of us want it. We want the Paladin to be special.
Can't be that special. I'm sure all the old 1e/2e'rs are generating enough holier-than-thouism to manifest divine powers.
I want "paladins" of extreme alignments and apparently other people do too. If they can't be made unique, then that is PAIZO'S fault, not the fault of the class.
Cartigan, if the way Paizo handles paladins really bothers you so much then house rule it.
I want "paladins" of extreme alignments and apparently other people do too. If they can't be made unique, then that is PAIZO'S fault, not the fault of the class.
What you want is not a paladin.
|
This whole new Paladin thing is ridiculous on its face. The Paladin now gains divine power from the strength of a belief in his own holier-than-thouism; a change from righteous to self-righteous. Now that I think about it, I see that it fits perfectly in the newly created Pathfinder world.
Good lord! Why is it you always seem to have this need to yell and scream and pronounce that Paizo is this or that every time you don't agree with some aspect of the game??
In all honesty, I tend to to agree that a paladin should have a specific god. In games I run, all paladins must choose a specific deity. No big deal. When I play a paladin I also always have an actual deity. This is just not that big of a deal. It's just personal preference Cartigan - just because you don't like something doesn't make you right. I think this is something you really need to come to grips with.
For the record, I think the paladin should only be LG. That's how he always has been, it makes him special and I like him that way.
No disrespect intended, but honestly, I think you need to learn to let stuff go and not get so righteously indignant over everything.
Actually, perhaps the real culprit here is not that the Paladin must be of one specific alignment, but rather that such a thing as 'alignment' even exists.
Sure, it makes things like 'Protection from *' and 'Detect *' easy to adjudicate, but I really think it causes more problems than it solves.
Nearly every group I've played with in the last 10 years or so pays very little attention to official 'alignment' where PCs are concerned. It's a House Rule thing that works very well for us. It may not work at every gaming table.
Being a 'Divinely Inspired Holy Warrior and Paragon of *' should be an exacting road that is easy to fall from no matter what your faith.
I think one of the basic assumptions the designers of 3E, and thus the subsequent iterations of the game, is that all Player Characters should be FANTASY HEROES. Not 'Hero' in the Greek or Literary sense, but 'Hero' in the hyperbolic four-color monthly publication sense.
The design philosophy of Players are Good Guys rather obviates the need to design an 'Evil Paladin' or 'Neutral Paladin' core class. It still doesn't necessarily explain why the Paladin must be LAWFUL good, rather than 'Any Flavor of Good'.
Of the Core Classes with Alignment Restrictions, all but the Paladin are very broad.
Barbarian: Any Non-Lawful
Cleric: Must be Compatible with Deity's
Druid: Any Neutral
Monk: Any Lawful
Paladin: Lawful Good
That's a hell of an alignment restriction, and the benefits for adhering to such a narrow path are not commensurately greater than those for playing any other class without such a restriction. It's cool FLAVOR, but should rules enforce flavor? Support - Yes. Enforce - Perhaps not. Flavor should be SETTING specific. It's all well and good for developers to say that 'In Golarion, Paladins must be Lawful Good, because the only Deity's who want them are X, Y, and Z'.
Back in the Olden Days, before 'Class Balance' was such a huge issue, the rewards for playing a Paladin were really greater than for other classes. This is why they had such tight restrictions and a slower XP progression than almost every other class.
The Discussion about it can be enjoyable, but in the end, we either have to accept that the Developers of the game believe Paladins should be Lawful Good, and no other Paladin Types should exist; we can modify the rules for our own gaming table; or we can create our own Paladin Alternatives; or we can, politely express to the developers that we, as their customer base, really believe there should be alternative paladins. If the developers receive enough polite, well thought out pleas for this, maybe they will eventually show up in something like the APG 2 or APG 7.
This whole new Paladin thing is ridiculous on its face. The Paladin now gains divine power from the strength of a belief in his own holier-than-thouism; a change from righteous to self-righteous. Now that I think about it, I see that it fits perfectly in the newly created Pathfinder world.
Dude...it's a game. A GAME. You can do whatever you want to with it, or not play it in favor of something else if it gives you such a fit.
Yeesh.
What you want is not a paladin.I want "paladins" of extreme alignments and apparently other people do too. If they can't be made unique, then that is PAIZO'S fault, not the fault of the class.
I don't care what you bloody call it. That's why "paladin" is in quotation marks. The point is to have a representative of each extreme alignment.
|
Throwing my hat into the circle marked "Cleric IS the Holy Warrior for a given alignment or deity."
If you look at the system from an abstract point of view, this is the way I see it:
Clerics as Holy Warriors aren't as skilled of combatants as a Fighter or Paladin might be. They aren't as tough, either.
The power granted to them by their god more than makes up for that, and their abilities and skills and resolution are bolstered by that faith, enabling them to fight with the best trained warriors in the land.
Applying mechanics to that, the cleric might have a lower HD and BAB progression, but he bolsters his abilities with spells granted by his god, which make him as powerful or more powerful than a fighter or paladin would normally be.
It makes perfect sense to me both in-character and in metagame terms, so I'm perfectly content with only having Paladins and Antipaladins as they stand.
I don't care what you bloody call it. That's why "paladin" is in quotation marks. The point is to have a representative of each extreme alignment.What you want is not a paladin.I want "paladins" of extreme alignments and apparently other people do too. If they can't be made unique, then that is PAIZO'S fault, not the fault of the class.
And look there is LG and CE are the 2 extrem, everything else is in between.
What ya want is called a cleric
|
I have a serious beef with the concept that if I want to play a holy warrior in the service of Caiden I have to be a Cleric.
I want to play a Paladin with a code of conduct that matches my desire that places personal freedom over order.
I was severely disapointed that Hellknight isn't a 20 lvl class and I had to take 5 levels of fighter.
I don't think Hellknight or any other Alignment based Holy/Unholy warrior in the service of a God weakens Paladins.
Creative Director
|
Cartigan... I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but the VAST number of your posts feel unusually antagonistic and confrontational and, frankly, insulting to Paizo, to many of our customers, and to myself. I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish by continuing to post on these boards, I guess, if what we (and I) are doing at Paizo is so disappointing and annoying to you. It strikes me that, perhaps, Pathfinder and Golarion just aren't the game for you.
In any event, please ramp back the aggression in your posts (and I'm talking about ALL of them, not just the ones on this thread). I'm kinda getting tired of it.
In any event, this thread has served its purpose; I've explained where the Templar went and there's no reason to keep things going here. Folks can continue to chat about the merits of paladins and templars and all that, but if people continue to be unnecessarily confrontational here I'll just lock down the thread.
And look there is LG and CE are the 2 extrem, everything else is in between.
I fundamentally disagree.
What ya want is called a cleric
No. It. Isn't.
Cartigan... I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but the VAST number of your posts feel unusually antagonistic and confrontational and, frankly, insulting to Paizo, to many of our customers, and to myself. I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish by continuing to post on these boards, I guess, if what we (and I) are doing at Paizo is so disappointing and annoying to you. It strikes me that, perhaps, Pathfinder and Golarion just aren't the game for you.
No, that's pretty much been what I have been aiming for.
And I should not purchase or play your system because I disagree with the company's design decisions and methodology? Seems like a pretty pointless, if not foolish, statement to make. I have no problem with the mechanics or, necessarily, the classes. My problem is with, as stated, the company's design decisions and methodology as it pertains to the official world and future class design and creation.
And look there is LG and CE are the 2 extrem, everything else is in between.I fundamentally disagree.
You can disagree all you want but LG is at one end and CE is at the other end. That makes everything else the middle.
There is not three aliment stacks there is one LG,LN,LR,NG,N,NR,CG,CN,CE It has a 2 extremes one is LG and the other is CG. Its always been that way, LG is good at its best intentions, while CE is evil at is most destructive and harmful.
Cartigan: How about you allow Paladains to be LG, NG, and CG. Anitpaladins can be LE, NE, and CE. Then for TN, you have Druids.
|
|
Cartigan... I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but the VAST number of your posts feel unusually antagonistic and confrontational and, frankly, insulting to Paizo, to many of our customers, and to myself. I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish by continuing to post on these boards, I guess, if what we (and I) are doing at Paizo is so disappointing and annoying to you. It strikes me that, perhaps, Pathfinder and Golarion just aren't the game for you.No, that's pretty much been what I have been aiming for.
And I should not purchase or play your system because I disagree with the company's design decisions and methodology? Seems like a pretty pointless, if not foolish, statement to make. I have no problem with the mechanics or, necessarily, the classes. My problem is with, as stated, the company's design decisions and methodology as it pertains to the official world and future class design and creation.
I disagree, your problem is that you appear completely incapable of disagreeing with people in a respectful fashion.
|
Creative Director
|
Cartigan... I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but the VAST number of your posts feel unusually antagonistic and confrontational and, frankly, insulting to Paizo, to many of our customers, and to myself. I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish by continuing to post on these boards, I guess, if what we (and I) are doing at Paizo is so disappointing and annoying to you. It strikes me that, perhaps, Pathfinder and Golarion just aren't the game for you.No, that's pretty much been what I have been aiming for.
And I should not purchase or play your system because I disagree with the company's design decisions and methodology? Seems like a pretty pointless, if not foolish, statement to make. I have no problem with the mechanics or, necessarily, the classes. My problem is with, as stated, the company's design decisions and methodology as it pertains to the official world and future class design and creation.
Well then. I guess I can lock this thread and talk to Gary about the possibility of giving you a time out from Paizo.com, because I'm not really interested in cultivating or fostering trolls and poisonous posts here.
Thanks for being honest about your goals, though! Although being a jerk really kind of pisses in the pool for everyone else, since the tone of your posts are singlehandedly making me not want to spend time on these boards answering questions.
Anyway, this thread is done.