The obvious seems to be inquisitor and paladin or battle-oriented cleric. But what do I know?
I would probably make Dugald as an inquisitor, as he seems to be more concerned about being a judge and executioner than a shining example of his faith reaching out to help others. Daniel, I would probably make a paladin as he seems inclined to look beyond himself and his own needs as he goes about his chosen task. The differences between the two are both minor and major at the same time, particularly their level of concern for others as they go about their chosen tasks, which in many ways is the key difference between a paladin and an inquisitor. It effects how an individual is likely to go about his chosen task, and how he is likely to be perceived by others.
"He will punish evil as often as able but will prioritize doing good and innocent lives first.."
Paladin all the way...
"...He prefers to formalize execution- listing crimes, judging and last rites, but against foes too dangerous is not above sneaky tactics as he is loathe to risk allies."
...unless your GM is one of those still convinced that LG Paladin means total fool.
In the latter case I would say LG Cleric of Justice or Oracle of Battle or Life instead.
Hi,
In the interest of Role Playing instead of ROLL playing. Our DM had us write up some Backstories and exchange them with another player.
We were then to come up with a build/class for that backstory. Proplem is me and the person who swapped thought of the same class and we don't wanna do that.
I'm wondering what you guys would make in terms of class/combat style.
** spoiler omitted **...
First guy sounds like a pally all the way.
Second sounds like a battle cleric/ battle oracle or celestial-ish sorcerer. Perhaps with a couple levels of bard.
Actually this might sound a bit off, but I think the first one rather sounds like a ranger with favored enemy:undead.
He's got a serious grudge, and a very targeted one. Inquisitor also would work, but I thought this was a perfect case for favored enemy.
The second one is a straightforward Paladin.
I could see cavalier for the second guy, but it doesn't have the feel of oracle to me.
The first guy seems too inclined to focus on law and justice to be a true paladin to me. Inquisitor works very well in this case as it gets around the alignment issues and allows for a slightly more, for lack of a better word, "selfish" personality and approach while maintaining the paladin feel. Ranger could work, but I think inquisitor maintains the religious feel a bit better, particularly the part where the god talks to him.
I would also like to point out that just because they are mechanically one class, doesn't mean that they couldn't hold the an in game title of another class. In game, I could see Dugald being viewed as a paladin as long as his mechanical class was divine based, so battle cleric, inquisitor, and paladin, even ranger with the right flavor, could all potentially fall under the ingame title of paladin.
To be honest, I love the idea of gritty paladins. So I would like to see this guy go that route. To be honest about the story, though, I think the suggestions of Inquisitor or Ranger with favored enemy work well too. At this point for me, it is a question of balancing the party.
Now, there isn't any reason why two paladins can't be in a group. In fact, with so many characters out there that don't play well with paladins, it might not even be a bad idea. There are different builds however. For instance, your first guy could be an archer paladin with high dexterity or even a TWF, go with the Undead Scourge Archetype for flavor, and the second guy could be mounted with a higher charisma with the Shining Knight or Warrior of the Holy Light Archetype.
But if you don't want that, and it sounds like you don't, then I will have to say that your second fellow sounds like a battle oracle or even a Battle Herald to me. A few levels of Bard and the feat Boon Companion would be enough to keep the horse (or other mount) in the game. I would probably pick between the two depending on the adventure you are doing. Mounted is not good for dungeons, or in the midst of cities for instance.
Over all, as long as they can get along, don't worry too much about it. Two of the same class can be brothers in arms, or rivals, and either could be fun, but there are so many cool options out there, anything can be awesome. Sometimes I find that the only thing I really need to change about a character is my attitude playing him.
To be honest, I love the idea of gritty paladins. So I would like to see this guy go that route. To be honest about the story, though, I think the suggestions of Inquisitor or Ranger with favored enemy work well too. At this point for me, it is a question of balancing the party.
Now, there isn't any reason why two paladins can't be in a group. In fact, with so many characters out there that don't play well with paladins, it might not even be a bad idea. There are different builds however. For instance, your first guy could be an archer paladin with high dexterity or even a TWF, go with the Undead Scourge Archetype for flavor, and the second guy could be mounted with a higher charisma with the Shining Knight or Warrior of the Holy Light Archetype.
This is why I pointed out that in game titles don't have to match mechanical class titles, especially when the class could potentially be called by the name of another class. Any battle oriented divine based character could potentially be called a paladin, even if their actual abilities weren't technically like those of the paladin class presented in the core book, giving characters faced with this situation a few more options mechanically.
|
I actually think Dugald would make a rather awesome Barbarian, with his rage being brought out against undead. You could take all of the anti-spellcaster Barbarian Rage Powers, and get yourself an Undead-Bane weapon. Maybe take a level or 2 of Ranger for the Favored Enemy (Undead).
Daniel, on the other hand, seems like an excellent candidate for an Oracle of Life or Battle. The stillborn thing could leave him cursed (haunted and crippled work best, I think), and you can always take Alignment Channel to use your Positive Energy to harm evil outsiders. Plus, the only thing you need to be good in combat is the Cleric Spell List. The other abilities are just icing on the cake.
Alternatively, if you want to go the obvious route, Dugald is an Inquisitor/Paladin, Daniel is a Paladin (Warrior of Holy Light/Hospitaler [both]).
Dugald: Inquisitor
Daniel: Paladin
both backstories: very cool.
Dugald: Inquisitor
Daniel: Paladin
both backstories: very cool.
I agree :-)
Good luck in your game.
Sounds like you came up with a solid plan to work with. Enjoy the campaign.
What about the paladin APG Undead Scourge since he has so much hatred for the undead? Or ranger with favored enemy undead?
Ok first guy? I'm thinking, rogue/assassin. He flips off the deep end (no reason why evil can't hunt evil) If you want to keep him heroic, and not full put revenge, Go Ranger/Inquisitor with a focus on the undead.
Second Guy, Magus. Half-elf? Raised by Uncle, elf blood, father had "powers" but never classically trained as a pally, no mention in back story about being 'called'. The fighter part of him he got from experience so close to the world wound, and the last mini paragraph says it all for the magic part.
Give him a rank in heal skill to support the medic part of his backround.