Welcome to another paladin thread. This one is about the special mechanics of the blackguard and anti-paladin and the big problem of paladin mechanics. As most people who don't try to inject real world moral relativism into their D&D/Pathfinder know a Paladin gets a bunch of cool special abilities as long as he follows a pretty rigid code. If he breaks it he has to atone to get his power back. BUT he has the honour of being the only class whose alignment is locked on both axes from level 1. A paladin who realizes that lawful good just isn't something he wants to be for the rest of his life is a worse waste of space than a mule in the Mines of Moria. Well, unless he gets the idea that heaven is for chumps and evil is cool. In that case the blackguard or the anti-paladin allow him to get back all of his powers twisted to do the opposite. Welcome to the dark side. Since being evil is all about the easy way (well and not bothering with the greater good, otherwise you would be neutral) that's easy. The gods of darkness, blood and murder embrace you. Wooooooo.
Now there are two ugly problem with that in the otherwise nicely symmetrical cosmology. If you drop out of paladin school without going all the way to kicking puppies and sacrificing virgins you are screwed. Bad paladin, no powers for you. Why is that? The other thing is that a blackguard or anti-paladin can go nowhere. It doesn't matter if they go into neutral territory or all the way to good, no one will accept them and give them powers. A level 20 anti-paladin who is redeemed is a knight of the sad countenance. Seems that the good gods aren't that much into redemption after all.
I would really like it if there would be multiple "divine champion" classes for the different alignments, especially now that the cavalier, samurai and hellknight beat up the paladin to take his most important class feature. Atonement would allow them to switch between the archetypes on an alignment change. Of course if someone tries to do that too often he could run out of gods he hasn't annoyed yet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin that is not lawful good is not a paladin. If you want to play a divine champion that makes service to justice and glory his life, roll a paladin. Otherwise play something else. There are other options available to you already.
This basically summarizes the developers' position on the subject, which has been stated over, and over, and over again. If you still have a problem with this fix it in your home game or leave it be.
Design Manager
|
Also, as noted in an earlier conversation, it's not even a god that a paladin is necessarily receiving his powers from, but the pure forces of law and goodness. Presumably an antipaladin is drawing his power from the forces of pure chaos and evil.
From the PRD:
"Clerics, druids, experienced paladins, and experienced rangers can cast divine spells. Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source. Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells, and the divine forces of law and good power paladin spells. Divine spells tend to focus on healing and protection and are less flashy, destructive, and disruptive than arcane spells."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin that is not lawful good is not a paladin. If you want to play a divine champion that makes service to justice and glory his life, roll a paladin. Otherwise play something else. There are other options available to you already.
This basically summarizes the developers' position on the subject, which has been stated over, and over, and over again. If you still have a problem with this fix it in your home game or leave it be.
Yeah! How dare you suggest something different or voice your opinion in this forum?! HOW. DARE. YOU?
Don't you know that playing non-LG Paladins is badwrong fun? Shame on you! Shame on you!!!
/sarcasm
Why is it that Paladins invoke such fanatism from some people? Why can't the guy like the mechanics of the class but not necessarilly want to be Lawful Good?
Everytime someone suggests anything remotely similar to a non-LG Paladin, another someone comes over and tells how wrong that idea is. By god people, it's just an idea. I like roguish charactersm but I don't like the Rogue class. Can't I suggest an archetype or voice my PoV on the matter?
Hey, I've seen games with CG Paladins and LN Paladins. Neither of them ruined our role-playing experience.
...Well, maybe the LN one, but that's because his player was a douchebag.
|
Design Manager
|
The devs have been pretty clear that LG Paladins are here to stay. That certainly doesn't prevent you from houseruling it however you choose in your own games. I find myself on both sides of the fence, depending almost entirely on day of the week and current planetary alignment.
In the Pathfinder world, Paladins are noble knights empowered by the awesome forces of goodness, fluffy bunnies, light, and evil-smiting.
If, in your world, paladins are divinely sanctioned warriors empowered by their deities, whether good, bad, or in between, then ignore the alignment piece and treat them as you will. I'm currently doing a conversion from an old Dragon magazine that has LE and NE versions of the blackguard (see: antipaladin).
There's really only one place the alignment restriction actually restricts you, and that's in organized play.
A paladin that is not lawful good is not a paladin. If you want to play a divine champion that makes service to justice and glory his life, roll a paladin. Otherwise play something else. There are other options available to you already.
Well, a paladin that is chaotic evil is an "anti-paladin". So the developers basically say that they don't like paladin classes with alternate alignments and then made one themselves. So what exactly is the "reason" that there couldn't be others? If you have such a problem with the Unearthed Arcana names (paladin of liberation, tyranny etc.) they could also have other names.
Also, as noted in an earlier conversation, it's not even a god that a paladin is necessarily receiving his powers from, but the pure forces of law and goodness. Presumably an antipaladin is drawing his power from the forces of pure chaos and evil.
Okay, then answer me this: Why can't someone get paladin-like powers from the pure forces of chaos and goodness or the pure forces of law and evil? And if you claim that those alignment combinations are worse matches think of devils and azata.
Yeah! How dare you suggest something different or voice your opinion in this forum?! HOW. DARE. YOU?
Don't you know that playing non-LG Paladins is badwrong fun? Shame on you! Shame on you!!!
/sarcasm
*g* Thanks, I needed the laugh.
Why is it that Paladins invoke such fanatism from some people? Why can't the guy like the mechanics of the class but not necessarilly want to be Lawful Good?
Everytime someone suggests anything remotely similar to a non-LG Paladin, another someone comes over and tells how wrong that idea is. By god people, it's just an idea. I like roguish charactersm but I don't like the Rogue class. Can't I suggest an archetype or voice my PoV on the matter?
Hey, I've seen games with CG Paladins and LN Paladins. Neither of them ruined our role-playing experience.
...Well, maybe the LN one, but that's because his player was a douchebag.
I don't know. And I really wonder if people are so protective of the name brand (Paladin (TM), proudly wearing shiny armor, riding white horses and slaying chromatic dragons since some time after 1974.) or are afraid that someone wants to take their class abilities without the drawbacks. Concerning the latter... I'm actually thinking of houseruling the paladin's smite evil to a mechanic like the cavalier's challenge that would work against all foes and that he would keep even when he loses his other powers. I'm still contemplating how much that would mess up the balance of the class if you can't drown it in neutral mercenaries or summoned creatures.
By the way, no one addressed the title. The fact that a paladin can fall really deep and get his power back from the forces of evil while good doesn't provide the same service for redeemed anti-paladins/blackguards.
Lemmy, I think paladiins inspire fanaticism because paladins are fanatics.
Hey, not true. I'm playing a Paladin right now and seeing someone else play one in another campaign. Neither of them is a fanatic.
Both were willing to compromise if that'd be for the greater good. My paladin at least, will lie without thinking twice if that's the only (or most likely to succeed) way to save an innocent. He beleives in redemption, but will prove merciless against demonsn devils and the like.
He believes in 2nd and 3rd chances, but enemies shouldn't expect a 4th one. He protects order 'cause he believes that a ordered world is a happier and safer world. He'll die to save a life, but not to save his pride, after all, he must protect the innocent, and he can't do that if he's dead. He believes in his goddess (Iomedae), and follows her commandments cause they seem to fall in place with his personal belief of how to create a better world, but if he's ever proven wrong, he may change his mind. He never saw himself as a sacred warrior or as a bastion of goodness, just as a warrior who tries to make his best to protect those who can't protect themselves and is lucky enough to have a like-minded deity/cosmic-force-of-good on his side.
He is no more of a fanatic than, let's say, Superman. If anything, clerics are more likely to be fanatics than Paladins, after all, a cleric can have actual proof that he's evil (through Detect Good/Evil, or simply by trying to channel energy and realizing it's negative energy) and still follow his God.
Paladins on the other hand, are expected to put Good above Lawful. IMO, A Paladin who tells the truth and, let's say, reveals the location of the resistance's headquarter to the evil Lich King's soldiers, 'cause his code said lying is wrong is not really Good. He just sacrificed the lives of good and innocent people just so he'd not lose his powers. That's evil in my book.
By the way, no one addressed the title. The fact that a paladin can fall really deep and get his power back from the forces of evil while good doesn't provide the same service for redeemed anti-paladins/blackguards.
Yeah, it seems to me the Great Powers of Law and Good are somewhat snobbish, if you're not exactly like them, than you're as good as a murder-hobo psychopath. As much as I love the class, I never liked the fact that Paladins have a serious weakness that is completelly dependant on GM fiat.
Unless you have a cool GM, playing Paladins can be very frustrating. I always say that jerk GMs are the bane of paladins, and they can bring down these holy warriors with more efficiency than any Demon Lord could ever dream of.
Yeah! How dare you suggest something different or voice your opinion in this forum?! HOW. DARE. YOU?
Don't you know that playing non-LG Paladins is badwrong fun? Shame on you! Shame on you!!!
/sarcasm
Your sarcasm is misplaced and faulty. This is hardly a different or new suggestion. It has been discussed many times on these boards, and my post is simply a summary of the developers' position on the subject of those discussions every time. It's idiotic and a waste of time to continue to push for non-lawful good paladin in the game. If you want such options, add them to your home game; stop kicking the dead bonded mount.
Well, a paladin that is chaotic evil is an "anti-paladin". So the developers basically say that they don't like paladin classes with alternate alignments and then made one themselves. So what exactly is the "reason" that there couldn't be others? If you have such a problem with the Unearthed Arcana names (paladin of liberation, tyranny etc.) they could also have other names.
The antipaladin has a special place in the history and background of the hobby. To do the game justice an antipaladin is necessary; they need the black knight figure that directly challenges the paladin on all levels.
It was not an exception to what the developers said. It is a special allowance due to the hobby's long history. This is also why paladin will always be lawful good.
By the way, no one addressed the title. The fact that a paladin can fall really deep and get his power back from the forces of evil while good doesn't provide the same service for redeemed anti-paladins/blackguards.
Antipaladins are a true and conscious corruption of a paladin's powers, abilities, and purpose. They are the embodiment of everything a paladin is not. A fallen paladin has to choose to turn his back on the powers of good, something that even most fallen paladins refuse to do; it is essentially burning your bridges in spite as you leave. There is no redemption for such characters. It has no place within concept.
Why is it that Paladins invoke such fanatism from some people?
Probably because paladins (and antipaladins) are basically fanatics. Sure, they're fanatics for all the right reasons, but they're fanatics nevertheless.
Your sarcasm is misplaced and faulty. This is hardly a different or new suggestion. It has been discussed many times on these boards, and my post is simply a summary of the developers' position on the subject of those discussions every time. It's idiotic and a waste of time to continue to push for non-lawful good paladin in the game. If you want such options, add them to your home game; stop kicking the dead bonded mount.
You know, not everybody lives on these forums. Just thought I should mention that.
It was not an exception to what the developers said. It is a special allowance due to the hobby's long history. This is also why paladin will always be lawful good.
The Unearthed Arcana also belong to the "hobby's long history." And I'm pretty sure that they dropped the lawful good requirement in D&D 4E. And as much as I don't like it you can hardly argue that it's not part of the hobby's history.
Antipaladins are a true and conscious corruption of a paladin's powers, abilities, and purpose. They are the embodiment of everything a paladin is not. A fallen paladin has to choose to turn his back on the powers of good, something that even most fallen paladins refuse to do; it is essentially burning your bridges in spite as you leave. There is...
Yeah, it's good and well possible that the best a paladin turned anti-paladin can accomplish is forgiveness in a Vader-style death (if you are into that, in the Star Wars Expanded Universe you are no Jedi unless you have at least fallen once). However, let's look at the opposite way. Someone is raised to be chaotic evil and trained as an anti-paladin. Even if he manages to get away from that turn his back on the powers of the Abyss, atones for his sins and becomes lawful good he gets what? Nothing. And that is a whole lot harder than falling.
Theorectically a characeter that the OP descibes never would have even made it to first level as a Paladin. By the time you're first level you would have either worked out your doubts, or washed out.
Doubts come with experience. A value that's exactly 0 on a level 1 character when he starts. :D It's easy to have no doubts while trained in a monastery with 20 other paladins and a cleric.
And I don't see the logic for symmetry in alignments. It IS much harder to be good than evil. Good requires an active conmitment. The only thing Evil needs to succeed is for good people to do nothing.
Do you know the Great Wheel? And no, evil and good both needs conscious effort. Evil still has to be inflicted on someone who will probably fight back.
Your sarcasm is misplaced and faulty. This is hardly a different or new suggestion. It has been discussed many times on these boards, and my post is simply a summary of the developers' position on the subject of those discussions every time. It's idiotic and a waste of time to continue to push for non-lawful good paladin in the game. If you want such options, add them to your home game; stop kicking the dead bonded mount.
Easy, man, I didn't mean to offend anyone. It was a light-hearted joke.
I meant no disrespect at all to you or anyone else,
Now, here is my point:
The OP posted an idea/suggestion. If it's new or fresh is hardly relevant. How many Monk/Fighter/Paladin threads do you see very week? Do you think all of those are full of fresh and new perspectives on their subjects?
Discussing whatever you want about the game is hardly idiotic, and no more of a waste of time than any other optimzation, houserules, suggestion, request or advice thread. It's not like we need RPG to live, so one could argue that even visiting this forum is a waste of time.
I don't freaking care if the developers agree with my opinion, or in this case, the OP's. I have a great respect for them and I believe they've made a great job with PF, but I don't agree with everything they say.
I think fighters should have more than 2 skill points per level. I think sorcerers shouldn't have delayed spell progression. I think Power Attack could be a combat option instead of a feat. I think allignments are largely unecessary, and allignment restrictions even more so.
None of this will likely change any time soon, and yes, I can change all of that in my games, but that won't stop me from commenting about it. This is a forum. I come here to write my thoughts and read about other people's opinions. Isn't that pretty much what forums are for?
Don't tell me commenting on any given subject is idiotic. The only idiotic thing is reprimanding someone because they posted their opinion/idea on a forum.
Who knows? If a large number of people ask Paizo for a non-LG Paladin, they might concede it. Or not. Still gonna talk about it here. It's about Pathfinder, and this is a forum dedicated to the discussion of Pathfinder, right?
If you don't think Paladins should be allowed to belong to another allignment, okay, I respect that. If the devs don't think so either. Ces't la vie, I'll still allow players to play CG Paladins if they really want. And I'll give my opinion on the matter if a like-minded player brings it up on this forum.
I believe there is no forum rule that says "do not discuss ideas the developers do not agree with".
If you think these threads are pointless, then why even read them at all?
|
Hey, not true. I'm playing a Paladin right now and seeing someone else play one in another campaign. Neither of them is a fanatic.
Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say that many players who are fanatical about paladins play paladins who are fanatics. Being fanatics makes them more likely to post in these forums.
Anyway, I think that a Paladin ought to be lawful good (not lawful stupid). I think other classes with similar abilities but different alignments would be interesting to play, but I think they should not be called paladins. For example, a paladin-like class might be dedicated to good and freedom (CG alignment). I haven't come up with a good name for the class, though.
You know, not everybody lives on these forums. Just thought I should mention that.
I realize that, which is why I summarized the result of those many threads and discussions in my first reply.
The Unearthed Arcana also belong to the "hobby's long history." And I'm pretty sure that they dropped the lawful good requirement in D&D 4E. And as much as I don't like it you can hardly argue that it's not part of the hobby's history.
Both are recent additions, though. The antipaladin concept goes back to the beginning of the hobby, and even beyond. That is why it gets a special allowance.
Yeah, it's good and well possible that the best a paladin turned anti-paladin can accomplish is forgiveness in a Vader-style death (if you are into that, in the Star Wars Expanded Universe you are no Jedi unless you have at least fallen once). However, let's look at the opposite way. Someone is raised to be chaotic evil and trained as an anti-paladin. Even if he manages to get away from that turn his back on the powers of the Abyss, atones for his sins and becomes lawful good he gets what? Nothing. And that is a whole lot harder than falling.
This argument is faulty as well. A being that starts as an antipaladin is still consciously turning away from all that is good. They make a conscious decision to sever themselves from the good and positive forces of the game's universe. They are beyond redemption as well.
Being a Battle Oracle wearing heavy armor, I already felt like I was a DPS Paladin with my Greatsword of Retribution (+2 with the Divine Favor spell 3/day), and I was NG, meaning I can cater to those who are indifferently evil (that is, doesn't impede my goal) as well as those who are good. I supported my deity, played fittingly to my role, and I pretty much felt like a Paladin (though I didn't need the Lay on Hands).
"I never cared about Justice, and I don't recall ever calling myself a hero; I have always only fought for the people that I believe in, and I will not hesitate! For if an enemy appears in front of me...I WILL DESTROY IT!"
That was pretty much my character's personality, and I think it fully reflects the kind of thing you are looking for in a class; a character that has divine power that, while he does not abide by some sort of code, he does serve the greater good, and will do whatever it takes to achieve that goal; even if it means working with the forces of Evil.
Lemmy, I think paladiins inspire fanaticism because paladins are fanatics.Hey, not true. I'm playing a Paladin right now and seeing someone else play one in another campaign. Neither of them is a fanatic.
Both were willing to compromise if that'd be for the greater good. My paladin at least, will lie without thinking twice if that's the only (or most likely to succeed) way to save an innocent. He beleives in redemption, but will prove merciless against demonsn devils and the like.
If playing PF, you fell for lying. PF Paladins for for any violation.
The Great Wheel was nothing more than a outer planar geograhical arrangement created for Greyhawk. The outer planes of the Forgotten Realms, and Krynn followed no such arrangement (it was Tree shaped if I remember one interpretation )) and as far as I know neither do the ones attached to Golarion.
Funny, I'm pretty sure I remember a time when the Great Wheel was it's own setting (Planescape) and connected Greyhawk, Krynn and the Forgotten Realms.
And if you took into account that the Seven Heavens were just Seven Layers, and that it's opposite counterpart had Six Hundred Sixty Six, even the Great Wheel wasn't nearly as symmetrical as you thought. The evil outer planes had far more layers than the good ones.
p.s.
Also remember that Hell had 9 layers and it's counterpart only had 3.
Yes, but that didn't matter because each layer was infinitely big. And infinity times infinity is the same as seven times infinity, just like 3 times infinity is the same as 9 times infinity.
Anyway, I think that a Paladin ought to be lawful good (not lawful stupid). I think other classes with similar abilities but different alignments would be interesting to play, but I think they should not be called paladins. For example, a paladin-like class might be dedicated to good and freedom (CG alignment). I haven't come up with a good name for the class, though.
Before the UA's Paladin of Freedom, there was a prestige class called Holy Liberator for that. It was pretty much a chaotic good version of the blackguard, the vital thing that was missing were the benefits for being an ex-paladin. But I agree, someone who kicks sand in his enemies faces, lies etc shouldn't be called a paladin.
Navarion, I absolutely love your idea about an antipaladin's "falling" and becoming a paladin!
Thanks, I'm currently collecting ideas for a setting, and among them is an order of anti-paladins whose training is inspired by the Mord-Sith (the way they are made evil, not the fighting style and abilities). And you can't think about Mord-Sith without thinking about Cara.
I realize that, which is why I summarized the result of those many threads and discussions in my first reply.
I am sure you could have done that in a much friendlier tone.
Both are recent additions, though. The antipaladin concept goes back to the beginning of the hobby, and even beyond. That is why it gets a special allowance.
Okay, now I'm hearing "Get off my lawn ya punk. Where's my THAC0? Why is their no "Elf" class anymore?" Not everything old is good because it's old.
This argument is faulty as well. A being that starts as an antipaladin is still consciously turning away from all that is good. They make a conscious decision to sever themselves from the good and positive forces of the game's universe. They are beyond redemption as well.
By that logic a paladin is incorruptible since he consciously turned away from all that is evil. Seriously, we already had a succubus paladin. A being that is literally made out of chaos and evil. Please show me the part of the rules where it says that the anti-paladin ceases to be a mortal being with a soul and is unable to change his alignment.
That was pretty much my character's personality, and I think it fully reflects the kind of thing you are looking for in a class; a character that has divine power that, while he does not abide by some sort of code, he does serve the greater good, and will do whatever it takes to achieve that goal; even if it means working with the forces of Evil.
Not really. I'm fine with my Inquisitor. However, what is a let's say level 10 anti-paladin who loses his power and multi-classes into Inquisitor of a good deity?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM who allows alternate alignment paladins, I think it's strange that paladins can still only be LG while sorcerers can cast using any mental stat and orc witch doctors can cast using their Con!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If playing PF, you fell for lying. PF Paladins for for any violation.Lemmy, I think paladiins inspire fanaticism because paladins are fanatics.Hey, not true. I'm playing a Paladin right now and seeing someone else play one in another campaign. Neither of them is a fanatic.
Both were willing to compromise if that'd be for the greater good. My paladin at least, will lie without thinking twice if that's the only (or most likely to succeed) way to save an innocent. He beleives in redemption, but will prove merciless against demonsn devils and the like.
Yeah, that's why I said that in order to play a Paladin and have fun, you need a cool GM. If I may quote myselft:
As much as I love the class, I never liked the fact that Paladins have a serious weakness that is completelly dependant on GM fiat.
And
A Paladin who tells the truth and, let's say, reveals the location of the resistance's headquarter to the evil Lich King's soldiers, 'cause his code said lying is wrong is not really Good. He just sacrificed the lives of good and innocent people just so he'd not lose his powers. That's evil in my book.
You'd think hat the forces of GOOD would be reasonable enought to know what is a true violation and what is not.
Lying for self profit? Fall.
Lying to save the children who the Evil Tyrant is looking for? Okay.
Kicking sand into the ways of someone just 'cause you don't like them? Fall.
Kicking sand into the eyes of the evil cultist in order to more efficiently defeat him? No problem.
Grave-robbing a innocent commoner to sell its golden teeth or whatever Fall
Looting the corpses of your dead enemies (or allies) to be better prepared for the next battle? Okay, as long as you give the dead allies' belongings to his/her family, if you know who that is (and if not, you should at least put some effort to finding out who they are)
Why should a Paladin fall just because he said that no, that dress does not make his wife look fat?
The other thing is that a blackguard or anti-paladin can go nowhere. It doesn't matter if they go into neutral territory or all the way to good, no one will accept them and give them powers. A level 20 anti-paladin who is redeemed is a knight of the sad countenance. Seems that the good gods aren't that much into redemption after all.
Some stains don't wash off.
Why is it that Paladins invoke such fanatism from some people? Why can't the guy like the mechanics of the class but not necessarilly want to be Lawful Good?
You can. You will. You shouldn't.
Some things should be pure.
|
see i think this is why they introduced the inquisitor. a non paladin holy avenger able to play any alignment. i personally dont think they are anything great, but they do fill the RP of a holy warrior that isnt LG better then every other class, a close second would be an oricle.
so you do have options, just not full bab with awesome saves options.
Well I personally houserule the crap out of Paladins in my game.
1. You have to worship a specific god same as a Cleric
2. There are LG, CG, CE, LE Paladins based on which God you worship
3. Paladin isn't a Base class. Its a prestige class.
Requirements
Alignment - Lawful good or Chaotic Good(I don't allow PCs to be Evil).
Base Attack Bonus - +3
Skills - Knowledge (religion) 5 ranks, Knowledge (nobility and royalty) 2 ranks.
Feats - Mounted Combat or Weapon Focus (See text)
Spellcasting - Ability to cast protection from evil as a divine spell.
Special - Ability to Channel
Here is the link to my Prestige Paladin
Basically you a 5th level Cleric can become a Paladin. A 1st level Paladin is like a 1 HD Lich... its just odd to me. A Paladin should be a Force of power and rare. Not something you can make at 1st level. In my games Most Churches have requirements to become a Paladin and require some type of quest or test.
Usually I see CG paladins. They have less restrictions and are easier to keep on the straight and narrow. Less chance of falling. So far its worked extremely well.
As a GM who allows alternate alignment paladins, I think it's strange that paladins can still only be LG while sorcerers can cast using any mental stat and orc witch doctors can cast using their Con!
Hehe, that wasn't that new to me. In the WarCraft RPG Ogre Magi could cast with con.
Here's a little lesson in infinity math.
Take two points one inch apart. How many points are there between them?
Answer yes, an infnite amount.
Take another two sets of points a mile apart How man points are there between them?
Just like the first example the answer is infnite. But that does not make them the same.
If the evil forces of the outer planes ever got their united act together, they'd sweep aside the combined forces of good like dust off a sidewalk. No, the planes are not balanced symmetrically.
According to your logic there's absolutely no need for the evil forces to work together. Since the Abyss already has infinite layers which are all infinitely big they could simply take over the Wheel.
Some stains don't wash off.
Please tell me the rule section that mentions unforgivable acts that keep your alignment locked in a dark basement.
You can. You will. You shouldn't.
Some things should be pure.
Oh, the old "lawful is better than chaotic" shtick.
so you do have options, just not full bab with awesome saves options.
Why does almost nobody get it? This isn't about alternate classes for divinely empowered fighters. It's about the fact that there's a class with a very specific skill set that's only accessible for two opposite alignments and drops to the usefulness of an NPC-class if you ever change it. Unless you are lawful good and switch to chaotic evil the character is screwed up forever. It doesn't matter if he multi-classes into Inquisitor or Oracle, he will always be worse than other heroes. And that keeps you from effectively using lawful evil fallen paladins, redeemed anti-paladins etc as concepts.
Yes, but that didn't matter because each layer was infinitely big. And infinity times infinity is the same as seven times infinity, just like 3 times infinity is the same as 9 times infinity.Here's a little lesson in infinity math.
Take two points one inch apart. How many points are there between them?
Answer yes, an infnite amount.
Take another two sets of points a mile apart How man points are there between them?
Just like the first example the answer is infnite. But that does not make them the same.
Actually you can map the one line segment to the other via a bijection. Mathematically speaking there are exactly as many points in the one inch line segment as there are in the one mile segment, just like how there are exactly as many integers as rational numbers.
Also, if you're running a game and you don't like the paladin fall from grace mechanic you can figure something else out. I'd start with the paladin losing all of his abilities except divine grace, divine bond and smite and applying the cavalier/samurai ronin order to him.
because they function in those alignments, if you want abilities with flexability then you get an inquisitor or oracle, why dont YOU get that?
3.X had lawful good paladins, a prestige class for lawful evil, neutral evil and chaotic evil people with evil paladin powers in the core rules, a prestige class for chaotic good people with paladin powers in the expansion for religious classes and a book with alternate rules for chaotic good, lawful evil and chaotic evil paladin base classes. I am also very sure that there was material on lawful neutral, chaotic neutral and true neutral paladins, but I don't remember in which book or magazine. Now please tell me where you get the idea to state as a fact that paladins and anti-paladins only function with lawful good and chaotic evil alignments. And also how that explains the one-way switch route.
Also, if you're running a game and you don't like the paladin fall from grace mechanic you can figure something else out. I'd start with the paladin losing all of his abilities except divine grace, divine bond and smite and applying the cavalier/samurai ronin order to him.
I don't have a problem with the paladin losing his powers, that's the same problem the cleric has, just a bit harsher. What I really don't like is what they did with the Cavalier and the Samurai (who basically got the ability to smite everybody without any divine power behind it. A paladin would be stupid not to learn challenging from them and get the rest of his supernatural abilities from the gods. But that probably can't be helped without messing up balance or banning Cavaliers and Samurai) And the fact that someone who has spent years channeling divine power suddenly can't do crap because only two out of 9 alignments are somehow able to grant him powers. I'm thinking about making variants of the old blackguard class. Basically ones where you can trade in your levels and get benefits for having "dead" paladin levels.
I don't have a problem with the paladin losing his powers, that's the same problem the cleric has, just a bit harsher. What I really don't like is what they did with the Cavalier and the Samurai (who basically got the ability to smite everybody without any divine power behind it. A paladin would be stupid not to learn challenging from them and get the rest of his supernatural abilities from the gods. But that probably can't be helped without messing up balance or banning Cavaliers and Samurai) And the fact that someone who has spent years channeling divine power suddenly can't do crap because only two out of 9 alignments are somehow able to grant him powers. I'm thinking about making variants of the old blackguard class. Basically ones where you can trade in your levels and get benefits for having "dead" paladin levels.
Seems to me more of a problem with the Paladin class than the Cavalier. I think Paizo did the right thing in grandfathering in the Paladin as best they could and introducing the Cavalier and Inquisitor to give people (like me) who would otherwise avoid the Paladin some less rigid options.
Along the same lines as my earlier suggestion the GM of a fallen Paladin could allow him to trade out his Paladin levels for Cavalier levels but have the PC gain the new class abilities in a delayed fashion, perhaps requiring some questing.
e.g.,
- ex-Paladin gains the tactician abilities while helping organize a village defend itself from invading orcs.
- ex-Paladin gains the order abilities (including smite) after earning his way into an existing order and training with its knights for some time and completing an order specific quest.
- ex-Paladin gains the mount (if he had the weapon form of divine bond) and expert horse trainer abilities after adventuring with a troop of mounted warriors and/or taming a wild horse from the steppes (I'm thinking Avatar here).
|
Design Manager
|
If playing PF, you fell for lying. PF Paladins for for any violation.Lemmy, I think paladiins inspire fanaticism because paladins are fanatics.Hey, not true. I'm playing a Paladin right now and seeing someone else play one in another campaign. Neither of them is a fanatic.
Both were willing to compromise if that'd be for the greater good. My paladin at least, will lie without thinking twice if that's the only (or most likely to succeed) way to save an innocent. He beleives in redemption, but will prove merciless against demonsn devils and the like.
See, this is the kind of fallacy that creates these paladin issues in the first place. Paladins (lemme insert the code before I go any further):"Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents."
Anways, as I was saying, paladins lose their powers for two reasons; ceasing to be Lawful Good, or willingly committing an evil act. If you want to get technical about it, as written they only lose their powers for committing an evil act, since the rule states that he must be Lawful Good, but does not imply any loss of power for anything other than committing evil acts. It could easily be argued that a paladin who ceases to be lawful cannot progress any further as a paladin but retains all abilities gained thus far, as long as his deviation from lawfulness was not associated with an evil act. The rest of the conditions are guidelines, and your GM should probably warn you if you're violating them on a regular basis, but they do not cause you to instantly fall.