I think, that if done correctly, paladin could be a feat chain with alignment and code restrictions and prerequisites rather than a class.
You could get a cleric paladin, cavalier paladin, most definitely a fighter paladin, heck even a ninja paladin.
Probably only the fighter would get the "full paladin effect" as the whole thing would be pretty feat intense. But it should cost a lot more and be harder to do than it is.
Back in the day when the class came out, it was hard to qualify for and therefor balanced out it's OP nature (and could only be human) now, its too common and too powerful
Back in the day when the class came out, it was hard to qualify for and therefor balanced out it's OP nature (and could only be human) now, its too common and too powerful
"X is too common" is a campaign justification for limiting how many paladins there are, not a game mechanics justification for turning the paladin class into a feat chain.
There's a 3-level prestige class for that. ;)
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The D&D 3.5 "Unearthed Arcana" suggested the Paladin, as well as the Bard and Ranger, as prestige classes.
I like the image of a wet-behind-the-ears paladin, but I can appreciate the idea of a ranger or cleric taking in-game oaths and becoming a paladin. It makes the oath mean more, and it allows the GM to convey her understanding of the paladin's oath to the player for several sessions.
I think a feat chain is a little weird, Pendagast, precisely because of the alignment prerequisite. I don't know of any other feat with alignment restrictions.
I don't know of any other feat with alignment restrictions.
There's a few. One in particular:
By swearing to never use a weapon other than a longsword, you can achieve things normally limited to the most highly trained swordsmen.
Prerequisite: Proficient in longsword, Weapon Focus (longsword), base attack bonus +4, worshiper of Iomedae.
Benefit: You may select longsword-related feats as if you were a 4th-level fighter. For example, you may select Weapon Specialization (longsword) as a feat.
Special: If you ever use a melee or ranged weapon other than a longsword in combat, you lose the benefits of this feat until you receive an atonement spell. You may still use spells that act as weapons (such as flame blade and spiritual weapon) without affecting your oath.
Found in Pathfinder 26: The Sixfold Trial
Technically the Iomedaean Sword Oath feat doesn't have an alignment restriction. You could be a N rogue who worships Iomedae, for example.
|
This sounds like an awful idea. If it's feat intensive for a Fighter, then that means no one else would be able to take all of these feats.
Additionally, how exactly is the Paladin "overpowered?" They're strong when working in their niche, yes, but this requires a very strict code of conduct, and you're still just a martial character that happens to be good against Evil targets, with some extremely limited spellcasting.
Do we have to keep doing this sort of thing?
I have a good idea. Create feats and a chain for a non-paladin to become a paladin. That would be quite interesting.
Meantime, leave the core book alone for the rest of us to enjoy.
Honestly I like the idea of a paladin. It has a lot of lore behind it and I think they serve a nice little role.
Rather then a feat chain, why not try something like a "archetype package"? Super Genius introduced archetype(s) that any class can take.
Check it out.
If you wanted to do this so you can have your ninja paladins maybe that would be fun.
(Also, personal taste: Not super OP in my book. They dominate their niche but that's about it. Have them fight misunderstood & good aligned beggers and watch them fall)
Honestly I like the idea of a paladin. It has a lot of lore behind it and I think they serve a nice little role.
Rather then a feat chain, why not try something like a "archetype package"? Super Genius introduced archetype(s) that any class can take.
Check it out.If you wanted to do this so you can have your ninja paladins maybe that would be fun.
(Also, personal taste: Not super OP in my book. They dominate their niche but that's about it. Have them fight misunderstood & good aligned beggers and watch them fall)
That'd be changing a story to specifically nerf them or put them in nerfy situations, It's a bit of a stretch.
The original paladin was hard to qualify for and had restrictions, Now a days, everyone is constantly looking to "over restrict" the paladins actions: "you took a rolling stop back at that stop sign, that's unlawful you lost your paladin powers"
I see that as a constant reminder of people looking to restrict the paladin (overly so) more than it was meant to be, to over compensate for the fact that any character roll could potentially be one now....
Instictfully people are looking to restrict this class, BECAUSE the only restriction IS "Lawful Good".
This over restriction of 'lawful good on a pedestal' just makes RPing a pally a chore, which is why I generally never play one anymore. It's like some kind of agenda to get the pally to fall.
I really believe this is due to a common consent that generally, it is believed the pally is OP, and it isn't restricted enough.
"there must be some draw back to being a paladin".
coupled with tons of posts like "why does my paladin have to have the paladin class, I want these powers for a rope swinging wig maker" blah blah blah...
So, Feat chain, was the idea.
Paladins don't fall because they didn't obey the order of some street guard, or the evil king.
Nor do they fall because they refused to lay on hands on some bloke that needed some healing.
They still have personal choices. If the behavior is a pattern, and is on going, or is a grievous event. (killing out of anger or pleasure, or stealing something for personal gain) then yes a single act can violate his oath.
Paladins and ranger were rare, now we have posts like "why play a fighter when paladin is better" and "Dm says my paladin fell because he ate meat on good friday"
This all says to me, the paladin isn't restricted enough (or at least entry into it)
|
|
The Paladin is very much restricted beyond just being LG. That bit at the end that says you cannot knowingly commit an Evil act is all that needs to be said about it. There are even Paladin codes for specific deities, and most of them are things like "Don't murder senselessly," "Help those in need," and "Do Good in <Deity>'s name, for you are their hand."
Just because some DMs are dicks about what constitutes a Paladin's range of options, doesn't mean that there's something inherently wrong with the Paladin class.
I was considering making some Paladin abilities into feats (beginning with "faith healer" to emulate lay on hands), but only because I was planning a world without deities, sort of a forsaken world.
In any regular setting, I don't think there's the need
faith healer is a cool idea, could give some random fortune teller lady the lay on hands ability....
LG/Paladin code, same same that I was talking about.
That's the only "restriction" so it's over accented and over bearing now.
as far as whats OP.
For starters, Smite should not overcome DR.
It had occured to me that if Stunning Fist could be a feat anyone could learn, why not a few other classes' features?
Besides, it gave me a fun idea for a Joan of Arc like character. In a world abandoned by the gods, the young female warrior who hears voices and has strange powers.
Paladins are pretty overpowered as long as you pretend wizards, druids, clerics, witches, sorcerers, oracles, summoners, bards, alchemists, and magi don't exist, and as long as you pretend "overpowered" means "good".
but Joan of Arc has consistently been used as a game comparison for an 'actual' paladin.
I would much favor a Paladin as a Prestige Class rather than a feat chain. Way less work to do as well.
And I've never found a Paladin to be overpowered. Facing Demons, Dragons and Evil of all sorts, my Paladins have been aces. Facing Neutral Mercenaries and Chaotic Barbarians, he's had his ass throughly kicked.