So do you like the idea? Step away from the good vs evil?
After so many years, it is good to try something different. The Ikko ikki conflict really is fascinating to read up on, they were the good guys!
No need to neuter the pally with neutral, or threaten them with falling, but a "not every enemy is evil campaign" also opens up diplomatic, bribing and oratory options. Don't have to kill everything, smite works still on the evil monster threat, but they aren't the only threat.
Pallies vs non evil rogues is also another one. Damn thieves!
I think that explains my idea.
Wiggz wrote:
The best home rule 'fixes' for Paladins I've ever seen got rid of the alignment requirement, got rid of the 'evil' part of Smite Evil and got rid of the ability to Detect Evil (something Paladins hould never have had anyway in my opinion). Instead Paladins were devoted to a particular God (you know, where they actually GOT their powers from), and their code was one of devotion to that particular God's service with their Smite being useful against that particular God's enemies. Worked much, much better and made far more sense.
Ok, here's the thing. I'm a believer that Paladins should be of any alignment that their Deity is and the great defender of his/her faith.
Here's the thing, of all of the alignments I'm pretty comfortable designing appropriate abilities. My son however wants to play a CN Paladin.
Any help would be nice. Thanks
Yes I know this isn't the thread, and I'm not trying to hijack it. Its just that with all this Paladin talk, there has got to be some help here.
I am not saying campaigns with neutral villians are impossible, but I do think something is wrong if you have to write your campaign around one character.
But why would you have to do that? At most, the Paladin will deal more damage against a few enemies per day. How does that break anything? Even if you BBEG is Evil, he should have minions to help him, and the Paladin can't smite all of them. If it's just a single BBEG x Party, then action economy will kill it much faster than any smite could dream of.
Most groups I have played with focus on fighting evil. Most of the campaigns I see described on this board focus on evil villains. The bestiary reflects this.
I would say the most common type of campaign involves an iconic evil villian with a group of weaker underlings, and in this scenario the Paladin does good damage while being very tanky. I know its possible to write a campaign that balances out the fighter with the Paladin, but most modules and adventure paths favor the paladin.
The problem is not that Paladins are too powerful, but that Fighters are underpowered. It's not a problem that Paladin has good damage (great against a few enemies), good survivability (HP, AC, LoH and Saves)and decent utility, that's something all front-liners should have!
Barbarians also have amazing damage, great survivability (especially with Susperstition) and decent utility (more skill points, trap-finding, fast movement, spell sunder, good selection of class skills, etc). Would you say they are OP too?
What about Rangers? They also have great damage, good survivability and great utility.
Fighters being under-powered. Now thats a joke. The paladin's main shtick is fighting evil. Against neutral enemies with DR they start to really struggle. The only exception is if they are pretty well kitted out. Don't forget they run out of smite really quickly. The addition of mercy abilities helped equal the playing field but they aren't the hardest-hitting melee class out. Neither are they the most badass of melee classes. They still suck against alot of enemies and situations.
Heh.. I was about to reply to your post, Equalizser, then I remembered I had this argument lots of time.
If you think Paladins without Smite Evil suck so bad, well, at least you don't think they are OP.
Can't have all stats high alas.
I haven't seen it as a dump stat much, precisely because if you hit it too hard, the paladin bonuses won't be enough, you will have a will save weakness.
Paladins are pretty MAD already. They need good Str and Cha, but also need decent Dex and Con.
I don't see a problem with them being able to dump Wisdom. No class should need 5 attributes to work.
Nothing is stopping you from boosting your Wisdom score. There is no reason to nerf the class.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, here's the thing. I'm a believer that Paladins should be of any alignment that their Deity is and the great defender of his/her faith.
Here's the thing, of all of the alignments I'm pretty comfortable designing appropriate abilities. My son however wants to play a CN Paladin.
Any help would be nice. Thanks
Not sure if you need help with the abilities or the code. For abilities the simplest fix is to have him detect and smite law, and otherwise replace all instances of "evil" in his mechanics with "law" and "good" with "chaos." If you want something more complicated you'll want to have a deity or other theme in mind.
If you're looking for help with a code I wrote up a CN Paladin code as an exercise elsewhere on the forums. Here it is, spoilered to avoid excessive thread derailment:
Additionally, a CN paladin's code requires that she undermine authority, respect free will (not using compulsions, not giving orders, not entering into binding contracts or requiring them of others, not keeping slaves or prisoners, and so forth), help those who seek to break the law (provided they do not use the help to enact a different set of laws or otherwise enforce their will on others), and punish those who enforce external codes of behavior on others.
Associates: While she may adventure with chaotic or neutral allies, a CN paladin avoids working with lawful characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with lawful associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a more restrictive lawful entity. A CN paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is supporting lawful society more than undermining it. A CN paladin may not accept cohorts, followers, or henchmen, since doing so would establish the paladin as an authority.
Looking at the description of lawful characters, we see it's about:
1) Submission of the individual to the collective in the form of laws, traditions, concern with honour, etc.
2) Consistency of individual behavior with past words or actions (reliability, keeping one's word) or with an objective reality (truthfulness).
3) Allowing certain people (authorities) to enforce the above.
This isn't too much harder to handle than "evil is about hurting, killing, or oppressing others." Moreover, a character can reject these values and actions without being forced into something as silly or unbelievable as "always lies, always does the opposite of what they are told, no exceptions." In detail, referencing the official description and with bold on the key bits:
Tell the truth - It's lawful to draw a distinction between a universal objective truth and fabrication and assume that the former is inherently preferable. A CN Paladin does not consider truth inherently desirable and therefore appears as a compulsive liar. They do tell the literal truth at times, particularly when tactical accuracy is called for, but truth is mixed in with equal parts metaphor and outright fabrication according to whatever makes a more interesting story or makes the CN paladin look good. While this may sometimes be advantageous to the CN paladin, the fact that they continue this behavior even when the lies are easily recognized (and is unapologetic when found out) may cause social difficulty. The CN paladin falls for apologizing for a lie, judging others for their dishonesty, or recounting a story of their exploits without embellishment or fabrication.
Keep their word, trustworthiness, reliability - A CN paladin does not make promises or otherwise encourage others to rely on them. To do so implies that it is reasonable to expect a fellow person to keep promises and be reliable, which is a lawful act. Since a CN paladin doesn't make promises, they feel no compulsion to either keep or break them.
Respect authority, obedience to authority - A CN paladin opposes any individuals who attempt to use a position of authority to influence others' behavior or thoughts. They will undermine these individuals by the most expedient methods possible, including heckling, exposing scandalous behavior, discrediting their credentials or office, or in extreme cases physical violence. This does not mean that a CN paladin must reject expertise (more on that below). A CN paladin falls for using a title of authority (Lord, Sir, Your Honour) or accepting an argument that is based solely on an appeal to authority or conformity. Note this doesn't require a CN paladin to abandon rational thought. A cop says "You can't swim there, it's illegal," the CN paladin laughs in his face. Cop says "Don't swim there, that water is highly toxic" or "you'll contaminate the town's water with filth fever," the CN paladin is allowed to agree that it's not a good idea to swim there, though he still doesn't say "sorry, officer."
Honor tradition, reactionary adherence to tradition - Similar to the above, a CN paladin who follows a tradition for the sake of tradition, in the absence of any evidence of that tradition's merit, will fall. For example, a female CN paladin will not wear white to their wedding. (In fact, a CN paladin will not have a wedding, since marriage is firstly a promise and secondly a request for legal or social approval of a romance, both of which are lawful things. A better example would be that a CN paladin won't wear black to a funeral, and if someone criticizes their dress the CN paladin will mock the idea that the color of one's clothes has anything to do with one's feelings for the deceased.) The CN paladin isn't required to break traditions that are based on practical benefit, such as washing one's hands after using the washroom, and may follow certain "fun" traditions divorced from their usual context, for example decorating a tree in July because why should that sort of thing be limited to Christmas?
Honor (personal) - A CN paladin fights dirty, cheats, or otherwise does whatever it takes to gain an immediate tactical advantage. In seeking such advantage the CN paladin does not take into account social fallout, since that is allowing the opinions of others to impede his performance.
Judge those who fall short of their duties, closed-mindedness, self-righteousness - Nothing is taboo to a CN paladin except mindless conformity and imposing external laws on others, and the CN paladin does not judge others for unlawful or dishonorable behavior including but not limited to improper dress, adultery, or cannibalism, nor is the CN paladin concerned with social caste. A CN paladin is still allowed to object to obviously evil behavior such as murder of innocents, though unlike a CG character he is not required to personally oppose it.
Lack of adaptability - A CN paladin does not have habits. They mix up marching order and combat tactics, and pursue a broad range of skills. A CN paladin falls for consistent use of the same tactic without variation, or for a single instance of failing to depart from a favoured tactic once it has become clear that that tactic is ineffective.
A note on authority vs expertise: In one sense expertise can be described as authority as in "he is an authority on sleep disorders," but there's a distinction that is very important for the CN paladin. Authority is making the claim that because of some title, political office, formal education, legal status or certification, you are intellectually or morally superior, more important, or more competent. Expertise is actually being good at something and being able to assist or advise others using that skill. In many cases, such as with doctors, we expect a strong correlation between the two. Doctors are expected to have medical expertise because they have spent a long time in formal education intended to grant this expertise.
The CN paladin can respect expertise. However, the CN paladin does not believe that formal education or certification implies competence. This view is not even unreasonable in a typical fantasy setting where self-taught people are not uncommon and a clever midwife or barber-surgeon could easily be as skilled a healer as a formally trained doctor, and an inspired oracle wields healing magic just as strong as a church-sanctioned cleric.
A CN paladin is suspicious of doctors and requires that they demonstrate actual expertise rather than just formal authority. A doctor who is an effective healer, who treats patients respectfully as equals, and who explains the reasons for medical recommendations (I've had fifteen heavy drinkers as patients and they've all died young; I want to try maggot therapy since the risks are low and it might save your leg from amputation) will be acceptable to the CN paladin and may gain their respect, though the CN paladin still does not respect or use the title of "doctor." A doctor who flaunts credentials, treats patients as stupid or inferior, refuses to explain or justify treatments or medical advice, or who refuses to consider that medical dogma may be wrong, is assuming the mantle of authority and becomes the enemy of the CN paladin. Similar rules apply to anyone who acts as though their formal credentials elevate them above others.
1) Lies compulsively but not constantly.
2) Doesn't make promises (so he doesn't have to keep or break them)
3) Undermines those who use authority to control others (as indicated directly in the code)
4) Does not respect authority or tradition for their own sake, and does not use titles of address, but can follow laws or traditions if they have practical benefit and can respect expertise
5) Fights dirty
6) Doesn't judge others for unlawful or dishonourable behavior
7) Does not have habits, preferring extreme adaptability
8) Does not use compulsions, issue orders, employ binding contracts, or otherwise limit free will (as indicated directly in the code)
I would run this by the GM (or look at it closely if you are the GM). The code is a draft and an exercise and I haven't playtested it yet. I would recommend loosening it up a bit, especially if your son is a new or younger player. The code was designed to be as restrictive as possible for a CN character while still making sense and being consistent (so it would be analogous to a strictly played LG paladin) and I can see some of it being hard to handle depending on the style of campaign. Restrictions which you think might be problematic can be replaced by deity-specific restrictions as appropriate. For example, a CN Paladin of Gorum may be required to test himself in battle wherever possible, or a CN Paladin of Callistra may be required to assist wronged lovers in seeking vengeance.
In particular, the restriction against lawful associates would make this very difficult if not impossible for a group containing a lawful character (just like you'd have problems with a group containing a LG paladin and an evil character). If this is the case you might have to talk with your group or suggest that your son play a CG paladin with a more anti-evil than anti-law focus.
Paladins are pretty MAD already. They need good Str and Cha, but also need decent Dex and Con.
I don't see a problem with them being able to dump Wisdom. No class should need 5 attributes to work.
Nothing is stopping you from boosting your Wisdom score. There is no reason to nerf the class.
Phooey on Dex. For my paladin Dex is the Dump stat. I see them as a 'little' MAD, but not very.
Strength and Con are vital to ANY melee character, Then toss in the Charisma to really make them shine.
Dex is next to useless on my build because I'm going heavy armor and that caps at Dex bonus 0 ANYWAY.. So dex of 10 for me.
YES, his ranged attacks absolutely suck... but he's got good melee and good AC... Can't be great at everything ;)
Dex really isn't that critical for a Paladin unless you are playing a archer paladin. Yeah you really don't want to dump it to a 7 but you can definitely afford to go with a 10 in Dex.
For standard Paladins I think you can pretty much just focus on Str, Con and Cha. Yeah a Str+Con belt is extremely expensive but it's cheaper than a physical perfection belt. Headband of Charisma is pretty much a given.
The main thing is that Paladins generally can't safely dump a stat to a 7 without brutalizing skillpoints (7 Int Human Paladins are okay) or risking a somewhat inferior ref or will save.
For people looking for really min-maxed Paladin builds the inability to dump 2 stats to a 7 is possibly a problem but personally I think that's actually a sign that the class actually uses all the ability scores relatively evenly unlike the vast majority of classes that see almost no problem in dumping Cha to 7.
I haven't seen it as a dump stat much, precisely because if you hit it too hard, the paladin bonuses won't be enough, you will have a will save weakness.I dump it and it is still pretty high. Fast progression plus charisma is enough to make up for it.
By dump do you mean you take it to 8? 7?
|
I'm starting to feel the big issue here is not the paladin, but the Fey Foundling feat.
Let's make everyone happy and give the fighter something like... "Against the Odds". As a swift action, the fighter receives an amount of temporary hit points equal to his level, these temporary hit points last one round or until spent, whichever happens first. He may do so once per day per Bravery point. At least the front fighter will have some ability to shrug off damage, without requiring a cleric behind or falling too much behind the paladin.
A Paladin can do well with Dex/Con of 10~12, as long as they have good Cha, which they should have anyway, although I do dislike the idea of having less than Con 12 or Dex 10 no matter which class I'm using...
Dumping Dex simply feels... wrong... heh
With a 20 PB you can have 16,12,12,10,7,16 or 14,12,12,14,7,16 as you like skills, In the end I think paraldin are far from MAD.A Paladin can do well with Dex/Con of 10~12, as long as they have good Cha, which they should have anyway, although I do dislike the idea of having less than Con 12 or Dex 10 no matter which class I'm using...
Dumping Dex simply feels... wrong... heh
I agree. My original point was that there's no reason to make Paladin more MAD because "Paladins should be wise". I feel Paladins are very well balanced and it's a better idea to be able to make wise Paladins but not need to than the other way around.
You can always boost Wisdom if you want, but nerfing the class so everyone has to do the same is a terrible idea.
The swords of the church (paladins) shouldn't be as wise as the clerics who direct them, seems to be the idea in dnd.
The swords of the church (paladins) shouldn't be as wise as the clerics who direct them, seems to be the idea in dnd.
I see it more that Wisdom is a suckers stat. What exactly is it USED for?
Perception? Survival? Sense motive and Heal are class skills... and once they get their spells Heal isn't that important anyway.
Will saves? My paladin has wisdom of 11 with no wisdom bonus... he's STILL got a save of 7 at level 3. which is the same as my 9th level sorcerer...
FLUFF wise, I agree that 'wisdom' is important for a paladin. That's why I can't drop mine TOO low since I also plan on him being 'king' in a kingmaker game... But mechanics-wise.... Wisdom does a VERY poor job of representing 'Wisdom'.
If they renamed the stat 'intuition' nobody would be arguing that a Paladin should need more of it...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perception? Survival? Sense motive and Heal are class skills...
Heal is actually a very useful skill, even if you have access to healing spells.
Perception? Survival? Sense motive and Heal are class skills...Heal is actually a very useful skill, even if you have access to healing spells.
Yeah, it has it's uses... but I still feel the 'Class Skill' bonus makes up for it to the point that you don't 'NEED' the wisdom stat to be high.
This is true. You could take Skill Focus too, and that opens up Eldritch Heritage(Celestial Bloodline).
Sense motive has strong potential, if there is a lot of hidden info and intent. Can also be useful for a paladin to know when to fight and smite, and when to not draw their sword.
Any intrigue game or game of lies, tricks, cultist chicanery, sense motive is good stuff.
Here's the thing, of all of the alignments I'm pretty comfortable designing appropriate abilities. My son however wants to play a CN Paladin.
Any help would be nice. ThanksYes I know this isn't the thread, and I'm not trying to hijack it. Its just that with all this Paladin talk, there has got to be some help here.
Here's a class I worked on a while back, as a kind of 'paladin of freedom'. I also did this one as a kind of 'defender of reality' concept paladin. There's also a prestige class the name of which escapes me with a few paladin-like abilities.
Yeah, not the strongest in damage, but a lot of middle strength abilities.
didn't read every single post, but it sometimes seems missed by many that they are in many ways the best defensive class in the game.
Sure, their high smite damage output is often balanced by rage, favored enemy, etc., but it often seems like direct comparisons overlook the fact that.
1. They have the best saves in the game.
2. They are immune to 1/2 the game's nastiest effects.
3. They can heal themselves as a free action.I know most comparisons tend to focus on offense, but the fact that they are very difficult to kill, IMO, is a huge factor. Also, the "overcoming DR" element to smite is a huge outside of the box factor that negates the puzzle element of many combats.
So I'm in the minority, but yes, IMO, paladins are a bit overpowered and yes, IMO, some alignment restrictions balance that somewhat.
I really have to disagree with this... 1 and 2 could also describe Monks, and I don't think anyone would say monks are OP.
A Paladin's swift action (not free) LoH is akin to Barbarian's bigger HD and DR. All front-liners should have some way to mitigate damage and resist some nasty effects that could remove them from the fight.
For Paladins, this means saves and LoH, for Barbarians, this means morale bonus to all saves, lots of HP and DR. The problem is not that these classes have these features, but that other frontliners (such as Fighters and Cavaliers) lack similar abilities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, Paladins are pretty powerful. But not unbalanced.
They can solo an encounter or two, but so can a Barbarian, Ranger or Gusnlinger. They are combat-focused classes, they should be awesome in combat!
Paladins have a nice array of combat offense, survivability and utility. They are almost always useful, but never game breaking.
One thing you can notice in most games, from RPG to Magic The Gathering to Fighting Games, is that more often than not, numbers don't make anything actually powerful, extra options do. That's why casters are so powerful. That's why I feel Fighters are underpowered, even if they deal a bazillion damage per round.
Paladins have nice options, but they are still limited. It's not hard to know what a Paladin is capable of and build a challenging encounter for him. You don't have to be afraid of a Paladin pulling a reality-altering campaign-chaging trick out of his ass because you forgot to read his obscenelly long spell list.
That's why I feel Paladins are very well balanced. They are consistently useful, they can do their job very effectivelly without stepping over anyone's toes and they have cool, unique and fun class features, but they'll never take the GM by surprise with a class ability/spell.
About your Paladin x Demi-Lich thread, I haven't read it, (or if I did, I don't remember it), but a lich shouldn't allow any paladin to come anywhere near him. If he does, he better have his ass kicked! A demi-lich could fly, turn invisible, summon demons and elementals, create walls of stone, stop time, etc...
If with all those options he still fails to keep his distance, then he more than deserves whatever beating he takes.
didn't read every single post, but it sometimes seems missed by many that they are in many ways the best defensive class in the game.
Sure, their high smite damage output is often balanced by rage, favored enemy, etc., but it often seems like direct comparisons overlook the fact that.
1. They have the best saves in the game.
2. They are immune to 1/2 the game's nastiest effects.
3. They can heal themselves as a free action.I know most comparisons tend to focus on offense, but the fact that they are very difficult to kill, IMO, is a huge factor. Also, the "overcoming DR" element to smite is a huge outside of the box factor that negates the puzzle element of many combats.
So I'm in the minority, but yes, IMO, paladins are a bit overpowered and yes, IMO, some alignment restrictions balance that somewhat.
I don't think they are overpowered for what they are and what they do. Their ability to smite evil is detracted from by their reduced facility without it. The limited uses per day means that smite evil is useless against a hoard of demons, for example. Defensively they are the best class (better than monks, let's be honest), but offensively they only have Smite Evil, which is actually very limited in uses.
Paladins are well defended against evil and can kick it's butt into next week. That's what they do, but it's ALL they do.
And all of that is very cool and useful, but hardly OP.
Paladins are consistently useful and situationally amazing. In most situations they can contribute in one way or another, but they trully shine when they are doing what they are supposed to do best (i.e: Fighting Evil creatures).
IMO, that sounds like a pretty balanced class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And those classes are OP compared to Monks or Rogues. But that's not what OP means. OP is something that's is too powerful on its own, not something that is better than something else.
e.g.: Ninjas are better than Rogues, but they are still pretty weak.
No player should feel useless outside of their niche role. Every class should be able to contribute a little in most situations and shine at what they are supposed to do best.
I think Bards and Inquisitors, for example, are also pretty well balanced, because they can always contribute and are very good at what they do best, OTOH, Fighters are (IMO) underpowered because they seriously lack options on situations where hitting things with swords is not a viable solution.
Being consistently useful is a good thing, being consistently amazing is not. Having a nice array of options is also a good thing, having all the options is not.
So instead of Paladins being too good, I see Fighters/Cavaliers as not being good enough.
Weapon bond or mount , spells, Aura of faith.but offensively they only have Smite Evil, which is actually very limited in uses.
Mount - not specifically offensive, limited uses in some campaigns.
Weapon Bond - about as handy as a decent buff.
Spells - few really dangerous offensive spells in that list, most are buffs, cures, etc. and how much time does a paladin have to cast in combat?
Aura of Faith - tied to Smite Evil, has the same limitations.
but isn't "fighters need to be better" the same formula for power creep that has been the problem for the past 15 years?
Actually, if you look back to 1e, fighters have lost quite a bit historically. Nowadays they need to specialize in a single group of weapons (and to get the most out of their damage they need to specialize further in a single weapon), whereas they used to be masters of all weapons. They once had amazing saves that made hostile magic bounce off them, and at high levels, they gained a literal army to command. And they could move and attack multiple times in the same turn, since full-attacks weren't a thing. And they weren't hampered in social interactions due to lack of skill points because skill points didn't exist either; on the contrary, at high levels their position as a warlord was quite helpful in social interactions.
The modern fighter class has lost all of that, to the point of boasting the worst skills and saves in the game, and what it has gained in exchange is... when it stands still and attacks with its specialized weapon, its damage per round is greater. Woohoo.
I think it's possible to find a nice balance by both buffing weaker classes and nerfing the more powerful ones.
I never said "buffs everyone until they are as powerful as wizards and druids". That would be a very annoying game, IMO, even if balanced.
I don't want everyone to me crazy awesome full of god-like powers (in fact, I don't like the Mythical rules because they seem like an unnecessary increase in power), but I want everyone to be able to do something useful most of the time. Fighter could get a few more skill points, class skills and other utility class features without fear of breaking anything. And pretty much every martial class in the game could get some increased mobilty. I hate the "stand still or suck" syndrome that limits martial characters so much, while wizards get to move at full speed and still bend reality to their will (twice!).
If every class had about the same efficiency/versatility of a Paladin, Inquisitor or Bard, the game would be much more fun.
Personally, I don't like the allignment system. IMHO, it adds nothing to the game and imposes a lot of unnecessary restrictions to the game, and it's not only possible, but quite easy to have good/evil characters/classes without defined allignments.
I don't have a problem with Paladins having codes and restrictions (although some people seem to take said restrictions way too far, acting as if falling were the whole point of the class), but I feel they shouldn't be a balancing factor because paladins are not OP.
Archer Paladins may be better at combat, but they still have the same limitations of melee Paladins.
Remember, this is not God of War, you don't go around killing stuff all the time just for the sake of killing stuff in a never-ending hack-n'-slash festival.
To me, that seems like a waste of all that freedom that the game provides to us. We can have infiltration, diplomatic missions, exploration, etc... Paladins are not awesome at all of those challenges. They are not even awesome at all combats (even if they are very competent at all combats, as they should be).
Of course, there is nothing wrong with playing a hack-n'-slash festival against demons and evil wizards, but if such a game favors Paladins, that is the gameplay style's fault, not the class, just like a campaign focused on infiltration and diplomatic intrigues will favor bards and games focused on wilderness adventures will favor druids and rangers.