| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just a curiosity thing from surfing the forums:
Why is it that everyone on the forums loves making paladins fall for anything, but any GM that dares to target a wizard's spellbook is treated like a dirtbag? Looking at the CRB, the paladin's Code of Conduct and the wizard's Spellbook look quite similar - if you're gonna treat one as fluff, shouldn't they both be? And if it's a balance thing, aren't wizards one of the most powerful classes in the game?
Note that this isn't a complaint about either class, I don't really care which is more fun or more powerful, it's just a question about the mentality of forum posters.
|
It's not a balance thing. Being LG is not a punishment or a weakness, it's a different approach. (Anyone who tells you that being forced to be LG is weakness is probably recruiting for Team Evil and you shouldn't trust them.) LG enables great cooperation, trust between allies and working together for the greater good; that's not weakness.
It's a theme thing. All divine spellcasters receive spells from a deity, and have to live up to the deity's rules, otherwise they get cut off. There's actually no indication that a LG cleric has it significantly easier than a paladin, but somehow people latch onto the paladin description and go CRAZY about trying to tempt them/force them into lose/lose situation. Maybe because it takes too much imagination to force a druid into an act that is simultaneously Chaotic AND Evil.
'Everyone' is definitely an understatement. I've never done either, as I think power loss is a terrible mechanic.
I don't like the idea of removing anyone's class features myself. I usually suggest against it.
Where do you get the idea everyone loves making paladin's fall but hates burning spell books? It varies between person to person. I usually suggest against either, but I've seen people totally go for both.
And to your point sir, I respond that murder-hobo paladins are sometimes begging to fall. In my kingdom maker campaign the paladin was 10 x more likely to attack with 0 aggression then my arcane trickster.
Just a curiosity thing from surfing the forums:
Why is it that everyone on the forums loves making paladins fall for anything, but any GM that dares to target a wizard's spellbook is treated like a dirtbag? Looking at the CRB, the paladin's Code of Conduct and the wizard's Spellbook look quite similar - if you're gonna treat one as fluff, shouldn't they both be? And if it's a balance thing, aren't wizards one of the most powerful classes in the game?
Note that this isn't a complaint about either class, I don't really care which is more fun or more powerful, it's just a question about the mentality of forum posters.
1. It is NOT everyone. Very few of us like paladins to be picked on, anymore than any other class.
2. Personally I have no problem with a wizard losing a spellbook as long as it is not GM Fiat or disguised GM Fiat, and it make sense.
Knocking a wizard out to steal the spellbook, knowing he WILL kill you to get it back just makes no sense to me. <---disguised GM Fiat.
Now if the party is in on a ship or an airship, and there is a crash----->I can see the spellbook being realistically separated from the wizard, or somehow taking enough damage so that it is destroyed or certain spells are lost.
I would probably houserule that the spellbook is only necessary for the wizard to change his spell line-up. If he doesn't have access to it, after he rests, he simply winds up with the same spells he had the day before.
There are some things I'm very tempted to say based on my background in psychology, but I'd get torn to shreds.
Oh come on you have to elaborate now :D lol
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would probably houserule that the spellbook is only necessary for the wizard to change his spell line-up. If he doesn't have access to it, after he rests, he simply winds up with the same spells he had the day before.
That's effectively a super-boosted Spell mastery feat for free.
There's a reason Spell Mastery is in there.
==Aelryinth
Spell Mastery is there because why? Boring? Feat Tax? That one prestige that uses it that doesn't actually give it a huge benefit? If he removed it no one would take the feat. That's fine. I've never seen someone take the feat anyway outside of prerequisites...
In Carrion Crown,
That spellbook is the reason why you take the feat. But, of course, if the spellbook is invulnerable, why bother?
What PrC? I only remember the Mage-lord from Faerun, which supercharged it quite well, actually.
==Aelryinth
Yeah, I don't take it at all. I don't play with DMs who go out of their way to target my spell book. I don't mind Zhayne's hourerule, but I still just don't like playing if they target my book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is that it is much easier to kill a wizard than to steal/destroy their spellbooks after a couple levels.
For paladins, it's the opposite : their code is so strict that the simple RP dilemna can make them lose their powers permanently. It's much easier to make a paladin lose their powers than kill them, even without thinking "I want to make that paladin a warrior damnit !".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And it is really not that easy to make a paladin fall!
Sure it is, just roll to trip.
Sometimes a paladin just has to choose the lesser of two evils. The RP based thing to do is to repent, and maybe seek an atonement spell.
The GM should not take away the paladin's powers when these situations occur unless the "player" chooses to do the greater evil, or chooses to do evil when other options are present.
To avoid conflict, and because players are not mind readers the GM should advise the player on what he considers to be evil.
Many players think being a paladin grants a license to kill and therefore anything that pings on their detect evil radar can be killed without any repercussions, to include losing their powers or going to jail. I am sure some tables allow that, but asking is always the safe thing to do.
Just a curiosity thing from surfing the forums:
Why is it that everyone on the forums loves making paladins fall for anything, but any GM that dares to target a wizard's spellbook is treated like a dirtbag? Looking at the CRB, the paladin's Code of Conduct and the wizard's Spellbook look quite similar - if you're gonna treat one as fluff, shouldn't they both be? And if it's a balance thing, aren't wizards one of the most powerful classes in the game?
Note that this isn't a complaint about either class, I don't really care which is more fun or more powerful, it's just a question about the mentality of forum posters.
Paladin chooses a safer path over the righteous one. Fall
Wizard's spell book is magically stolen through BS.
One is about the character and their decisions. It is about morality and what is "the good", an age old philosophical question that we still struggle with.
The other is the DM deciding to manipulate the game world in such a way as to harass the PC and giving them no chance to fight back. The game isn't suppose to be a game of cat and mouse between the wizard's spell book and the nigh infinite number of thieves the DM has at his disposal.
One is the player DOING something. The other is something HAPPENING to the player
What PrC? I only remember the Mage-lord from Faerun, which supercharged it quite well, actually.==Aelryinth
The Magaambyan (sp?) Arcanist, referred to as the Collegiate Arcanist on the d20pfsrd OGC website. It requires Spell Mastery and eventually allows you to change which spells you have Mastered with a little effort, and to spontaneously cast your Spell Mastery'ed spells a few times per day, among other things.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/prestige-classes/other-paizo/c-d/magaambyan -arcanist
Any wizard that does not ensure that they have a extra copy of their spellbook secured somewhere more safely than on their person is sadly underplaying their usually very high intelligence. Not taking that precaution is just asking for trouble.
"They had it coming!" is pretty adversarial and opinionated I think.
Why keep an extra copy when you can do all sorts of fun tricks anyway? My last wizard kept a book chained to his chain belt in plain sight. On the inside it said
I prefer to maximize my PC's vulnerabilities. My lawful good eldritch knight had traveling spellbooks, a spell component pouch, a bonded item (longsword), and a paladin-style code of conduct for his prestige class.
It's only sporting.
One is the player DOING something. The other is something HAPPENING to the player
Perhaps, but I think we've all heard of paladin dilemmas where the pally has to choose between two evil options - or cases where the DM and the paladin's player have different ideas of what good and evil would be.
Mind you, LG clerics and the like don't seem to catch nearly as much flak as paladins. I imagine it's because their code wasn't written out as universal rules in the core book.
I would probably houserule that the spellbook is only necessary for the wizard to change his spell line-up. If he doesn't have access to it, after he rests, he simply winds up with the same spells he had the day before.That's effectively a super-boosted Spell mastery feat for free.
There's a reason Spell Mastery is in there.
==Aelryinth
You appear to be operating under the assumption that I care. That's just a feat tax to cover for ... questionable design.
One is the player DOING something. The other is something HAPPENING to the playerPerhaps, but I think we've all heard of paladin dilemmas where the pally has to choose between two evil options - or cases where the DM and the paladin's player have different ideas of what good and evil would be.
Mind you, LG clerics and the like don't seem to catch nearly as much flak as paladins. I imagine it's because their code wasn't written out as universal rules in the core book.
More specifically, it's because they don't have a code at all.
Rather than the wizard's spell book, I have punished a wizard for not getting enough shortstop and was ostracized here for it. I see it as no different.
What is shortstop?
I think I found the post. I remember that one. I never read it to the end though so I can't really say much about it.
Its easier to steal from dead people... Well, unless those dead people still move. That happens all the time in my experience, but the ones who don't are totally easier to steal from.
1.) It makes no sense. Wizards don't rely on their spell books in combat. In addition, the enemy can loot and sell the book after the battle is done. If the enemy targets my spell book, it should only be when he knows he is dead anyway and wants to spite me.
2. A wizards spell book should be hidden on his person unless he is using it. It isn't going to be easy to target when it is concealed. Once he has a portable hole, it will be hidden in there.
1) If im an evil overlord comanding hordes of underlings (who effectively just achieve giving the PCs enough XP to level up, so they can face me), it makes tons of sense to tell them to target the spell book of the wizard. The underlings are to weaken the PCs. A high level wizard might be weakened less by being killed than by loss of spellbook, because he is cheaper to revive than rewriting his spellbook.
2) A strong wooden door has hardness 5, hp 20. Such doors would offer a somewhat decent protection (meaning you survive with only a few pieces missing) against a hand grenade exploding on the other side. Yet the fireball blows through the door via heat, meaning it heats in the short time it explodes to several hundred degrees. The only reason the posessions of a wizard in place of the door not being heated to several hundred degrees (which would incinerate any paper at once) is thats its a game of fun and not realism. So realistically destroying an enemy spellbook hidden on person would be trivial for a lev 5 caster. The only reason therefore that the evil overlords do not rountinely try to destroy the spellbook is that they cheat by metagaming and therefore know that for some bizarre reason heavy wooden doors are destroyed by lev 10 fireballs via heat, but the wizards poossesions are never heater by nearby fireballs.
1. How is this targeting/stealing taking place? Nobody can ever seem to make this happen without GM Fiat.
2. Well we are in the game world so we should use the game's rules. Otherwise your hardness rules do not apply, and to be fair no character(NPC or PC) has their items destroyed by fire damage unless they fail a save. This is not a "protect the wizard feature".
What is shortstop?
Wow, I tried to type sleep and my phone thought I said shortstop....
Point is, I have been arguing that wizards have weaknesses clearly stated in the book such as the sleep thing that DMs seem to hand wave for wizards but not for paladins and I think it's BS man!!!!This thread is Tiger Blood.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I initially thought this thread was about wizards fighting paladins. I am slightly disappointed.
More specifically, it's because they don't have a code at all.
Yes, because the core book can't fit in the dogmas of 20 cults. Still, you'd think clerics would be as tightly bound to their religion as paladins are to their code. It would stand to reason the gods wouldn't grant miracles to some layabouts who'd much rather do their own thing when there are hundreds of perfectly devout and proper worshippers, wouldn't you?
More specifically, it's because they don't have a code at all.Yes, because the core book can't fit in the dogmas of 20 cults. Still, you'd think clerics would be as tightly bound to their religion as paladins are to their code. It would stand to reason the gods wouldn't grant miracles to some layabouts who'd much rather do their own thing when there are hundreds of perfectly devout and proper worshippers, wouldn't you?
Well, without a pre written code your left to your own devices to come up with your own code. This works much better at a table level. In the mean time, something hard coded into "Do this or lose all your class features" has a very different stigma. Its also much friendlier for home brew I think to leave people to their own devices. People come up with all sorts of neat things on their own.
More specifically, it's because they don't have a code at all.Yes, because the core book can't fit in the dogmas of 20 cults. Still, you'd think clerics would be as tightly bound to their religion as paladins are to their code. It would stand to reason the gods wouldn't grant miracles to some layabouts who'd much rather do their own thing when there are hundreds of perfectly devout and proper worshippers, wouldn't you?
Not really, no. I would think that most gods are happy if you kiss their divine buttocks regularly.
Then again, I'm not particularly hip on 'extant and meddling gods' anyway. I prefer the 'distant, so distant you can't verify their existence' model, or just 'there ain't none'. All clerics are clerics of a philosophy/ideal in my games ... just most of 'em don't know it. They just anthropomorphize their philosophy as a psychological crutch.
All clerics are clerics of a philosophy/ideal in my games ...
When you view them as ideals instead of alignments, there is a much different expectation. Paladins in my games I allow to follow any alignment and ideal, and change their auras/smite targets accordingly. It creates a very different vibe and expectation. I think RAW paladin's are treated more as championing an alignment(LG) than a particular ideal or deity, while cleric's change largely based on who they worship. Remember Chaotic isn't always easy. YMMV.
|
There's actually no indication that a LG cleric has it significantly easier than a paladin, but somehow people latch onto the paladin description and go CRAZY about trying to tempt them/force them into lose/lose situation.
As GM I once had a chaotic evil cleric of the god of lies fall for telling the truth.
I initially thought this thread was about wizards fighting paladins. I am slightly disappointed.
Same! :-D
I can't think of any religion that didn't have some very important dogma you had to cling to, or you weren't considered a cleric, you were a heretic and possibly a blasphemer. Minor differences in dogma spin off entire churches that often end up historically violent (Luther and the Hundred Years' war, anyone?)
Saying clerics don't have codes is just silly. They are going to have some extremely important codes to live by. Paladins all live by interpretations of ONE code, which is useful, but even then causes arguments. Trying to argue that with all 9 alignments and gods thereof? Ugh...but saying they don't have the codes because they aren't defined is just burying your head in the sand.
Probably to avoid the headaches, but still.
==Aelryinth