While there are many Pathfinder rules that do not make a lot of sense to me, none is worse imho than the rule that all paladins have to be LG. With that said, it is impossible to be a paladin of Cayden Cailean since his alignment chart is CG, NG, CG.
The actually concept of paladin is holy warrior for a deity, not some overzealous policeman upholding the law. For that you have hellknights.
Is there a workaround for this or does PF throw its hands in the air and just say not all good aligned deities have paladins?
|
By the rules it's a no go, but it does have flavor. There is the Chevalier PRC; 3 levels and you get the flavor of being a non-lawful paladin.
I currently have a player who is running a goblin Chevalier of Cayden.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe paladins receive their power independent of the god they worship (if any). Or at least, that's how I've always played them; paladins, in effect, circumnavigate the need for a deity, receiving their powers directly from the supernatural force of good (kind of like a jedi, now that I think of it, haha).
In any case, your paladin can revere Cayden and any number of additional gods, looking to each as an inspiration (in one way or another). Cayden is chaotic, so that's a bit of a problem, but if you focus on his "good" aspects, then there should be no disconnect.
The rule that Paladins have to be Lawful Good makes sense.
However, none of the rules say that you can't be a Paladin that worships a non LN, LG, NG god. Only such rules exist for Clerics (though personally I enforce it all religiously affiliated classes).
Personally, if you want a holy warrior of cayden caailean make a war priest or cleric that focuses on melee. It's as simple as that.
Paladin's are unique because of their alignment restrictions and their specific code as well as their unique powers. I think it is intentionally that such things be restricted.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a workaround for this or does PF throw its hands in the air and just say not all good aligned deities have paladins?
PF throws its hands in the air and gyrates them about as if unconcerned about repercussions.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Paladins being LG only (and, really, the alignment system in general) is a colossal crock of gorgon droppings.
Fortunately, the Paladin is pretty easy to houserule to 'any good', since the class has almost NO elements that relate to law and chaos.
On a quick surface scan:
Divine Bond - LG pallys can do axiomatic, CG pallys can do Anarchic, NG Paladins could do either or neither, depending on how you look at it.
Obvious fidgeting with the code for NG or CG ... or just drop the whole 'lying, cheating, dishonor' clause from all of them and just use the 'no evil' part of it (or better yet, throw out the whole code nonsense).
Not going through the whole spell list, but obviously, any spells that would be anti-chaos get an anti-lawful version for the NG/CG pallys.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I'm not seeing a single thing in the rules that suggests that a Paladin can't worship Cayden Cailean. As long as his own alignment is LG, he can absolutely worship a CG god, perhaps worshipping the GOOD aspect of the god while ignoring the inherent chaos that he represents. There's also no reason that you can't be a paladin of Gozreh, worshipping the inherent beauty and balance of nature, while still being LG.
Paladin's are unique because of their alignment restrictions and their specific code as well as their unique powers. I think it is intentionally that such things be restricted.
Not really ... it's just a legacy thing. 3e was going to have unrestricted paladins, but WotC caved under player complaining, even though it would take nothing away from them.
There are Paladins of Asmodeus in one of the campaigns that Paizo puts out. So I'm pretty sure that anyone can have Paladins....
Keep in mind that those charts are for clerics (whose alignment must be within 1 step of their deity's alignment). Paladins have to be LG, but that doesn't mean they can't worship/revere a non-lawful (or even non-good) deity. Hell, there's nothing stopping a paladin from being a polytheist, as long as he maintains his code of conduct.
|
I'm not seeing a single thing in the rules that suggests that a Paladin can't worship Cayden Cailean. As long as his own alignment is LG, he can absolutely worship a CG god, perhaps worshipping the GOOD aspect of the god while ignoring the inherent chaos that he represents. There's also no reason that you can't be a paladin of Gozreh, worshipping the inherent beauty and balance of nature, while still being LG.
It depends on if you are going by the basic, generic Pathfinder rules or by the specific rules for the Pathfinder Campaign Setting (i.e. Golarion)
The assumption in the core rulebook is that a paladin's alignment and the god they worship are two different, independent things. Going by the write-up, there is no reason why a LG paladin couldn't worship a CG god (although that paladin would occasionally be out of step with the god's other worshipers).
However, on Golarion paladins have the same deity restrictions (i.e. within one step on either alignment axis) as clerics. So if you were playing a Pathfinder Society game, or using the campaign setting as written, then the answer is no.
Personally I prefer to keep the two separate. Otherwise I feel like it blurs the line between "paladin" and "priest" a bit too much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a workaround for this or does PF throw its hands in the air and just say not all good aligned deities have paladins?
Not all good aligned deities have paladins. The LG ones do, there's a couple NG ones that do, a TN one does, everyone else's philosophy just plain doesn't mesh with the big shining noble knight concept. Cayden Cailean in particular, one would have to assume, finds paladins a bit too uptight in general to want to employ any.
So you'd have to settle in this case for a cleric, or an inquisitor, or a warpriest, the latter of which, in particular, was created specifically to address this sort of thing if I'm not mistaken.
Or just talk with your GM (assuming you're not in the PFS stuff). As I said above, it's an easy houserule.
Paladin's are unique because of their alignment restrictions and their specific code as well as their unique powers. I think it is intentionally that such things be restricted.Not really ... it's just a legacy thing. 3e was going to have unrestricted paladins, but WotC caved under player complaining, even though it would take nothing away from them.
How exactly did they cave if they published variant paladins? Paizo also published variant paladins in Dragon Magazine #310, which was an official product for 3.5.
That said,
Not all good aligned deities have paladins. The LG ones do, there's a couple NG ones that do, a TN one does, everyone else's philosophy just plain doesn't mesh with the big shining noble knight concept. Cayden Cailean in particular, one would have to assume, finds paladins a bit too uptight in general to want to employ any. . . .
I completely agree with this. I also don't mind the legacy issue with Paladins. It has baggage.
Just say you're a holy warrior and pick whatever class(es) fit your concept.
There's also no reason that you can't be a paladin of Gozreh, worshipping the inherent beauty and balance of nature, while still being LG.
Because it does not mix one little bit. How do you worship a deity of chaotic behavior while being strict rule abiding yourself?
How exactly did they cave if they published variant paladins? Paizo also published variant paladins in Dragon Magazine #310, which was an official product for 3.5.
*eye roll*
Because they weren't unrestricted in the base, core, original printed game like they were supposed to be, and instead printed them in what amounts to a book of houserules and a periodical. And, y'know, because the 3e devs said that was precisely what happened; they put the restriction back in due to grognard whine.UA's paladins are still restricted by alignment, albeit 4, and still subject to the same nonsense.
Dragon doesn't count because they're variant paladins, not a single, unrestricted class. Instead, you have nine restricted classes ... not, IMHO, and improvement.
One of my favorite Paladin characters I have ever played is a Paladin who worships Pharasma. He hates Undead, cares for the quality of life for those around him, and is very respectful of the clergy (even if he doesn't associate with the evil ones) since they all follow doctrines he can get behind.
Worship whomever you want, just be the champion (LG) of the faith, even if (or especially if) you stand out awkwardly.
Just my 2 cp...
|
While there are many Pathfinder rules that do not make a lot of sense to me, none is worse imho than the rule that all paladins have to be LG. With that said, it is impossible to be a paladin of Cayden Cailean since his alignment chart is CG, NG, CG.
The actually concept of paladin is holy warrior for a deity, not some overzealous policeman upholding the law. For that you have hellknights.
The idea is that being a Paladin is more than just being a Holy warrior for a God, that's covered by Cleric, Inquisitor, and now Warpriest. No, being a Paladin is about a purity of righteousness and honor that is defined by the LG Alignment.
I'm not sure I agree with all that, but I see where it's coming from.
Is there a workaround for this or does PF throw its hands in the air and just say not all good aligned deities have paladins?
Officially? No non LG Paladins. Unofficially? Nothing breaks if you allow CG ones and just swap their Anti-Chaos spells for Anti-Law ones. I do it. I do the same for LE Antipaladins, too. I do restrict it to the four 'extreme' alignments, though, as being a Paladin is a very extreme life choice, IMO.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The four corner alignments aren't extreme, because the two different alignment components will limit each other.
Someone who cares ONLY about law, or ONLY about good can more extreme than someone who cares about both law and good, because the combined alignment encourages a character to perform minor evil acts which are lawful, or minor chaotic acts which are good.
There's also no reason that you can't be a paladin of Gozreh, worshipping the inherent beauty and balance of nature, while still being LG.Because it does not mix one little bit. How do you worship a deity of chaotic behavior while being strict rule abiding yourself?
He's not a god of chaotic behavior, he's a god of alcohol, luck, adventure, and following your conscience no matter what. This happens to lean chaotic because of the focus on individual choice and freedom, but could be very attractive to certain LG characters, namely those who are more about holding themselves to strict standards of orderly behavior than enforcing it on others.
|
|
The four corner alignments aren't extreme, because the two different alignment components will limit each other.
Someone who cares ONLY about law, or ONLY about good can more extreme than someone who cares about both law and good, because the combined alignment encourages a character to perform minor evil acts which are lawful, or minor chaotic acts which are good.
I disagree...but let's not turn this into an Alignment argument thread.
He's not a god of chaotic behavior, he's a god of alcohol, luck, adventure, and following your conscience no matter what. This happens to lean chaotic because of the focus on individual choice and freedom, but could be very attractive to certain LG characters, namely those who are more about holding themselves to strict standards of orderly behavior than enforcing it on others.
I actually disagree here for reasons James Jacobs has brought up:
Worshiping your God in a way that is too different from their own Alignment (ie: more than one step removed) is a Chaotic act. So...you're either worshiping him in a Chaotic fashion...or you're worshiping him in a non-Chaotic fashion which is violating his doctrine...and as a violation of doctrine, Chaotic. And will thus eventually shift your Alignment to NG over time, and make you stop being a Paladin by the rules.
In summary: I'm cool with CG Paladins, but not LG Paladins of CG gods.
*eye roll*
Because they weren't unrestricted in the base, core, original printed game like they were supposed to be, and instead printed them in what amounts to a book of houserules and a periodical. And, y'know, because the 3e devs said that was precisely what happened; they put the restriction back in due to grognard whine. . . .
*Shrugs*
What do you want me to say? There are some 'paladins' published by WotC and Paizo. I think the term 'Paladin' has too much baggage, so go with Holy Warrior and pick whichever class fits, whether it's cleric with a dip in fighter, or inquisitor, or maybe a sorcerer if a magic god... Skip the paladin class itself. The shining holy warrior, like Galahad or Roland, is really is too good (or at least should be) for your average murder-hobo party. If it's not, you're playing a parody, but that can be fun, too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The four corner alignments aren't extreme, because the two different alignment components will limit each other.
Someone who cares ONLY about law, or ONLY about good can more extreme than someone who cares about both law and good, because the combined alignment encourages a character to perform minor evil acts which are lawful, or minor chaotic acts which are good.
I disagree...but let's not turn this into an Alignment argument thread.
He's not a god of chaotic behavior, he's a god of alcohol, luck, adventure, and following your conscience no matter what. This happens to lean chaotic because of the focus on individual choice and freedom, but could be very attractive to certain LG characters, namely those who are more about holding themselves to strict standards of orderly behavior than enforcing it on others.I actually disagree here for reasons James Jacobs has brought up:
Worshiping your God in a way that is too different from their own Alignment (ie: more than one step removed) is a Chaotic act. So...you're either worshiping him in a Chaotic fashion...or you're worshiping him in a non-Chaotic fashion which is violating his doctrine...and as a violation of doctrine, Chaotic. And will thus eventually shift your Alignment to NG over time, and make you stop being a Paladin by the rules.
In summary: I'm cool with CG Paladins, but not LG Paladins of CG gods.
JJ has weird ideas about what constitutes "chaotic".
|
|
You could make a paladin that uses the pantheism options from Faiths and Philosophies and worships the Ascended Pantheon, which conveniently includes two more traditional paladin gods (Iomedae and Irori), three if you count Aroden, in addition to Cayden.
Before anyone suggests that paladins can't be pantheists, check out this quoted section from the heading for pantheism:
Common Believers: Oracles, paladins, summoners
(bolding is mine for emphasis)
It's not quite the same as a paladin of Cayden Cailean specifically, of course, but there's actually some interesting roleplaying ideas you could run with. Maybe have a paladin that emphasizes the courage and valor aspects of Iomedae while associating them with the adventuring spirit of Cayden and the pursuit self-mastery from Irori.
Furthermore, the Pantheistic Blessing and all pantheons except demon lords are legal for PFS, so you could probably make the character work even in such a heavily RAW setting.
That said, expect GMs to ask to see the book, even if only b/c I doubt many are familiar with the pantheism rules.
You mean polytheism? Pantheism's kind of different.
I can understand why a paladin could only worship a LG (possibly a NG too) deity. It's the same philosophy as "Using an evil spell is an evil act, even to heal someone".
IMHO (and I insist it's my own opinion), every alignment is a force. Worshipping and deeds have real repercussions on the balance of those powers, and even the tinniest act of chaos feed the Chaos and weaken the Law, menacing to change things beyond imagination. A kind of "every act has consequences" or "chaos theory".
I have read an article long time ago, about how a paladin is the incarnation of the Law that lead us to Good, and how they consider the doubt (and thus chaos) as the door to all evils. That's why even a step outside their code have that much impact on their class, even if it is for a greater good.
From what I recall, there was a paragraph about absolutism and stuff like that too... It was a really great reading, a shame I can't remember where I found it.
This UCamp description about the Lawful Good alignment feels the same for me:
A lawful good character believes in honor. A code or faith that she has unshakable belief in likely guides her. She would rather die than betray that faith, and the most extreme followers of this alignment are willing (sometimes even happy) to become martyrs.
PS: Sorry for my English, I'm sure I let a lot of wrong terms and grammar errors, but I'm a little tired today ^^".
Why not simply take a Inquisitor of Cayden? I think this would fit much better then a Paladin.
A Paladin is THE holy knight (for me), someone who not only knows what honor is, but live it in every second of his live.
Somone who would either die then let his honor be destroyed.
He IS the white knight, the embodiement of pure justice and good.
(for reference see old knight ows in history or fiction (I like the one from dragon heart).
Not something which is very matching to Cayden, the drunken hero. ;)
He's not only a "warrior who get some divine powers because he beleifs in his god".
If you want to play this, play a warrior, cleric or inquisitor.
I can't understand why all people want the benefits of a paladin but didn't accept that they come with some flaws/prequisits.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Paladin is THE holy knight (for me), someone who not only knows what honor is, but live it in every second of his live.
Somone who would either die then let his honor be destroyed.
He IS the white knight, the embodiement of pure justice and good.
(for reference see old knight ows in history or fiction (I like the one from dragon heart).Not something which is very matching to Cayden, the drunken hero. ;)
Plenty of people play LG paladins who drink heavily. Here's an example.
Classic knights are a great way to play paladins but it's perfectly possible to be honourable without being chaste, abstinent, or otherwise fitting into the western knightly ideal. As a really basic example, some Eastern philosophies of warfare espouse taking certain advantages in combat that a classic western knight would consider highly dishonourable - stuff like ambushes or positioning yourself on the battlefield such that the sun is in your opponent's eyes.
JJ has weird ideas about what constitutes "chaotic".You don't think not following the dictates of your own religion, which you believe in whole-heartedly, is pretty Chaotic? I do. Lawful alignments are pretty much definitionally more internally consistent and doctrinally rigid than that.
Would you define Martin Luther as chaotic? He thought the entire Church was doing his religion wrong, presented objections in a systematic matter, and spawned a new church. He went up against a lawful organization in a lawful way with the goal of returning it to what he saw as "true" doctrine.
Now, it's a little harder to argue about what the "true" doctrine is when your god can actually send a messenger down and sort it out, but Cayden is well known for not caring too much about how he is worshiped as long as his followers (1) drink and party without being destructive and (2) protect the freedoms of others, and since he doesn't personally empower the paladin (at least not per CRB) he isn't likely to bother himself over this particular eccentric worshiper.
In summary: I'm cool with CG Paladins, but not LG Paladins of CG gods.
I guess it depends on whether you think chaotic characters can consistently follow a set of moral principles.
If you think they can, CG paladins are just fine.
If you think they can't, CG paladins don't work, but "Chaotic doctrine" becomes an oxymoron so there's nothing for the LG paladin of a CG god to deviate from.
I personally would also prefer CG paladins to LG paladins of CG gods, but I also think that a paladin of Cayden is a legitimate character concept that ought to be allowed one way or the other.
|
|
Darn, just missed my edit window.
1) Though I personally would prefer a CG paladin of Cayden to a LG paladin of Cayden, since we are in the Rules forum it's important to note that a LG paladin of Cayden or another CG deity is allowed by RAW (minus PFS-specific restrictions) but a CG paladin is not.
2) When I picture a paladin of Cayden, I'm thinking something like Captain America (honourable, concerned with both justice and freedom - remember he opposed the superhero registration act) plus a strong belief that beer is proof that god loves us and wants us to be happy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin is just a cleric with bigger weapons, thicker armor, and less spellcasting. No reason for them to be alignment restricted.
I think the paladin should have been a prestige class. Everyone complains that they're too restrictive, but that's the point. You can't play a paladin without adhering to the code--it's what makes the class (more than any class ability).
Faiths of Purity has a Cayden Cailean-only spell that's a paladin spell, and Faiths of Corruption has an Asmodeus-only antipaladin spell. Just saying.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
War priest fulfills the concept just fine.
You don't need the paladin class to fulfill the concept of "holy warrior of (insert deity here)".
What people are after is the suite of powers of a paladin without the restriction. It ain't easy being lawful good, and the paladin should remain restricted in my book.
I'm a bit late to this discussion, but I only happened to come across it because I happened to be reading some comments by an artist commissioned to do artwork for Paizo, and for one particular piece (namely the Rider of the Steppe in the NPC Codex) he was given the following direction:
half-elf paladin of Cayden Cailean; breastplate, longsword, longbow, cloak, explorer's outfit.
So apparently someone at Paizo thinks it's okay to have a Paladin of Cayden Cailean. And as already mentioned, Faiths of Purity includes a Cayden Cailean spell for Paladins.
Personally, I'd like to see Pathfinder move away from the LG (or CE) restriction for Paladins. I'm in favor of the 4-corners of the alignment chart.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
War priest fulfills the concept just fine.
You don't need the paladin class to fulfill the concept of "holy warrior of (insert deity here)".
What people are after is the suite of powers of a paladin without the restriction. It ain't easy being lawful good, and the paladin should remain restricted in my book.
Warpriest doesn't fill the concept, and it's not about the specific powers, it's about the broad strokes and how they influence RP.
Warpriest is a wisdom-based class; it gains its power from insight into the deity's doctrine. High-wisdom characters tend to be more aware of their surroundings and have better judgment; they make good advisors and perhaps tacticians.
Paladin is a charisma-based class; it gains its power from strength of personality. High-charisma characters tend to be better at influencing others. They're natural leaders - the ones you want making the rousing pre-battle speech.
The difference in personality between a high-Wis and a high-Cha character is the main reason that I rewrote a canny but doubt-ridden paladin I'd designed as an inquisitor. Now, you could make a Warpriest with a high Cha and make them the party face - just like you could make a Fighter with a high Wis and hunting skills. That doesn't make the Fighter a satisfying conceptual substitute for the Ranger.
A Celestial bloodline primalist spelleater bloodrager with an optional dip in lame battle oracle is a better paladin substitute both mechanically and thematically as a class that fights evil by channeling holy powers via strength of personality. Plus for a follower of Cayden you can take one or two of the flavourful drunken rage powers.
And as already mentioned, Faiths of Purity includes a Cayden Cailean spell for Paladins.
And wasn't Enhance Water reprinted in Inner Sea Gods?
Enhance Water did get a reprint, and Cayden's inquisitors/clerics (and probably other divine casters who finagle their way into his worship) can cast variants of (create water) and (create food and water) that produce wine/ale.
I've made a monk of Cayden Cailean using an ability from Mythic Adventures -- beyond morality (under the old tradition of trappist monk breweries). A paladin should be just as feasible.
|
Yeah... as has been stated. The "Within One Step" clause only applies to clerics.
LG paladin of CG deity is legal.
Without 3.5 conversion, CG paladin is not.
PFS is the place that extended the "One Step" rule to all divine casters... it's not core.
Huh, never noticed that before, but technically, you're right. I don't think it is RAI, because it would allow Paladins of, say, Rovagug, but. . .
Actually, it may not be now that I think about it. I seem to recall some errata about that a long time ago, but I can't find it.
Assuming the one step rule, here are some other options:
First off, as many have said, warpriest fits the roll nicely if you are looking for spellcasting, a lay on hands like ability, and eventual channeling. Alternately, if you want a more knight bent, may I recommend cavalier of the star? They get a smite-like ability in their challenge and even get bonuses to save vs their challenge. You can get the same flavor as a paladin, even call yourself a paladin, you just get a separate suite of powers.
As others have said, being a paladin in the pathfinder world is not just about being a holy warrior. It is about being a holy warrior that lives by a strict code of honor and integrity. They have found that by restricting themselves in a certain way, they can become more powerful. This kind of lifestyle is antithetical to Caden's 'live and let live, let's have a good time' lifestyle. Caden is far too willing to lie, cheat , and steal to accomplish his greater good than is comparable with the way Paladins operate.
I mean, if you are just trying to game the system so that you don't have to play a lawful good paladin, or that you can have a paladin of a 'cool god' then no, nothing for it that I know of.
The thing that makes no sense to me is that the Cleric is the objectively more powerful class (9th-level casting trumps everything else), and yet Paladins have all the restrictions. Why aren't Clerics held to higher standards, since they are wielding the greater share of their God's might?
|
|
The thing that makes no sense to me is that the Cleric is the objectively more powerful class (9th-level casting trumps everything else), and yet Paladins have all the restrictions. Why aren't Clerics held to higher standards, since they are wielding the greater share of their God's might?
Whoa whoa whoa, don't mention classes being objectively better than others unless you want crazies coming out of the woodwork to shout about character optimization until they are blue in the face, learned that one the hard way.
First off, 9th level spells only happen at level 17, many (I would argue most) games don't even get there. Paladins are strong beginning to end. Maybe a little stronger beginning than end, but strong nonetheless.
But the real issue here is that clerics and Paladins fill different roles. Sure, you can make a battle-cleric, it's a popular build, but Paladins are straight built for it, with smite, bonus to saves, and full BaB.
Think of it this way: A cleric's DEFAULT role is support. They have healing and buff (and debuff-removal) spells. Yes, they CAN turn into clericzilla, I've seen it happen, but that generally requires several rounds of prep time. Most Paladins are front liners and ready to go out of the gate. They get ambushed or caught with their pants down, that's okay, whereas clericzilla needs several rounds of spool-up time.
Plus the ability to bypass any DR (if it's evil), the bonuses from smite (including AC), the bonuses to Saves, immunity to diseases and fear, those are all powerful INATE bonuses. Always active. Sure a cleric can cast remove rear, but what happens if the cleric comes across something in the surprise round that panics him? Well, he's gone, can't cast his spell. Sure the cleric has remove disease, but what if the disease hits and drops his wisdom to 10? Can't cast that spell.
The thing that makes the paladin powerful is that most of their abilities can't be countered. No spool-up time (maybe one round to make their sword holy) no SR against smite evil (as opposed to most of your 9th level spells) and straight up immunities instead of spells to deal with it.