| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am playing a Tiefling, about to be 5th level, Paladin of Iomedae and have been a sword & board paladin since we converted out 4e campaign to Pathfinder. We tried to stay as close as we could to our character concepts. That being said none of us are really optimized. So I was thinking about going two-handed weapon. But since Inner Sea Gods came out, & I saw this feat & the flavor it gives, I am thinking about keeping the sword & board. However the feat is not meant for Paladins, which I think is kinda absurd!
Disciple of the Sword thematically fits with a Paladin of Iomedae to me. The only reason I think it says for cleric or inquisitor is cause they are 3/4 BAB casting classes. That or just for flavor. I don't think it would be terribly over-powered for a Paladin to have the feat. I think it makes a sword & board Paladin more workable, since most folks decry them in favor or two-handed weapons or bows. As I said the flavor is awesome & appeals to me.
Thoughts anyone? Would you let a Paladin take this feat?
Any reason why you don't see this as a good house rule or errata?!
Boosting a Paladins swordfighting ability might make a hypothetical Fighter sad, compared to boosting an Inquisitor.
But "Fighter" and "Longsword" are both terrible choices, so nobody in their right mind cares. I say go for it.
|
It looks well-written, which leads me to suspect that not including paladins wasn't an oversight.
Given that this is the Rules Questions subforum, the answer is clear: sorry, no.
Houserule-wise? I think I might allow it, particularly because longswords are so lackluster. I just hate that people with a patron diety like Iomedae are avoiding their patron's favored weapon because it's such a disappointing choice.
Why do you think guys like me avoid the hell outta Iomedae? For a goddess of war, she certainly has a lousy weapon. Would have been better if she had something a bit more war worthy, like a bastard sword.
You could always just go with a large longsword and balance the -2 to hit for inappropriately sized weapon with the weapon focus and greater weapon focus.
Huh? Sure, the longsword isn't the best weapon but it's certainly not the worst. It's a middle-of-the-road, average martial weapon, which I'm pretty sure is exactly what it's intended to be.
Greatsword sized Sunblade, 2d6 weapon that qualifies as a longsword.
As for the paladin issue, absolutely I would allow it.
Huh? Sure, the longsword isn't the best weapon but it's certainly not the worst. It's a middle-of-the-road, average martial weapon, which I'm pretty sure is exactly what it's intended to be.
It's a one-handed weapon. When dealing damage is your main job, reducing your effectiveness by 1/3 in exchange for a bit of defense is not a good choice.
Sword and (passive) shield fighting style is even worse for Paladins, who often need a free hand for a moment, and who are far better able to take a beating than a Fighter (provided they can get that free hand).
Why do you think guys like me avoid the hell outta Iomedae? For a goddess of war, she certainly has a lousy weapon. Would have been better if she had something a bit more war worthy, like a bastard sword.
You could always just go with a large longsword and balance the -2 to hit for inappropriately sized weapon with the weapon focus and greater weapon focus.
Looking for some images of the goddess, she's the parangon of the paladin depicted in lot of stories: The typical shiny armor, shield and sword.
Well, it's not the best weapon, but it's pretty common and effective.
For the feat denied to the paladin, I feel like they tried to prevent a little too much effectiveness from the shiny boys.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is another feat designed to allow Iomedean Paladins to take Weapon specialization in Longsword, Iomedean Sword Oath , it means you cannot ever use any weapon except a longsword without using atonement, and you still have to buy weapon specialization as another feat. So it is much inferior to this one, however its existence is probably why Paladins cannot take the new feat.
I would probably allow Paladins of Iomedea to take the new feat and then ignore the existence of the terrible old feat.
Why do you think guys like me avoid the hell outta Iomedae? For a goddess of war, she certainly has a lousy weapon. Would have been better if she had something a bit more war worthy, like a bastard sword.
You could always just go with a large longsword and balance the -2 to hit for inappropriately sized weapon with the weapon focus and greater weapon focus.
Iomedae has war in her portfolio as a domain but I would not consider her a God of War.
Her weapon choices might be because of the traditional Paladin arch-type from movies & books, longsword & shield.
I think she is more about Honor, justice, rulership, valor. War is part of what she does but not all she is about. More of a protector & defender of the oppressed and rooter out of evil. Her domains are Glory, Good, Law, Sun & War but this does not mean she is a God of War.
I say "NO" do not allow it for Paladins.
The Weapon Specialization is a key feature of the Fighter Class and should not be encroached upon by other classes lightly. The feat is for 3/4 BAB only by design. Giving a Paladin access to the fighter only feats is a bad idea. I agree that thematically it would fit but game mechanics wise it would be broken. The combine bonus of +4 damage when added to the smite evil ability would get out of hand real fast without even needing to min/max the build. YMMV though.
There are examples of other specific class archtypes that get weapon specialization.
The kensai magus with their chosen weapon can choose it at 7th level.The Zen Archer gets it with one type of bow.
I am sure there are a few more examples.
Now they are 3/4 BAB classes and they only get weapon specialization.
The above feat is only for clerics & inquisitors, also 3/4 BAB.
How broken would it really be? An extra +2 damage and if you want to you can get the greater WF & WS feats. It is only for followers of Iomedae & certain classes.
Pretty tight group.
Not thinking it would be too overpowered for a Paladin to have since you have to use a longsword.
The problem comes more from the fact you can take fighter's feats with a high BAB.
Paladin of Iomedae would be a near no-brainer for paladin enthusiasts, and it would make the fighter even less attracting. And you don't get to use only a longsword.
Technically speaking, blowing 4 feats for +2/+4 is a horrible use of 4 feats.
It's the giving away of fighter-restricted feats which is more the problem. Spec won't do anything for the paladin he couldn't do before...the TH/DMG bonuses are vastly inferior to Smiting, and since they don't have Weapon Training to stack on top, it's really not much different then a +4 Str bonus or something...at the price of 4 of his 10 feats.
So, give it, and let them be good with the sword of their god. just don't be surprised when the fighter starts getting some more good stuff, too.
==Aelryinth
*BUMP*
Let the paladin take the feat, it would not unbalance anything, paladins already have stronger options.