Yes, technically other classes can mimic all these things. It would take a bizarre multiclass abomination to not just get one or two. And STILL take class levels at the minimum, and dedicating those class levels to being a fake paladin. And in many of those cases, it takes your deity being chill with their blessings being used to deceive people.
Yes, but what paladin is coming into town AND using all his abilities just so people could ID them. it's only on visible abilities used. You likely aren't going to see more that one or two so it's not really a stretch. Note a single class oracle can cover 2 abilities, and a Antipaladin [Insinuator] can cover 4, so it's not really hard to pass yourself off as one.
No, I don't think people feigning being paladins would be a routine occurrence. For a comparison, maybe consider that anyone could put on a blue shirt and a badge, but many people still commonly respect or at least listen to policemen. Why aren't we more concerned about fake police?
People don't fake being police because there are tangible consequences for doing so. What it the consequences of being a fake paladin? None that I know of. So if people blindly believe anything a paladin says, why NOT pretend to be one: this is especially true it it's for short term where detection is next to impossible.
If you know exactly what you want from the paladin, then what's stopping you from just filling off the serial number/unwanted parts?
That works both ways. If you don't like non-LG paladins, why would be an issue "filling off the serial number/unwanted parts". For me, I already said why I want it in print: it'd make it into circulation and be available in a central easily available online source. I play online so it's not like I want to try to get a houserule through each time I play but an available/optional archetype or something like that that I can point to would save a lot of time/effort.
Primarily, you'd need a new code, fitting whatever new alignment you want. The alignment spells and abilities (Detect x, Smite y...) need to be replaced, but they usually come in sets of four anyway, one for each alignment.
Yep, seem an easy set of archetype to make, I just with they would.
If you don’t care for the flavor, why not replace it?
Because I'm not the Dm and I don't have a set DM I play with all the time?
It's exactly the kind of "find and replace" reskining that "Paladin = LG" people dislike, but it's fine for houserules.
Houserules work fine for a set play group for sure. I don't have that though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People don't fake being police because there are tangible consequences for doing so. What it the consequences of being a fake paladin? None that I know of. So if people blindly believe anything a paladin says, why NOT pretend to be one: this is especially true it it's for short term where detection is next to impossible.
Actually Greystone, Inquisitors would be the ones to hunt down false Paladins.
Actually Greystone, Inquisitors would be the ones to hunt down false Paladins.
People don't fake being police because there are tangible consequences for doing so. What it the consequences of being a fake paladin? None that I know of. So if people blindly believe anything a paladin says, why NOT pretend to be one: this is especially true it it's for short term where detection is next to impossible.
There is a prohibition on pretending to be a paladin? I missed that under the class. Were talking about people "using trickery and guile when righteousness and purity is not enough". Would deception from others be an issue? Remember, lying is against a paladin's code, not necessarily against a god's code. Add to this that paladins aren't required to HAVE a god: what exactly would a Inquisitors have to do with a godless paladin?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a prohibition on pretending to be a paladin? I missed that under the class. Were talking about people "using trickery and guile when righteousness and purity is not enough". Would deception from others be an issue? Remember, lying is against a paladin's code, not necessarily against a god's code. Add to this that paladins aren't required to HAVE a god: what exactly would a Inquisitors have to do with a godless paladin?Actually Greystone, Inquisitors would be the ones to hunt down false Paladins.
People don't fake being police because there are tangible consequences for doing so. What it the consequences of being a fake paladin? None that I know of. So if people blindly believe anything a paladin says, why NOT pretend to be one: this is especially true it it's for short term where detection is next to impossible.
Defaming by example, besmirching the image of the church, making false claims on the legal, not totally religious front is a thing. The BIG thing is that it would be sacrilege which is huge. I should also point out, that while the Duty of rooting out the false Paladin falls to Inquisitors, real Paladins would certainly be against false Paladins as well.
Graystone, I totally get that you don't like new-to-you tables refusing to let you play something that you feel is totally reasonable, so you want the rules to back you and not them. Perhaps you need to put more effort towards remaining with tables long enough that you have enough of a positive reputation that they are more willing give your ideas a shot.
Yep, seem an easy set of archetype to make, I just with they would.
I'm sure there's a third-party-
Huh.Weird.
I have to admit, I'm surprised - there isn't even a third party paladin archetype with changed alignment on the d20pfsrd. Not only no find&replace reskin (which might fall under "to trivial to bother with" for 3pp), but nothing with changed code of conduct at all (except some paizo archetypes).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is a prohibition on pretending to be a paladin? I missed that under the class.Actually Greystone, Inquisitors would be the ones to hunt down false Paladins.
People don't fake being police because there are tangible consequences for doing so. What it the consequences of being a fake paladin? None that I know of. So if people blindly believe anything a paladin says, why NOT pretend to be one: this is especially true it it's for short term where detection is next to impossible.
Immaterial. There's isn't anything in the Core Rulebook that says there are penalties for impersonating a police officer either. There are some questions not answered by the rulebook. Some things are going to be campaign dependent.
Defaming by example, besmirching the image of the church, making false claims on the legal, not totally religious front is a thing. The BIG thing is that it would be sacrilege which is huge. I should also point out, that while the Duty of rooting out the false Paladin falls to Inquisitors, real Paladins would certainly be against false Paladins as well.
This only applies to paladins of a religion. A false paladin of no god is besmirching no image and legal claims only apply if the church IS the government. Paladins themselves don't fall under Inquisitors, worshipers of their god does.
Graystone, I totally get that you don't like new-to-you tables refusing to let you play something that you feel is totally reasonable, so you want the rules to back you and not them. Perhaps you need to put more effort towards remaining with tables long enough that you have enough of a positive reputation that they are more willing give your ideas a shot.
Oh, it's not really a matter of remaining with tables or a positive reputation: I play online and it's rare to get the same DM back to back. Positive reputation does allow me to get more callbacks but that might be next year when they want to DM again. It's really a case of trying to get into a game and then trying to get houserules added on top of that: in an environment of more players than available slots, it's not a winning strategy to ignore sources allowed and try to add my own.
Immaterial. There's isn't anything in the Core Rulebook that says there are penalties for impersonating a police officer either. There are some questions not answered by the rulebook. Some things are going to be campaign dependent.
I'm talking the default rules and setting: does the rules books and/or the golorian setting say anything about it? If not, the immaterial part is other campaign dependent settings, as I have no context or reference for those.
I can understand if someone adds a consequence for impersonating a paladin: I'm questioning people talking like it's a given and accepted default.
HWalsh - "Paladin's strength and authority": And that is spelled out where? I have no problem with YOU playing that way but where does it say this? Where does it talk about an order and it's reputation?
"Pretending to be a great hero": we're talking about the average paladin that's just walked into town. Were did "great hero" come from. Even if they come from an order with a good rep, that doesn't make a 1st level paladin great or a hero.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Their order? Paladins are not a groupthink hivemind. They are not part of Ye Olde Paladin's Guilde. They are separate groups of holy warriors for specific gods and ideas.
Also, I'm still waiting for some page numbers with the information for paladins reputations and influence.
A really good Paladin resource for In-Universe Use can be found in the book "Divine Anthology" which contains an entry for a book titled "On Virtue"
This is on page 16 of the Divine Anthology.
This book is said to be one of the few popular religious texts in the five mountains and has been reprinted all across Golarion. It contains information about Paladins, Paladin Codes, and the like, which gives the common people the information about Paladins.
This book became so popular, even among dwarves, and is the only major book about non-dwarves in the lands.
So, I mean, we even have in-unverse books about Paladins that are wildly popular. So popular that evil kingdoms BANNED THE BOOK because they don't like Paladins.
A great example.
However, how many copies of that book do you think the average towns person has seen? They may have heard of it, but then they may have heard of what dragons are like and any number of other things .. which ties into what The Sideromancer remarked on: Can the average person, or even the average adventurer, tell the difference between a paladin, a cleric, an inquisitor, a warpriest, a LG fighter, or for that matter a rogue or bard disguised as one?
There are popular books in 2017 about Navy SEALS. Navy SEALS would be very angry if you pretended to be one of them. Nevertheless you can put your hands on stories of people pretending to be them.
Yes, the idea of a shining knight is a wonderful idea and fantasy of many a peasant. So is being a great mage, or a cunning thief, or an adventurer. This still doesn't give any of the classes an bonuses outside of what is written into their class.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, we have, and you were incorrect then, as well as now. It isn't baseless. I have provided page numbers, examples, rules reference regarding SU abilities.
None of which do what you say, that paladins are unquestioningly trusted at their word and considered authorities in their own right. That is your extrapolation, and a fine idea. But it is not the rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Paragons of devotion, decency, and diplomacy, paladins are seen as inspirations to the young—shining examples of what anyone can become with enough hard work, sacrifice, and faith."
This doesn't say what you were saying in your other posts. "inspirations" doesn't equal great heroes. They are nice decent people... that's it. Nothing about people believing them unilaterally. Nothing about them being 'authorities'. We DO have "paladins who serve no specific god are actually more common" said though.
See, in Pathfinder, all Spells (and SU abilities) have a visual component (unless you take a specific set of feats) and can be seen.
SLA yes, SU no.
"all spells have their own manifestations" and "this prevents spellcasters that use spell-like abilities, psychic magic, and the like from running completely amok against non-spellcasters in a non-combat situation." the FAQ makes NO mention of SU, a fact I pointed out in the associated thread. So aura's and SU abilities aren't seen.
There is a prohibition on pretending to be a paladin? I missed that under the class.
In-game, your fakaladin character can lie all day long and maybe get away with it.
But that sweet CHA bonus to attack?
Nope.
There is a prohibition on pretending to be a paladin? I missed that under the class.In-game, your fakaladin character can lie all day long and maybe get away with it.
But that sweet CHA bonus to attack?
Nope.
I don't know, my Cha works JUST fine with this starknife... [and who can tell I'm hitting with Cha?]
The fact that you're still just as accurate and damaging after a ray of enfeeblement?I don't know, my Cha works JUST fine with this starknife... [and who can tell I'm hitting with Cha?]There is a prohibition on pretending to be a paladin? I missed that under the class.In-game, your fakaladin character can lie all day long and maybe get away with it.
But that sweet CHA bonus to attack?
Nope.
You sure I'm not using Dex? ;)
And, you can't detect feats that have passive effects with Know checks.
there are still no in game mechanics to back up that fluff so its useless
Other than the Lawful Good allignment requirements, Paladin Codes and the rules that Paladins FALL if they don't maintain these goodly tenets? You remember, all those things you have been arguing that you want gone. I am OK with you you not liking these rules, how you are arguing your case, not so much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, now I want to build somebody who's life goal is to be taken for a paladin, and adheres to the ideals of Rahadoum.
there are still no in game mechanics to back up that fluff so its uselessOther than the Lawful Good allignment requirements, Paladin Codes and the rules that Paladins FALL if they don't maintain these goodly tenets? You remember, all those things you have been arguing that you want gone. I am OK with you you not liking these rules, how you are arguing your case, not so much.
Yep... Now how did they figure out they were a paladin? A badge from paladin's local #8? The word Paladin tattoo's on a forehead?
Even if we assume a paladin is known, why would they be more trusted than another LG character? Does pulling out a holy symbol of Iomedae give me a free pass too and make everyone trust what I say without question?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've no problem with paladins having a sort of reputation that they can grow into. Sure, wonderful.
That said, they don't start out as a paragon of virtue and townsfolk rain flowers and virgins on them as they ride into town any more than the player who thinks it is a good idea to write into his background that he is a noble gets to wander into the palace unhindered.
If you didn't earn it or pay for it (spell, class feature, feat, etc) then you don't have it.
Relevant story.
Umm, relevant how?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you didn't earn it or pay for it (spell, class feature, feat, etc) then you don't have it.
That's a way to play. A valid one. I also think my group isn't the only one where not everything needs to be bought with game mechanics. I'd be fine with someone writing into their backstory that they were a noble who could wander into the palace unhindered - in fact, there's a PC in my campaign who fits that description exactly. I'd give some people an advantage on Knowledge checks for stuff relevant to their characters on a purely roleplaying aspect; the guy who grew up in this town absolutely can automatically know all the rumors about the haunted well. And yes, people generally respect paladins despite just assuming that the nice-seeming guy in full plate with a holy symbol who heals at a touch is a paladin.
I don't think that's "wrong" either. It's fine to point out that it's not written into the rules as a mechanical requirement, but I'd also consider it best in the interests of less arguing to acknowledge that a significant number of players have fun with a different interpretation that is also not "wrong".
i was more talking about his wanting to get massive benefits to social encounters via the fact there is fluff involved rather then talking about the ramifications of following a code in this instance
I also wouldn't assume he wants "massive benefits to social encounters". Quite possibly what he wants is to have to make the exact same Diplomacy checks at the exact same DCs as anyone else, and just be acknowledged, in roleplaying, as someone people regard as actually being a holy warrior of Good. Not everyone thinks in terms of how to turn things into an advantage...
I also think my group isn't the only one where not everything needs to be bought with game mechanics.
It's totally fine if you do that: it's just not the default base assumption of the game and THAT is really the crux of this debate.
So I don't think anyone is saying the way people are playing the game is wrong, they are saying the way it's presented as the obvious way it SHOULD be played or is presented in the game at large.
I also wouldn't assume he wants "massive benefits to social encounters".
He inferred as such, that everyone would give them huge difference solely because their name has 'paladin' attached to it.
If you didn't earn it or pay for it (spell, class feature, feat, etc) then you don't have it.That's a way to play. A valid one. I also think my group isn't the only one where not everything needs to be bought with game mechanics. I'd be fine with someone writing into their backstory that they were a noble who could wander into the palace unhindered - in fact, there's a PC in my campaign who fits that description exactly. I'd give some people an advantage on Knowledge checks for stuff relevant to their characters on a purely roleplaying aspect; the guy who grew up in this town absolutely can automatically know all the rumors about the haunted well. And yes, people generally respect paladins despite just assuming that the nice-seeming guy in full plate with a holy symbol who heals at a touch is a paladin.
I don't think that's "wrong" either. It's fine to point out that it's not written into the rules as a mechanical requirement, but I'd also consider it best in the interests of less arguing to acknowledge that a significant number of players have fun with a different interpretation that is also not "wrong".
i was more talking about his wanting to get massive benefits to social encounters via the fact there is fluff involved rather then talking about the ramifications of following a code in this instanceI also wouldn't assume he wants "massive benefits to social encounters". Quite possibly what he wants is to have to make the exact same Diplomacy checks at the exact same DCs as anyone else, and just be acknowledged, in roleplaying, as someone people regard as actually being a holy warrior of Good. Not everyone thinks in terms of how to turn things into an advantage...
It isn't a matter of right and wrong, or good and bad fun. It is a matter of treating a single class -- not an individual character whose background makes sense for any situational bonuses or perks -- as the target of a worldwide bonus for simply existing.
As for what he wants or doesn't want .. given the number of threads this exact conversation has come up, I'd lean more towards that this is how he seems to believe the game is structured. Now it is a fine way to play, but that doesn't mean it is the default.
|
A fighter was mistaken for a paladin.Relevant story.Umm, relevant how?
One of my go to tactics is to hold out a bag with 50 gold pieces, and suggest that the mook take it and go to the bar, or back to school, or back to their parents basement mom kept the place the same.*
The lack of murderhobodom has gotten me mistaken for a paladin on multiple occasions. Really, I just want them out of the fighters charge lane to the actual threat. Most paladins would be more concerned that an evil doer is getting off scot-free but i get paid the same either way.
* as long as i get a receipt the exchange will pay me back.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, that's is what I said. If ANY table was allowed to have a non-LG paladin, you'd walk... I don't get the NO... You're literally saying that giving others options is enough to make you stop playing the game even though it'd has no impact on your table. Nothing in this post alters any of my posts in the least IMO.Nice try, but no. What I said was if Paizo, as in the company, made this a thing in the official universe I'd walk away, and I would. I can proudly say I don't play 4th Edition because of how badly they screwed Paladins up (as well as other things) and although I do play in 1 5e game I don't play Paladins ever.But we aren't talking about HIS table. He said he'd walk if ANY table was allowed it. So I think it's 100% fair and accurate. He's saying that if people he doesn't even know are allowed to play non-LG paladins, he's taking his toys and going home...HWalsh: your whole last post boils down to: You'd rage-quit if someone DARED to allow options you don't like... That IMO isn't 'growth', that's straight up playground rationalization.Come on man, I don't think that's fair. We all have hangups that we'd walk from a table over. Who cares if his is non LG paladins?
Actually no, thats not what he said at all. Let me help. He (like me) likely doesn't give two squirts of piss about what people do on their home tables. He isn't likely to play in a game that waters paladin down like that, and he isn't likely to play a system that makes it part of the official rules. People playing whatever they want at their table is whatever, the game altering because people would rather the official rules have the same rules as their table is a deal breaker.
that's a cavalier and a warpriest not the same thing in the slightest, it would be like saying some one who wants to play a fighter should play a wizard instead which is just plain dumbWhat is it that you want from a paladin that you can't get from those two classes?
The only thing I can think of would be 4th grade casting, in which case there's probably a ranger archetype for it.
Things a Paladin gets that a Cavalier doesn't:
4 level spellcastingGood Will save
Various class skills
Aura of Good
Detect Evil
Smite Evil
Divine Grace
Lay on Hands
Aura of Courage
Divine Health
Mercies
Channel Positive Energy
Weapon bond/Celestial template on mount
Aura of Justice
Aura of Faith
Aura of Righteousness
Holy Champion
Things a Paladin gets that a Warpriest doesn't:
Full BAB
d10 hit die
Certain Paladin-exclusive spells
Aura of Good
At Will Detect Evil
Smite Evil
Divine Grace
Aura of Courage
Divine Health
Mercies
Celestial Mount
Aura of Justice
Aura of Faith
Aura of Righteousness
Holy Champion
Note: I'm using vanilla, no-archetype classes for comparison. I'm aware of the Champion of the Faith Warpriest, who gets inferior versions Detect Evil and Smite Evil (but still lacks all the rest).
Neither class is really that good of a substitute for a paladin, except in very limited areas.
Page numbers? Where is the bits on all of this? I've poured over the various editions of D&D and Pathfinder and I seem to be missing these pieces of information.It is fine to have that sort of thing as the default of your home brew setting. However, it is giving the paladins a lot of social power that isn't baked into the class.
What you are describing is something akin to how, say, the Heralds of Valdemar are seen by the population in large part. Which, again, is fine if that is what you want to do. But the default setting doesn't grant them any sort of situational bonuses or any special recognition that others wouldn't get.
No. I am describing the game setting for Pathfinder. That is the default. When you deviate from that it is called homebrewing.
Thus in your homebrew setting it is fine to have that sort of thing not be the default. In the non-homebrew setting that is the default.
I don't think there are any. However I would say that in very large towns or more towards cities with well established temples, most citizens could recognize someone dressed as a paladin. As all of the paladins belonging to the same temple would have the same uniform/armor and weapons. Which can be said of: knights, cavaliers, clerics, war priests, the city guard... A mercenary company that calls the city home.
That being said, if you went to a small village or town with no paladins; then the population there wouldn't have a clue. Because you would just be another full plate wearing person with a weapon. Is this person a fighter, a mighty knight, a paladin or a cocky mercenary? No way to tell until they did something, and even then that won't help. Until the paladin is the only one turning down the reward for getting rid of this town's particular monster.
But really you could take all of his points and apply them to Knights or Cavaliers. Because fluff... anyone flying a banner of the area's major religion or King would get minimal attention. But unless they are stupid, they aren't going to just throw praise and adulation on everyone who comes to town under that banner.
But for the average NPC in any location, they aren't going to know any of these glorious armored do gooders by face or name. Hell they won't even know if the armored do gooder standing before them is a real do gooder or just someone with fancy stuff.
that's a cavalier and a warpriest not the same thing in the slightest, it would be like saying some one who wants to play a fighter should play a wizard instead which is just plain dumbWhat is it that you want from a paladin that you can't get from those two classes?
The only thing I can think of would be 4th grade casting, in which case there's probably a ranger archetype for it.
Things a Paladin gets that a Warpriest doesn't
Full BAB
d10 hit die
Certain Paladin-exclusive spells
Aura of Good
At Will Detect Evil
Smite Evil
Divine Grace
Aura of Courage
Divine Health
Mercies
Celestial Mount
Aura of Justice
Aura of Faith
Aura of Righteousness
Holy ChampionNote: I'm using vanilla, no-archetype classes for comparison. I'm aware of the Champion of the Faith Warpriest, who gets inferior versions Detect Evil and Smite Evil (but still lacks all the rest).
Neither class is really that good of a substitute for a paladin, except in very limited areas.
When people make this argument about warpriest it becomes pretty obvious its more about cool powers than any real rp reason.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And what is wrong with being interested in the cool powers?