For years I have considered the basic assumption of a Paladin as a core class but what is always apparent is that the Paladin is just too much of a specialist class compared to the rest.
My suggestion was to turn the paladin into a prestige class along with the blackguard and instead have a knight class that would lead into these two. however from experience trying this, most people simply go fighter (mainly for the feats) and then paladin or blackguard.
Today though after reading over the comments on the prestige class document I thought about another option...
Why not turn the Paladin into a Knight class based off alignment?
At 1st level knights would choose an Oath of Allegiance to either a Good Church, an Evil Church or a Monarchy. Those that follow the Church of Good gain paladin spells and abilities while the Evil Church gains blackguard spells and abilities. Those who follow the Monarchy are effectively neutral and gain a different selection of abilities and spells.
I would also strongly recommend the shift from wisdom to charisma for Knights spells so that the neutral knights spells would reflect leadership and battle prowess, spells such as aide, bless, etc. would make a knight stand out from basic fighters.
Thoughts?
Well, I've always considered the paladin something of a specialty core-class. With that said, one of my favorite 1st Edition classes was the cavalier from Unearthed Arcana.
A spell-using knight...hmmm, I dont know. I mean, we have the Arcane Knight Prestige Class, or someone may be inclined to make a knight-like gish. Perhaps a fighter oriented Prestige class may be in order. Something that allows you have all sorts of wepos, armor and shield related feats, and equestrian related abilities.
Still, your idea has potential, so please tell us more.
Quijenoth wrote: For years I have considered the basic assumption of a Paladin as a core class but what is always apparent is that the Paladin is just too much of a specialist class compared to the rest.
My suggestion was to turn the paladin into a prestige class along with the blackguard and instead have a knight class that would lead into these two. however from experience trying this, most people simply go fighter (mainly for the feats) and then paladin or blackguard.
Today though after reading over the comments on the prestige class document I thought about another option...
Why not turn the Paladin into a Knight class based off alignment?
At 1st level knights would choose an Oath of Allegiance to either a Good Church, an Evil Church or a Monarchy. Those that follow the Church of Good gain paladin spells and abilities while the Evil Church gains blackguard spells and abilities. Those who follow the Monarchy are effectively neutral and gain a different selection of abilities and spells.
I would also strongly recommend the shift from wisdom to charisma for Knights spells so that the neutral knights spells would reflect leadership and battle prowess, spells such as aide, bless, etc. would make a knight stand out from basic fighters.
Thoughts?
I stumbled upon your post tonight and just wanted to say, although your idea is correct, I.E. true medieval knights who were called Paladins were simply devout to the catholic/Christian church, but were called so, simply because they had an unwaivering faith and sense of loyalty to their liege.
In the "Players Handbook 2" WOTC had created a class called "Knight" who was in regards what you're talking about. A great fighter, with special capacities to his friends and a bane to his foes, you should check it out. He's a fighter with a tougher edge!
Quijenoth wrote: For years I have considered the basic assumption of a Paladin as a core class but what is always apparent is that the Paladin is just too much of a specialist class compared to the rest.
My suggestion was to turn the paladin into a prestige class along with the blackguard and instead have a knight class that would lead into these two. however from experience trying this, most people simply go fighter (mainly for the feats) and then paladin or blackguard.
Today though after reading over the comments on the prestige class document I thought about another option...
Why not turn the Paladin into a Knight class based off alignment?
At 1st level knights would choose an Oath of Allegiance to either a Good Church, an Evil Church or a Monarchy. Those that follow the Church of Good gain paladin spells and abilities while the Evil Church gains blackguard spells and abilities. Those who follow the Monarchy are effectively neutral and gain a different selection of abilities and spells.
I would also strongly recommend the shift from wisdom to charisma for Knights spells so that the neutral knights spells would reflect leadership and battle prowess, spells such as aide, bless, etc. would make a knight stand out from basic fighters.
Thoughts?
It certainly an iteresting solution to the situation, but I'd insist on keeping to name Paladin for the class. Call me traditonalist if you like.
Anyway, making the class able to fight both for good or for evil is very nice and the ablility to also keep neutrality a factor in characters decisions is also pretty cool.
So to say it short and sweet, I like your idea and I wouldn't mind seeing it implimented.
My biggest grief with the Paladin is how it can only represent a handful of dieties in the PHB, the more chaotically inclined good gods like Cayden Cailean don't get paladins? I think Paladin should be reworked so that it has the current Paladin abilities but with less restrictions on them and also, like you all said, the ability to be of any alignment. I liked the Unearthed Arcana's Paladin of Freedom, Slaughter, etc, etc variants.
Quijenoth wrote: For years I have considered the basic assumption of a Paladin as a core class but what is always apparent is that the Paladin is just too much of a specialist class compared to the rest. When 3.0 came out and I saw the mechanic for Prestige Classes (and later when d20 Modern used six-generic base classes and expected you to work into an advanced class later), I think they made a mistake and should have been more aggressive in limiting base classes and using prestige, well, in retrospect, better than they did.
I think their should have been these base classes:
Barbarian
Fighter
Rogue
Wizard
Cleric
Druid
Then they could move into Prestige Classes that represent Range, Paladin, Bard, Monk and other specialists (Assassin, Knight, etc).
Also, this wold allow interesting combination. Anyone dedicated to their LG god might become a Paladin, not just a Fighter type. I could see a Cleric called to the next level by a god, or a barbarian.
IMHO: In the end, 3.0 became too filled with Prestige classes that were written to sell collections of prestige classes. And 3.5 became an overload of base classes. I wish it had been handled better.
BTW: A Paladin does not necessarily mean a Knight. The dictionary defines it as:
1. any one of the 12 legendary peers or knightly champions in attendance on Charlemagne.
2. any knightly or heroic champion.
3. any determined advocate or defender of a noble cause.
Quijenoth wrote: At 1st level knights would choose an Oath of Allegiance to either a Good Church, an Evil Church or a Monarchy. Those that follow the Church of Good gain paladin spells and abilities while the Evil Church gains blackguard spells and abilities. Those who follow the Monarchy are effectively neutral and gain a different selection of abilities and spells. Or to a cause or ideal. In d20 the Paladins and Clerics do not have to be devoted to a god; it may be an ideal. Sort of like a Knight Errant, like Lancelot before he swore allegiance to King Arthur.
In Unearth Arcana (and on d20SRD.org) there are variant Paladins, for other alignments. Take a look. It might give you some ideas.
Iron Sentinel wrote: Well, I've always considered the paladin something of a specialty core-class. With that said, one of my favorite 1st Edition classes was the cavalier from Unearthed Arcana. Of course it was awesome. It was WAY out of balance with the core classes. They were totally kick-butt with little negatives. At that point the Paladin became a subclass of Cavalier and gained not only all the Paladin powers but the Cavalier powers as well.
Talk about power creep. It was like +2 levels above the fighter.
That book caused so many problems in my games. Butthead players who like to cause problems (like playing a thief and robbing their own party or attacking fellow PCs) in game loved the Barbarian because it allowed them to act like idiots. They were cared of magic, at low levels wouldn't work with Clerics, tries to destroy scroll and stuff.
then you had the Cavalier, who was encouraged to act like an upper crust snot as well!
And then there was the thief acrobat. No one played that dung heap.
Recent threads in Classes: Cleric, Druid, and Paladin
|
