| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I call a cow's tail a leg, how many legs would she have?The problem you are facing, as I'm sure you no doubt noticed, us that your opponent does not care what the name says. If it doesn't match their idea if what a Paladin is, it's not a Paladin.
5E has no Paladins. They have "thing that isn't me hunters". They're specialized in fighting creature types, not Evil.Looks at PHB, reads the Paladin entry
I think I can say for fact 5e has Paladins.
Depends... Is the cow a paladin?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally don't see the equivalence,but hey, I've long since lost any stake in this particular argument, as I'm not even going to be involved with PF2. now I'm just here for the fire.
I came for the rum
That they are Fabulous?
| 24 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say, that the prime reason I'd want to open the Paladin to other alignments is that I despise the elitism that people attach to the old idea.
"Not only am I Good, I'm the MOST Good. That Barbarian who champions everything that I do without my Code to guide them? Bah! A mere pretender, no where near my purity of soul. Chaotic Good? More like 'Decided not to be Evil today'! Those lesser Heroes know nothing of my incredible valor and my boundless humility! It is I, Lawful Good Paladin Man, who am the ultimate bastion of righteousness!"
And just wanting that to be enforced by the rules. So that anyone playing the game, whether they will ever interact with the "Keep em Lawful!" players or not, is 'forced' to acknowledge that Lawful Good Is Best Good.
I frankly find that sort of elitism completely goes in the face of everything a Paladin should stand for. Paladins are my favorite class, and I love Lawful Good more than every other alignment, but if this notion of "Paladins are the Greatest Good, an ELITE CLASS of Hero!" was brought up to one of my Paladins their response would be legendary! (Involving sitting down with whoever said that, and explaining that nothing about them elevates them above any other man, woman, or child. True Heroism is a choice that anyone can make, and to see those choices made every day is what inspires the Paladins I play to do their best too.)
So I want to burn those alignment restrictions to the ground, because I HATE the idea that only Lawful Good characters can be such champions! No! No, no, no, no, no! True Paladins would champion the idea that ALL people can make that choice to be a Hero, and they would be inspired by each and every person that made that choice.
That true humility, that's something I don't think the Old Paradigm being pushed can accept. That they aren't Special Warriors that are Better Than Everyone Else. But its something I dearly want, for my Lawful Good Paladins to welcome Neutral Good and Chaotic Good champions to their number, so that they can strengthen their cause of protecting the innocent and the lost, while opposing the wicked.
The Old Way of doing Paladins is just elitism pandering to Special Snowflakes, lets open that fellowship already. My Paladins will welcome every newcomer with open arms.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whenever someone comes up with a solution to the Paladin, it’s usually to remove it or replace the Paladin with something else not really caring about the fact that a lot of us like the Paladin just fine, and that we’d lose that.
Well, the last instances I saw that wasn't true at all.Every time it was about adding options that allow for Non-LG paladins as well. That's neither trying to remove it nor is it replacing the Paladin with something else. So no, you wouldn't lose anything, but others would gain.
Also, the OP doesn't hate the Paladin. Diminuendo was trying to find a solution for the fact that it might not be feasible for Paizo to create several classes that basically do the same thing, only for other alignments, while the Paladin class as is doesn't allow for using other alignments than LG.
why not just homebrew a Paladin’s alignment restriction away
1. PFS play
2. jerk GMs3. jerk players
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Xerres: You deserve a cookie for that post. *hands over a cookie*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's certainly better than "any alignment", but I still think the Lawful component is important for a Paladin, as that's the manner in which they enact Good. At most, if absolutely necessary, I'd say "Good and non-Chaotic".How about this for an alignment restriction for Paladin...
Alignment: Any Good
Would allow for more laid back characters. Like a chill CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean or NG Paladin of Shelyn.
Us Dammit, Glitter! This is gonna take weeks to get out of my webs....
Longer! It reproduces!
He stole that idea from me!
Would allow for more laid back characters. Like a chill CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean or NG Paladin of Shelyn.That's certainly better than "any alignment", but I still think the Lawful component is important for a Paladin, as that's the manner in which they enact Good. At most, if absolutely necessary, I'd say "Good and non-Chaotic".How about this for an alignment restriction for Paladin...
Alignment: Any Good
Implying a Lawful character must have a massive stick up their ass? That's false.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Implying a Lawful character must have a massive stick up their ass? That's false.
Ok, which character do YOU expect are more laid back? A lawful one or a chaotic one? DO you expect to have a good time with a CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean or a typical LG paladin?
Why not trying to take posts at face value without reading in subtext into them... :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Implying a Lawful character must have a massive stick up their ass? That's false.Would allow for more laid back characters. Like a chill CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean or NG Paladin of Shelyn.That's certainly better than "any alignment", but I still think the Lawful component is important for a Paladin, as that's the manner in which they enact Good. At most, if absolutely necessary, I'd say "Good and non-Chaotic".How about this for an alignment restriction for Paladin...
Alignment: Any Good
Most I played with treat the Lawful as the letter, not the spirit. Not false.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Implying a Lawful character must have a massive stick up their ass? That's false.Ok, which character do YOU expect are more laid back? A lawful one or a chaotic one? DO you expect to have a good time with a CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean or a typical LG paladin?
Not to throw a spanner into your calculations but I would totally have more fun with the LG guy because I am LN as heck and that chaotic guy is going to keep running off into crazy antics that are destined to give me a migraine I just KNOW it...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most I played with treat the Lawful as the letter, not the spirit. Not false.Implying a Lawful character must have a massive stick up their ass? That's false.Would allow for more laid back characters. Like a chill CG Paladin of Cayden Cailean or NG Paladin of Shelyn.That's certainly better than "any alignment", but I still think the Lawful component is important for a Paladin, as that's the manner in which they enact Good. At most, if absolutely necessary, I'd say "Good and non-Chaotic".How about this for an alignment restriction for Paladin...
Alignment: Any Good
Sounds like they didn't know what Lawful is.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've had far more 'moral' characters that were Neutral than any of the polar extremes -- they couldn't insist that anyone else follow their Path, only suggest it, and would feel rotten and horrible if they did something rotten and horrible because circumstances demanded it.
Even if they weren't required mechanically to get a 'Paladin-Get-Out-Of-Consequences-Free' card they would do so as required to them personally.
And the few times I've adventured with Paladins in PFS that were not my own, most of the hardliners in the discussion would have had them fall for 'not being nearly Lawful enough'.
So maybe, just maybe the OP is onto something. If this is the equivalent of dropping forty gallons of kerosene into a gaming home, perhaps we need to re-assess where our priorities are both as a community and as a person.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now if we're talking about a laid back CG Paladin of Calistria....
I know this idea is immensely appealing to a lot of people on these forums, but I gotta admit, my skin legit CRAWLED for a sec reading this.
Do Not Want.
Granted, that's 100% because of my utter distaste for Calistra and not at all because of the CG Paladin part.
Any way, as you were.
|
|
I know this idea is immensely appealing to a lot of people on these forums, but I gotta admit, my skin legit CRAWLED for a sec reading this.
Sorry for that, didn't want to cause any unease. Also I didn't even know people would advocate for that to happen. Contrary to you, I like Calistria very much, but I never thought about creating a Paladin of hers. Until someone in this thread used the word "laid", that is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to throw a spanner into your calculations but I would totally have more fun with the LG guy because I am LN as heck and that chaotic guy is going to keep running off into crazy antics that are destined to give me a migraine I just KNOW it...
LOL Chaotic = "running off into crazy antics" is as bad as Lawful = "massive stick up their ass".
So, let take fictional characters? Judge dread or han solo? Which one sounds like a better drinking companion? ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dredd wouldn't drink with you, because he is the Law.
The Law cannot be drunk on duty.
I know this idea is immensely appealing to a lot of people on these forums, but I gotta admit, my skin legit CRAWLED for a sec reading this.Sorry for that, didn't want to cause any unease. Also I didn't even know people would advocate for that to happen. Contrary to you, I like Calistria very much, but I never thought about creating a Paladin of hers. Until someone in this thread used the word "laid", that is.
Hahah, no harm done. I just really don't like Calistra. Patron goddess of the Crazy Ex. Lust and vengeance are not two portfolios that ever should have been allowed to mix.
Read my review of Dave Gross's Queen of Thorns if you really want to see my uncensored take on her.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to throw a spanner into your calculations but I would totally have more fun with the LG guy because I am LN as heck and that chaotic guy is going to keep running off into crazy antics that are destined to give me a migraine I just KNOW it...LOL Chaotic = "running off into crazy antics" is as bad as Lawful = "massive stick up their ass".
So, let take fictional characters? Judge dread or han solo? Which one sounds like a better drinking companion? ;)
I would vote Dredd, Solo is fun to watch on screen bit I would never want to be near him when he's up to stiff.
Face it,I'm too Lawful for this example to work on me. =)
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The paladin has always been my favored class through 2E, 3.0, 3.5, PF. However, I think the concept of a holy warrior is more appropriate in today's game. I want my character to be driven by his/her's deities code/ethics more than a generic code put in place in the core rulebook, to mimic the games that have come before. I think that the warpriest was a good start in this direction, just did not quite make the cut in my opinion.
I want to see an unholy knight of Asmodeous, based upon tyranny, I want to see a champion of Sheylyn, defending the concept of good - purity, love, etc. for goods sake only. I want to see a defiler of Rovagug - intent on spreading chaos and discontent. And still I want the holy knight - the paladin, if you will, of Imodae, fighting back the corruption of the world wound. Call them what you will, I want a class that I can build based upon that characters religious or even general moral or immoral code.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd vote for Judge Dredd. At least we could finish our drinks without getting shot at.
"Public intoxication is against the law!' *bang, bang* ;)
Face it,I'm too Lawful for this example to work on me. =)
They have medications for that these days. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would I want to medicate? I LIKE being lawful. I try to be LG but I'm a tad lot too cynical and pessimistic to really pull it off, so LN it is, irl anyway.
You understand in 5e they can be any alignment, right?fun part is that actually having diferent kinds of paladins, such as 5e Devotion, Ancients and Vengeance paladins,
Yes
I know this idea is immensely appealing to a lot of people on these forums, but I gotta admit, my skin legit CRAWLED for a sec reading this.Sorry for that, didn't want to cause any unease. Also I didn't even know people would advocate for that to happen. Contrary to you, I like Calistria very much, but I never thought about creating a Paladin of hers. Until someone in this thread used the word "laid", that is.Hahah, no harm done. I just really don't like Calistra. Patron goddess of the Crazy Ex. Lust and vengeance are not two portfolios that ever should have been allowed to mix.
Read my review of Dave Gross's Queen of Thorns if you really want to see my uncensored take on her.
Also there is that whole thing with Calistra's followers and them unleashing wasps on those that they feel deserve it.
Like there is a reason that this art from pathfinder is pretty much Calistria in a nutshell:
http://cdn.obsidianportal.com/assets/242245/CalistriaVenganza.jpg
Why would I want to medicate?
I'm too 'not-lawful' to understand why you wouldn't. :P
|
|
Read my review of Dave Gross's Queen of Thorns if you really want to see my uncensored take on her.
I just went out of curiosity. Well done review, by the way, only that I'm a big fan of all things elves and, if I remember correctly, quite liked Kemeili at the time I read that book. That paladin, not so much.
Yeah,complete opposite of me. I wanted to punch her every time she was on scene.
Yes they have. Just like World of Warcraft have paladins too, and that includes Blood Elves paladins that steal the power of Light, making them certainly not Lawful Good. You don't like it? that's cool5E has no Paladins. They have "thing that isn't me hunters". They're specialized in fighting creature types, not Evil.You understand in 5e they can be any alignment, right?fun part is that actually having diferent kinds of paladins, such as 5e Devotion, Ancients and Vengeance paladins,
Note to self: something akin to this for paladin archetype work....
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
5E has no Paladins. They have "thing that isn't me hunters". They're specialized in fighting creature types, not Evil.
RPGs have no Paladins. They have religious warriors with divinely-bestowed miraculous powers, not the 12 Peers of Charlemagne.
Kindly leave this "No True Scotsman" business elsewhere.
Now, with that said... you're probably not going to lose out in execution, because in the existing context of Golarion, non-LG Paladins require an Archetype. As Golarion's internal setting logic is not due for any kind of seismic shift, it seems likely to continue.
Fun tangential factoid-In the AD&D 2E days, my favorite setting was Ravenloft... which was a rough row to hoe for Paladins. The Domains of Dread Hardcover (the first to really allow for making PCs who were from Ravenloft rather than trying to escape it) made it plain that Paladins did not exist as a thing in Ravenloft- they could come in from elsewhere, but you didn't get native-born Paladins. Instead, they had a 2E class called the Avenger- had to be Neutral or Chaotic, and basically a "I'm hunting down a nemesis to achieve retribution for the traumas inflicted by this particular Mastermind/Werewolf/Vampire/Tutu-Wearing Flying Hippo-Man" Fighter upgrade.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't even think Gotcha-GMs are that much of a problem. Then again, my tables tend not to have problems with alignment because we have an unwrittem agreement not to think about it too hard, lest it break.
Mainly I would just like to see the Holy Warrior archetype opened up to more concepts. Not everyone wants to deal with the paperwork of full prepared spellcasting. Some people will want a character with supernatural abilities, but of a more martial bent. And PF2 will most likely not have the come-lately and arguably redundant Warpriest class.
I've never had a problem with paladins either, but I'm not as nitpicky as some people are when it comes to the code.
There've been people on the boards that argued that a palain/rogue shouldn't use sneak attack because it's not honorable.Another said if a paladin was the general of an army, and had to defend his kingdom against a larger army the paladin would fall if he had his army ambush the larger army. He should meet them in open combat, even if it meant the kingdom he was defending would be conquered.
Other stories of similar nonsense have been told here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*wakes up, bleary-eyed, grabs coffee*
“I wonder how that thread is going?”
[87 new posts]
Sweet hoogly-moogly.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it's too crazy to say it should be either a prestige class or a "branch" of another class because there should be equivalents for other alignments, at least the 4 corners, but there aren't really. I'd love it if the class had to pick an alignment at level 1 or level 3 and go from there - We could roll in Hellknights for LE and make them better than a prestige class, anti-paladins could get a better name and then there'd be something for CG.
If 2E is going to be as versatile as they say, I don't think that would be too much of a stretch - and if there's not enough room in the CRB I wouldn't mind waiting for another book to come out
If I call a cow's tail a leg, how many legs would she have?The problem you are facing, as I'm sure you no doubt noticed, us that your opponent does not care what the name says. If it doesn't match their idea if what a Paladin is, it's not a Paladin.
5E has no Paladins. They have "thing that isn't me hunters". They're specialized in fighting creature types, not Evil.Looks at PHB, reads the Paladin entry
I think I can say for fact 5e has Paladins.
You can call it whatever you want, but that doesn't make it table, and I'm sure that's your point.
However WoTC has the authority to call their paladin a paladin, even if it doesn't match up to previous versions of a paladin or Paizo's paladin since they get to make the rules for their game.Some people complained about PF1's paladin being able to work with evil for a short time, but that didn't make it a non-paladin.
So if the book says paladin that is what it is.
Of course we're allowed to feel like something that doesn't match our ideal of what it should be, but that doesn't change what it is. It just means that whoever gave it a classification could have done a better job.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
HW, you and others keep insisting that LG gets 'all the candy' even though mechanically there's not a lot of 'all the candy' in such a class.
Few have offered reasoned responses to my 'if the candy was removed would you still play the class if it required LG' thought experiment.
Most have said "Well, it'd need different candy to make up for the candy not being there."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
C'mon guys, there aren't enough available characters to change my name to
It is simply put someone who is altruistic (good) who believes that laws, both natural and supernatural, improve society (lawful) are the most beneficial to the people.
Lawful doesn't even need to pertain to actual laws. Lawful alignment represents ordered thinking and being more inclined to follow rules than they are to break them. That's why Lawful characters are the ones who choose to take up the mantle of the Paladin, enforcing a code of conduct upon themselves in order to live their ideals (and perhaps teach by example).
A Chaotic Good character would probably be more inclined to enact what they feel is right spur-of-the-moment and likely doesn't think too hard in advance about it before doing so, simply acting on their Good nature.