| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am all for these classes existing. As different base classes.
So what you're saying is you'll happily support the 3pp that prints it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am all for these classes existing. As different base classes.
What's the class that gets its powers from the elemental forces of Chaos and Evil? Law and Evil? Good and Chaos? Just Good? Just Law? Just Evil? Just Chaos? Utter Neutrality?You see the problem here? There are people who want to play a class like Paladin, but want to get their power from another source.
That seems like a lot of unnecessary replication, wouldn't it work better as orders, archetypes or some other system with one base class?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
With all due respect to Walsh and Turtle, there is only so much available word count in the crb. Even the Barbarian, with his former 'non lawful' limitation and access to six of nine alignments is too limited for the crb, let alone the Paladin.Feh. We are going to have twelve core character classes, I believe; that's space enough to have one limited to each alignment with three left over.
Less than 60 words shouldn't make or break the CRB.
Alignment: Lawful Good
A Paladin draws their powers from the elemental forces of law and goodness, as such must retain a Lawful Good alignment. If they ever willingly commit an evil act, or their alignment changes, they lose access to their powers and class abilities until they receive an atonement spell and regain their Lawful Good alignment.
What's the class that gets its powers from the elemental forces of Chaos and Evil? Law and Evil? Good and Chaos? Just Good? Just Law? Just Evil? Just Chaos? Utter Neutrality?
You see the problem here? There are people who want to play a class like Paladin, but want to get their power from another source.
I don't care if the name "Paladin" is reserved for the LG version of this, but there really should be a version of this for every alignment, or a lore explanation as to why only the elemental forces of Law and Good, while working in tandem, can create a being like the Paladin.
Such explanation was given in Second Edition Paladin's Handbook.
Assassin is the Evil one. Or do you want Good Assassins?
Would be fair that every alignment gets their special class for sure. But one tailored to that alignment's quirks and philosophies.
And like assassin they should be prestige classes.With all due respect to Walsh and Turtle, there is only so much available word count in the crb. Even the Barbarian, with his former 'non lawful' limitation and access to six of nine alignments is too limited for the crb, let alone the Paladin.Feh. We are going to have twelve core character classes, I believe; that's space enough to have one limited to each alignment with three left over.
Less than 60 words shouldn't make or break the CRB.
Alignment: Lawful Good
A Paladin draws their powers from the elemental forces of law and goodness, as such must retain a Lawful Good alignment. If they ever willingly commit an evil act, or their alignment changes, they lose access to their powers and class abilities until they receive an atonement spell and regain their Lawful Good alignment.
What's the class that gets its powers from the elemental forces of Chaos and Evil? Law and Evil? Good and Chaos? Just Good? Just Law? Just Evil? Just Chaos? Utter Neutrality?
You see the problem here? There are people who want to play a class like Paladin, but want to get their power from another source.
I don't care if the name "Paladin" is reserved for the LG version of this, but there really should be a version of this for every alignment, or a lore explanation as to why only the elemental forces of Law and Good, while working in tandem, can create a being like the Paladin.
Such explanation was given in Second Edition Paladin's Handbook.
Assassin is the Evil one. Or do you want Good Assassins?
Would be fair that every alignment gets their special class for sure. But one tailored to that alignment's quirks and philosophies.
I would be ok with this. Make you REALLY want to be a Paladin before taking it. Good place mechanically to tack on restrictions as well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My evidence for this is that people who want to make chaotic good paladins a thing often talk about it as though it were an act of inclusion, like there's some class of lawful good challenged people finally being allowed to indulge in one of the game's classes from which they had previously been unfairly excluded, like this were the equivalent of building a wheelchair ramp.I've played LG, I've played Paladins. It's fun in its own way, but CG is more my style. I don't see why I can't be a CG Holy Crusader of say Milani. Granted Warpriest fills that role, but how long did it take for us to get a class that does? Besides the Warpriest is basically a redesigned Paladin that doesn't have to be LG. So why not make Warpriest default and call the Paladin what it should be: a subclass of Warpriest.You should, but that class should be flavored around subterfuge, protection, and subversion of more powerful forces. The lawful good Paladin we have is flavored around supporting one's allies, taking blows for them, and healing.
The essence of chaotic good is just more like a rogue than a tank. A chaotic good Rogue/Paladin hybrid would be a wonderful thing that I would love to see in the game.
Why? Not all Chaotic forces in the world are infiltrators trying to bring down Lawful regimes from the inside.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No no on! They are wise mentors that learn magic to protect people only to heroically sacrifice themselves so the fighters and rogues can save the kingdom! lol
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If Paladin stays restricted to LG it probably shouldn't be in the CRB. Core classes should be broad ideas that can fit many character concepts, not really narrow ones that put lots of restrictions on you options, keep those classes for later supplements.
I really like that idea.
Anything in Core is fully playable for anyone who buys the core rule book. No alignment locks on core classes. [disclaimer: I'm all for a suggestion to the GM that Evil alignments not be allowed for PCs]
If you want a limited, specialized class, it's a something that comes later, after the basics are covered.
Such explanation was given in Second Edition Paladin's Handbook.
Assassin is the Evil one. Or do you want Good Assassins?
Would be fair that every alignment gets their special class for sure. But one tailored to that alignment's quirks and philosophies.
Fair enough. I GREATLY disagree with that mentality and I agree with Spoony when he says, "I want one anyway".
And yes, I DO want good assassins too. Ever played Assassin's Creed? Just because you are heavily trained in the art of killing people quickly and quietly, doesn't mean you are evil. I have a character that calls himself an assassin, but he is just looking for the guys who murdered his mentor. (He's also not an Assassin PrC, because Rogue is pretty much better in every way.)
As far as every alignment getting a special class with tailored features, that's just being stereotypical.
Some things OBVIOUSLY should be different for an Evil only class, but why not be a martially trained individual that can inflict diseases with a mere touch and cause pandemonium with his mere presence?
Isn’t ‘all holy warriors of different philosophies are structured exactly the same’ stereotypical?
And yes, I DO want good assassins too. Ever played Assassin's Creed? Just because you are heavily trained in the art of killing people quickly and quietly, doesn't mean you are evil. I have a character that calls himself an assassin, but he is just looking for the guys who murdered his mentor. (He's also not an Assassin PrC, because Rogue is pretty much better in every way.)
i had a Fey Assassin who was a neutral good unchained rogue. in fact, she was focused on more than just the killing people aspect. she did the rest of an assassin's job such as scouting, reconnaissance, stealing important mcguffins, collecting bounties and even making maps. the original assassin job description is very similar to that of a CIA or MI6 agent. she never used that death attack when simply injecting a hallucinogen called spider's kiss through a dagger wound allowed her to capture most foes alive. and she collected these bounties to feed and support her massive family back home because even fey need to eat. just because you can't stay dead doesn't mean you can't be incapacitated or inconveiencd by hunger or disease. being comatose from starvation is still an issue.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo gets to choose what their lore is.
If their lore changes to allow Goblins to be regular cast-members in an adventuring party.
Or Paladins can be any alignment, or remain Lawful Good, that's Paizo's prerogative.
And then the GM can do whatever the damn hell they want to the narrative after that. If the GM wants to say: I don't want goblins in this game, or Paladins have to be Chaotic Neutral because they worship Deadpool god of 4th wall breaking jokes. Then that's the narrative the narrative players play with. Because nobody is gonna break your kneecaps if you change anything in the official canon.
Of course then you have the universe brain option: Players and GM talk and converse about their narrative and mechanical expectations for the game before you begin, and then continue the discussion between sessions to make sure the game is still fulfilling the expectations of everyone at the table.
Now some people might say: "What about PFS?" and normally I'd say: "What about it?"
But in this case I might also say: "If you're playing in PFS then you are tacitly agreeing to the particular lore and mechanical assumptions of this particular organized play campaign."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just had an alternate thought more in-line with my way of thinking.
Mayhap I like player agency because it works to serve the narrative?
CLASSES are not special. PLAYER CHARACTERS are special.
They're the protagonists. The game happens to them. It doesn't matter if they're long lost ancient kings or pudgy gardeners.
I have slaughtered HUNDREDS of sacred cows in the name of fun and good story. If it can exist in the setting and the player can give me at least a marginally good reason for existing within the rules then it happens.
This is why I loathe Society. I could give a crap if the cavalier wants to ride his horse in the bar. IF he ignores the bartenders cursing and telling him off than the guards get called, they come in. S~&% happens. Sometimes good things happen, sometimes someone hurls an empty bag of cheetos at the player for getting them banned from their favorite tavern.
Suddenly the shadowy figure they were supposed to meet gets knifed in the alley out back when he tried to sneak out. More story happens.
You can cut out the excessive and the cringe worthy, but again only because it detracts from the fun. In a game where everyone is equally special you are not more equally special than others.
so.. lg paladins, so they get their powers from the heavens( the LG celestial plane) why would it bother you if a paladin got its powers from the plane of nirvana?( the NC celestial plane?)
for that matter, I kinda hope they either take it out comepletly or they alt the paladin so much that it no longer resembles the paladin of any edition and no longer has to be LG but any good....
Id go on, but I really really have to go do something else right now...
A holy warrior could get powers from nirvana. And it would be different powers and not a paladin, really.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A holy warrior could get powers from nirvana. And it would be different powers and not a paladin, really.so.. lg paladins, so they get their powers from the heavens( the LG celestial plane) why would it bother you if a paladin got its powers from the plane of nirvana?( the NC celestial plane?)
for that matter, I kinda hope they either take it out comepletly or they alt the paladin so much that it no longer resembles the paladin of any edition and no longer has to be LG but any good....
Id go on, but I really really have to go do something else right now...
I just re-read the Paladin Class.
What ability there doesn't fit for Nirvana (Neutral Good)?
Hell, [sic] those abilities fit Nirvana BETTER than Lawful Good
None. It's been long said that for a supposed exemplar of Lawful Good, a paladin sure has no bloody tools to deal with Chaos.
Considering the Law/Chaos Axis is as important as the Good/Evil one in the cosmology, this has always been rather dumb.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A holy warrior could get powers from nirvana. And it would be different powers and not a paladin, really.so.. lg paladins, so they get their powers from the heavens( the LG celestial plane) why would it bother you if a paladin got its powers from the plane of nirvana?( the NC celestial plane?)
for that matter, I kinda hope they either take it out comepletly or they alt the paladin so much that it no longer resembles the paladin of any edition and no longer has to be LG but any good....
Id go on, but I really really have to go do something else right now...
I just re-read the Paladin Class.
What ability there doesn't fit for Nirvana (Neutral Good)?
Hell, [sic] those abilities fit Nirvana BETTER than Lawful Good
None. It's been long said that for a supposed exemplar of Lawful Good, a paladin sure has no bloody tools to deal with Chaos.
Considering the Law/Chaos Axis is as important as the Good/Evil one in the cosmology, this has always been rather dumb.
I had always assumed that the "Oath" portion of the class was the lawful aspect. One of the tenants of Chaos is "freedom" and adopting a "religious devotion" (either literally or figuratively) to a cause sounds counter to that alignment.
That being said, I would still allow "chaotic paladins" to exist.
A reasonable enough argument on its face...yet startlingly inconsistent with the evidence. Chaotic Evil Antipaladin still have a code. Cavaliers have codes and no alignment restrictions whatsoever. Gorum may glory in battle for it's own sake, but he still expects his clerics to meet certain standards, like not cutting down invalids who can't fight back. Codes are not only for the Lawful.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There has been a lore reason behind it, for like, ever.
To repeat my exact words on another miserable Paladin thread back on March 12:
All right.
Why? Please articulate the whys of this apparently intractable gut-level feeling you're basing your entire stance on.
I wish to hear a coherent explanation as to why a divinely driven holy warrior- let's say a neutral good follower of Sarenrae, committed to making the world a better place for all of good heart- is unworthy of the title of "Paladin" (a word which has already migrated across the linguistic continuum to mean many things... have gun, will travel and all of that...).
Because alignment fixtures change.
Not all that long ago in the grand scheme of things, Rangers had to be Good-aligned (and in 3E, couldn't pick their own species as a Favored Enemy unless they were evil). Druids used to be True Neutral only. Bards had to be at least partially neutral (except for some weird Birthright edge cases where Rjurik bards had to be lawful). All of these classes survived having their alignment requirements either loosened or waived. Why is the Paladin (and its ludicrously-named Anti-Paladin subclass) so utterly married to all Lawful Good all of the time (which has already been eroded in PF1 anyway)?
I will add, since it's been a little under a month, that you need not say, "It's always been this way!" or "I like it like this!" 'cause let's face it man, those reasons aren't reasons. They're personal preferences that have utterly failed to convince anyone who didn't agree with them when you began.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In this episode of "Paladin Purists VS I-Want-A-Full-Bab-Warrior-For-My-Neutral-God" we figure out that putting People into two neat piles are not as a good idea as they thought it were.
Mechanically the problem is that the "Full BAB Warrior With 4th Level Divine casting" havent been a option for any other gods though that would make sense. You could argue the closest to this would be the ranger, but technically being nature based is a whole other concept entirely.
Personally i am pretty Heavy into both of these "camps" that were introduced in the first post, though that would be argued as "Average" i feel like i am both depending on the game in question.
For the narrative part i would like to have games based on the setting being a consistent world, in that being that if something happens there is most likely a reason to why and how it happens. In the event of "Good Goblins" being around i would like to hear why that came to be over "just cause i say so". Other settings have a way easier time, especially in their beginner phase as they establish this before its...well... a "Established world".
On the mechanical side of things i like to have options for concepts that allow me to play... well... "concepts" or themes for characters that could very well be a part of the world in question. The "Warrior of freedom" could easily be a Paladin, but because of the mechanical aspects of alignment there is a few steps you are not allowed to take despite how much of a fantatic this character in question is.
If anything the concept of "Paladin" in pathfinder feels more like a odd one out as they are strongly tied to a vague concept such as alignment, which at most times is merely a descriptor rather than mechanical thing. In the event of Evil humans its more of personality, while on demons is that they are literally made of the evil stuff.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That post is actually probably going to be deleted. Kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy really. You guys probably need to take a break and cool off.
Forced out of comfort zone no thats probably not right however choosing to play something out of ones comfort zone would probably be at least an educational experience. Broaden ones horizons instead of restrict and all that.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
That post is actually probably going to be deleted. Kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy really. You guys probably need to take a break and cool off.
Forced out of comfort zone no thats probably not right however choosing to play something out of ones comfort zone would probably be at least an educational experience. Broaden ones horizons instead of restrict and all that.
Yeah, it would really be great if those who argue LG paladin only would try to get out of their comfort zone and play a CG paladin.