|
Now that the AP has been out a while, is playing a paladin a good idea? From what I've gathered of the AP, it's intrigue-based, but paladins are still mentioned as a better option than some classes. I'm worried about having to do the "I'm not paying attention while you sneak around and break into someone's house!" kind of situation or having to lie to people to get things done.
I know that a gray paladin is an option, but I like regular paladins.
Honestly you should be fine the ap can easly be done morally
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
as would Shelyn but requiring the enemy strike first is a pain in most campaigns.That's an anthema from a PF2 playtest blog. It's not a thing in PF1.
Actually...
I am peaceful. I come first with a rose rather than a weapon, and act to prevent conflict before it blossoms. I never strike first, unless it is the only way to protect the innocent.
Still anathema to Shelyn's faith in the Golarion setting, PF Editions be damned; just not fundamentally tied into the core Paladin class (though I do think it's rather poor form to ignore your chosen deity's tenets.)
I don't think a paladin would be good choice for this AP. So much of this adventure involves deception, disguises, lying, manipulation, espionage, and surreptitiously dealing with threats, all of which are grey areas *at best*. Paladins are great for Princess Eutropia to put in the spotlight at her side and leading her military forces, but not for her off-the-books, underhanded, do-what-needs-to-be-done spies/enforcers.
If a paladin could get through this entire adventure without violating their oath I'd be surprised.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They definitely fill the role of "Upstanding Member of Eutropia's inner circle" to some degree, but within reason I could maybe seeing this work conceptually. If you feel like worshiping a slightly more off-the-beaten-track deity, there's a few Lawful and Good Gods that cover darkness and investigation...
• The as-yet-unfurnished Empyreal Lord Kelinahat [Archon Lord of Intelligence, Stealth and Spies] is my personal favourite here, and one my chief prospective character is at least marginally affiliated to. (My Kingdom for an Obedience, Paizo!)
• Zohls [Archon Sherlock Holmes Lord of Truth, Determination and Investigation] is also fairly apt.
• Tanagaar [Archon Lord of Night, Watchfulness, Hunting] if you originate from a more rural area of Taldor; Northern Tandak or the Verduran Forest for example.
• Alternatively, if you're a foreign ambassador of the distant lands of Tian Xia, or your character is otherwise somehow familiar with the Dragon Empire faiths, there's also Tsukiyo [LG Prince of The Moon, Lunacy, and Spirits]—the latter domain of which I understand may somehow end up relevant when a back-end WftC AP book has the word "Soul" in its title.
* Of course this is not an exhaustive list; there are lots of other reasonable faiths to choose from, and as a Paladin in a PF1 Home Game you need not worship a deity at all.
Dusk Knights exist, so there's a premise for some less-than-reputable methods of attacking at least. Even Ragathiel's faith employs the likes of Crimson Templars, who are in no uncertain terms described as "Heaven's Assassins" and are beholden to a code not unlike the Paladin Code of Conduct, though notably lack the "Cannot Lie" clause. On the whole, trying to avoid combat through diplomacy is something most Paladins would want to accomplish in regards to non-monstrous foes (and even some monstrous ones!)—which is fairly appropriate for at least some of what this AP is going for, or so I've been told.
Ultimately a very careful Paladin, who wholeheartedly believes in supporting Eutropia's cause for the greater good, could easily fit the same role as a Cavalier in this AP as "Noble Knight" or some such—but I'm not going to deny that, depending on your actions and what you choose to be aware of, there's a non-zero chance that your DM may judge an atonement or two to be in order. That, however, is absolutely a discussion between Player and DM that should take place well before the pencil hits the character sheet, much less dice hitting the table.
TL;DR - Yeah, sure, Paladins should work. Maybe not the traditional Iomedaean Paladin, but you could probably work it out with your Party/DM if everyone is on board.
I think it's viable, provided one of the three options:
1. The party is willing to play this AP from a Lawful angle, which is possible, just difficult.
2. The Paladin is flexible enough to bend the rules when appropriate. Such a thing is possible, given that you are effectively acting in the service of a rightful leader against less rightful ones.
3. The player is okay with their Paladin being in the dark about their companion's less scrupulous activities.
All of these are certainly doable. It's not like this AP is explicitly unlawful or immoral by nature. But it is a challenge, and it depends very heavily on how strict the group is about alignments and Paladin codes.
It can't really be that bad considering the Player's Guide recommend Paladins as a martial option, can it?
Might be one hell of an oversight, or that was in before much of the AP was done.
I think it's viable, provided one of the three options:
1. The party is willing to play this AP from a Lawful angle, which is possible, just difficult.
2. The Paladin is flexible enough to bend the rules when appropriate. Such a thing is possible, given that you are effectively acting in the service of a rightful leader against less rightful ones.
3. The player is okay with their Paladin being in the dark about their companion's less scrupulous activities.
4. All of these are certainly doable. It's not like this AP is explicitly unlawful or immoral by nature. But it is a challenge, and it depends very heavily on how strict the group is about alignments and Paladin codes.
1. without heavy rewrites, that would make the entire book 2 unplayable.
2. But need to be acting against rightful ones at times.
3. that one is a given.
4. while not explicitly, it is quite unlawful.
|
|
1. without heavy rewrites, that would make the entire book 2 unplayable.
I've actually got a paladin in my group, and he's operating on the assertion that Eutropia is effectively the legal ruler of Taldor. Eutropia has asked for the Stavian estate to be returned to her, and the Lotheeds have refused this request, making them in the wrong. By this logic, the paladin's actions in undermining the Lotheeds and improving life for locals fit well into the parameters of Lawful and Good.
1. without heavy rewrites, that would make the entire book 2 unplayable.I've actually got a paladin in my group, and he's operating on the assertion that Eutropia is effectively the legal ruler of Taldor. Eutropia has asked for the Stavian estate to be returned to her, and the Lotheeds have refused this request, making them in the wrong. By this logic, the paladin's actions in undermining the Lotheeds and improving life for locals fit well into the parameters of Lawful and Good.
Wasn't the point there...
1. The party is willing to play this AP from a Lawful angle, which is possible, just difficult.
Trying that wouldn't work without heavy rewrites.
They would still be going against a lawful autority, and will break rules from time to time... and the Pali doesn't get to smite the Evil guys asap.
It can't really be that bad considering the Player's Guide recommend Paladins as a martial option, can it?Might be one hell of an oversight, or that was in before much of the AP was done.
{. . .}
I don't think it was in before the AP was done, since the Player's Guide was WAY late . . . hey wait, maybe that's one of the reasons WHY it was so late . . . .
|
|
1. without heavy rewrites, that would make the entire book 2 unplayable.I've actually got a paladin in my group, and he's operating on the assertion that Eutropia is effectively the legal ruler of Taldor. Eutropia has asked for the Stavian estate to be returned to her, and the Lotheeds have refused this request, making them in the wrong. By this logic, the paladin's actions in undermining the Lotheeds and improving life for locals fit well into the parameters of Lawful and Good.Wasn't the point there...
1. The party is willing to play this AP from a Lawful angle, which is possible, just difficult.Trying that wouldn't work without heavy rewrites.
They would still be going against a lawful autority, and will break rules from time to time... and the Pali doesn't get to smite the Evil guys asap.
Again, the point is that by refusing to give up the Stavian Estate, the Lotheeds are not a legal authority, but rather one who is abusing their power. And not smiting the Evil folk immediately is a Good thing, since the concern is that that would lead to the civil war that Eutropia is desperately trying to avoid.
Hell's Rebels has a similar take where a group of paladins are opposing the Lawful Authority because that authority is Evil, but they're required to do it in a way that requires some degree of stealth and guile. Book 2 of WftC follows a similar vein.
1. without heavy rewrites, that would make the entire book 2 unplayable.I've actually got a paladin in my group, and he's operating on the assertion that Eutropia is effectively the legal ruler of Taldor. Eutropia has asked for the Stavian estate to be returned to her, and the Lotheeds have refused this request, making them in the wrong. By this logic, the paladin's actions in undermining the Lotheeds and improving life for locals fit well into the parameters of Lawful and Good.Wasn't the point there...
1. The party is willing to play this AP from a Lawful angle, which is possible, just difficult.Trying that wouldn't work without heavy rewrites.
They would still be going against a lawful autority, and will break rules from time to time... and the Pali doesn't get to smite the Evil guys asap.
Again, the point is that by refusing to give up the Stavian Estate, the Lotheeds are not a legal authority, but rather one who is abusing their power. And not smiting the Evil folk immediately is a Good thing, since the concern is that that would lead to the civil war that Eutropia is desperately trying to avoid.
Hell's Rebels has a similar take where a group of paladins are opposing the Lawful Authority because that authority is Evil, but they're required to do it in a way that requires some degree of stealth and guile. Book 2 of WftC follows a similar vein.
They are in a similar "grey area" there, hence why brute strength isn't an option (well, a good option anyway).
Cracked open book 2 for the first time, and oh boy. Our paladin of Abadar might be in trouble. We are playing PF2 so the rules are pretty black and white.