| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Smite Evil remaining powerful and an actual reason for Evil creatures to be afraid when a Paladin is around. If you're just hard to kill but not a notable threat then... who cares. You'll survive while they kill everyone else. Good job.
Energy sword is fun, and I'd greatly enjoy it combined with PF1 Smite so I can pretend I got the Light Hawk Wings and I'm about to wreck Kagato's face. But I'd prefer that as a generic feat, because Ryosko ain't no Paladin. But a decent 'Soulknife' option would be great, energy swords are cool, everyone should have one. Metal swords are for peasants.
Someone in the other thread brought up wanting Paladin archetypes to not focus too much on doing what the Paladin does already, but slightly different. They wanted Archer Paladin archetype, Gunslinger Paladin archetype, Light Armor Skirmisher Paladin archetype, so on and so forth. I agree with that sentiment.
I'd like to see Paladins have abilities themed around Light in general more often I guess. Create swords from it, shields from it, do some Green Lantern nonsense I guess. Big AoE explosions of it. My Paladins invariably align with Sarenrae, and I want to burn like the Sun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, you're not going to get an alignment-free thread. For the people who want more paladin concepts, this thread is effectively a wishlist for cool abilities that will be locked behind a single alignment.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something truly tanky - Like a bodyguard effect or maybe a 'shield other' aura that affects all allies or easily switches between allies.
The ability to 'mark' a foe so they take a penalty if they don't attack the paladin.
Something like a souped up diehard so you just keep on fighting when you really shouldn't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Smite Chaos. If Paladins are tied to the forces of Law and Good, I'd like feats to support enforcing both sides. Not just smite evil rotated 90degrees either, but a power which does less raw damage but greatly hampers mobility and shapeshifting powers associated with chaos.
Cavalier challenge. Give options for fighting neutral opponents who are no less threatening to innocents than evil.
Smite Evil: this should be more damaging than either of the above, but limited to evil targets only.
Some ability to sacrifice their legendary armor proficiency for legendary proficiency in their deity's favored weapon.
An emergency force sphere type effect that they can include friends in centered on their shield.
Divine grace only 1/round, but at no reaction cost. Still have casters be a threat to Palsdins, but don't make passions too short on reactions.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I'd prefer it if all of these were feat locked, except maybe the proficiency thing.
I want divine grace back like it was in pf1, but cap it at +4 and no higher, so that items t hat increase cha will only be useful to a point
If they go that route, I'd rather it be like Tortured Crusader where they just get a +4, no charisma strings attatched.
|
willuwontu, Paladins will offer heretics the chance to surrender to them before they fight them. After they start a fight with a paladin the paladin will fight the herritic until he can no longer fight either beng unconscious or dead then take him prisoner (or otherwise too wounded to fight ) If a higher level paladin wants to take a prisoner he might use hold person on him. If you attack a paladin he feels that you are attacking his god and will show you almost no mercy.
A paladin feat that lets them attack an enemy using manacles or rope to bind them up and take them prisoner.
A feat to let their smite attacks deal (small) damage in an area, around the smited foe they attack.
Those both sound cool beans.
Oaths that add tenets to the code and unlock class feats based on oath, so Paladins can be more of less restrictive based on player desire/investment.
Example:
Oath of Mercy which requires a paladin to never use lethal damage against intelligent or natural creatures, but gave access to a feat which meant nonlethal damage the paladin did would knock out an enemy as long as it was dropped to 0 within a round of being damaged. So, the Mercy Paladin could strike a foe, who is dropped by his fighter friend's sword, and still not worry about them bleeding out and needing the killing blow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Add an "Oathbreaker" mechanic where, if the GM and player believe the Paladin has acted against their oaths, their abilities change to something different.
A previous example in another thread, the paladin's Smite gets weaker but their healing abilities improve until they have atoned for whatever they did wrong.
Another option, their save bonuses vanish, but they gain DR and the ability to block damage for their allies until the player and GM agree that they've learned their lesson about protecting those weaker than themselves.
The Oathbreaker modifications can be based on deity; a healing deity might lock off Smite for healing; a god of avenging may focus more on damaging foes than protection.
Simply punishing players for roleplaying their characters is not good. Make it a willing tradeoff; a state that you can go into for a minimum of a week or so, so you can't switch back and forth during a single adventure session, but the choice to go into "Oathbreaker" mode is a big deal moment, as is to go into "Redeemed/Normal" mode in a later adventure.
I am against alignment affecting mechanics in general, but I'm even more against arbitrary GM decisions preventing a player from using their abilities. If a PC gets bonuses in excess of what other PCs get for what amounts to roleplaying their characters properly, then all classes should get the opportunity for the same.
On the other hand, if Paizo wants to introduce "failure states" to classes, based on player choice and practicalities, that offer different (but no less powerful) bonuses, then I would not be opposed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If paladins are going to hold a special place in the game world as recognizable champions of righteousness, the paladin class needs to be narrowly defined. Adding non-traditional class features to the paladin chassis cheapens the value of that chassis by making it unrecognizable as a paladin. Non-traditional features should be reserved for archetypes or for other, more-generic classes.
A paladin is and always has been a knight in shining armor. Unless we abandon that theme, the abilities of the paladin class need to reflect it. Like the worthiest Arthurian knights, paladins tend the wounds of the righteous and smite the wicked in hand-to-hand combat. They ride noble steeds and wield magic swords. They say prayers, uphold ideals, and go on quests to retrieve holy relics.
No part of the Arthurian ideal involves, for example, sprouting angel wings or shooting beams of light at enemies. Magic of that sort has nothing to do with the source material of the paladin class, and completely redefines the role of paladins in the world. If someone wants to play an angel-winged warrior that fires beams of light, they should be able to do so with some other class that better accommodates that role.
Unless and until the traditional concept of the paladin is completely abandoned, the paladin class should include only abilities that are appropriate for idealized Arthurian knights in shining armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If paladins are going to hold a special place in the game world as recognizable champions of righteousness, the paladin class needs to be narrowly defined.
I generally agree with this, but I disagree about ruling out things that thematically fit very closely to the knight motif, which would include light blades and angel wings.
I am far more hesitant about archer, gunslinger, other variant archetypes built upon a Paladin chassis, because I don't understand the game design of having one incredibly specialized character class, and the rest far more generic, and modifiable by archetype. Many of the Paladin Archetypes that walk away from "armored champion of a narrow set of deserving gods," should probably be built off of a different class, or just be a different class.
I can already see some people arguing that a champion of Erastil should be feasible as an archer, but a Paladin of Erastil has to be something different that a champion of Erastil because Every god can and should have access to champions, and the paladin, if it exists as a class, should focus on virtues beyond generally championing the will of the deity. In that regard, I would rather favored weapons be a thing for clerics, warpriests or religiously motivated fighters (i.e. the weapons masters) and paladins really focus in on knightly weapons and being heavily armored.
Hoping Divine Grace returns to how it was. (as a resistance bonus would be nice, except normal magic armour now covers that).
Also something I noticed was that Aura of Courage no longer grant immunity to fear. I am a little sad to see that go. As a paladin, being immune to fear is sort of part of the class for me.
I love smite evil, but found detect evil a bit clunky. I myself have tried smiting a flesh golem, just to learn that it was not an evil creature, just because it was made of dead humanoid parts...
I havent played many paladins sadly. Would love to keep liking the class.
I also like how paladins get the best armour prof
I'd like to see the new core Paladin 2.0 be viable with Irori. The enlightened paladin does the job nicely in 1.0 but I'd appreciate not having to wait for later player options to make it a reality.
So, although paladin 2.0's strongest progression is supposed to be armor - I hope that the new core paladin has a viable non-armor path out-of-the-box.
I'd like to see the new core Paladin 2.0 be viable with Irori. The enlightened paladin does the job nicely in 1.0 but I'd appreciate not having to wait for later player options to make it a reality.
So, an honest and curious question: Why would a champion of Irori, that is essentially a monk, need to be a paladin? If the point is to be a monk, but have some special features for fighting evil, doesn't that sound more like an archetype or feat options for a monk than an unarmored, unarmed paladin?
I am honestly a little confused about class design in PF2 because I feel like one of the problems that PF1 encountered was having too many ways to do almost the same thing, but one of those options turning out to be the clearly mechanically best way of doing something.
I want divine grace back like it was in pf1, but cap it at +4 and no higher, so that items t hat increase cha will only be useful to a point
I would cap it at Paladin class level.
Achievement unlocked if you manage to get Cha 50+ at L20...I want divine grace back like it was in pf1, but cap it at +4 and no higher, so that items t hat increase cha will only be useful to a pointI would cap it at Paladin class level.
Few, if any players would actually manage to stay at the cap all the time, but it would certainly cut down on Paladin dips.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hoping Divine Grace returns to how it was. (as a resistance bonus would be nice, except normal magic armour now covers that).
Also something I noticed was that Aura of Courage no longer grant immunity to fear. I am a little sad to see that go. As a paladin, being immune to fear is sort of part of the class for me.
I love smite evil, but found detect evil a bit clunky. I myself have tried smiting a flesh golem, just to learn that it was not an evil creature, just because it was made of dead humanoid parts...
I havent played many paladins sadly. Would love to keep liking the class.
I also like how paladins get the best armour prof
I'm quite sad about the Divine Grace and immunities nerf, but in the end I trust Paizo and how we Paladins may need the nerf for the betterment of the game as a whole. But again we don't have all the info on the classes. For all we know we may get those immunities at later levels...
Actually detect evil got buffed. It's now a intuitive ability, kinda like a Spidey-Sense... So cool. I got that info from the Paizo Twitch interview Mark.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/260331209
I'd like to see Paladin's of Erastil focus on being mounted and having a closer relationship with animals rather than focus on being good with a bow.
That's not a buff. That's how they worked in 2nd edition.Hoping Divine Grace returns to how it was. (as a resistance bonus would be nice, except normal magic armour now covers that).
Also something I noticed was that Aura of Courage no longer grant immunity to fear. I am a little sad to see that go. As a paladin, being immune to fear is sort of part of the class for me.
I love smite evil, but found detect evil a bit clunky. I myself have tried smiting a flesh golem, just to learn that it was not an evil creature, just because it was made of dead humanoid parts...
I havent played many paladins sadly. Would love to keep liking the class.
I also like how paladins get the best armour prof
I'm quite sad about the Divine Grace and immunities nerf, but in the end I trust Paizo and how we Paladins may need the nerf for the betterment of the game as a whole. But again we don't have all the info on the classes. For all we know we may get those immunities at later levels...
Actually detect evil got buffed. It's now a intuitive ability, kinda like a Spidey-Sense... So cool. I got that info from the Paizo Twitch interview Mark.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/260331209
Ok, cool. I've only played Pathfinder so I don't know about that. But it still way better than 1e...
Ok, cool. I've only played Pathfinder so I don't know about that. But it still way better than 1e...That's not a buff. That's how they worked in 2nd edition.Hoping Divine Grace returns to how it was. (as a resistance bonus would be nice, except normal magic armour now covers that).
Also something I noticed was that Aura of Courage no longer grant immunity to fear. I am a little sad to see that go. As a paladin, being immune to fear is sort of part of the class for me.
I love smite evil, but found detect evil a bit clunky. I myself have tried smiting a flesh golem, just to learn that it was not an evil creature, just because it was made of dead humanoid parts...
I havent played many paladins sadly. Would love to keep liking the class.
I also like how paladins get the best armour prof
I'm quite sad about the Divine Grace and immunities nerf, but in the end I trust Paizo and how we Paladins may need the nerf for the betterment of the game as a whole. But again we don't have all the info on the classes. For all we know we may get those immunities at later levels...
Actually detect evil got buffed. It's now a intuitive ability, kinda like a Spidey-Sense... So cool. I got that info from the Paizo Twitch interview Mark.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/260331209
Sounds cool if it works like a spidey sense. I had very little exposure to 2nd edition. Unfortunately if I follow that link I get:
"Sorry. Unless you’ve got a time machine, that content is unavailable.
In the meantime, take a look at these other videos instead."
But I will go look up how it worked in 2nd E. :)
Can some
classes.
A paladin is and always has been a knight in shining armor. Unless we abandon that theme, the abilities of the paladin class need to reflect it. Like the worthiest Arthurian knights, paladins tend the wounds of the righteous and smite the wicked in hand-to-hand combat. They ride noble steeds and wield magic swords. They say prayers, uphold ideals, and go on quests to retrieve holy relics.
This basically restricts paladins to (European) humans, or to non (European) humans behaving like a (European) human but with pointy ears.
A gnome paladin do not fit in this Charlemagne/King Arthur /Hospitaler knight theme, for example. Neither does a dwarf paladin, or a wood elf one, for that matter. Neither does a stryx paladin, or kitsune, or sylph genasi. Or a human paladin from the jungles of Garund, or a paladin from Vudra.
Quote from 2e Player's Handbook:
A paladin can detect the presence of evil intent up to 60 feet away by concentrating on locating evil in a particular direction. He can do this as often as desired, but each attempt takes one round. This ability detects evil monsters and characters.
I'd like to see the new core Paladin 2.0 be viable with Irori. The enlightened paladin does the job nicely in 1.0 but I'd appreciate not having to wait for later player options to make it a reality.
So, an honest and curious question: Why would a champion of Irori, that is essentially a monk, need to be a paladin? If the point is to be a monk, but have some special features for fighting evil, doesn't that sound more like an archetype or feat options for a monk than an unarmored, unarmed paladin?
I am honestly a little confused about class design in PF2 because I feel like one of the problems that PF1 encountered was having too many ways to do almost the same thing, but one of those options turning out to be the clearly mechanically best way of doing something.
We probably disagree on a fundamental level then: to me it is not a problem, but a desirable feature that Pathfinder is a complex game where the same/similar results can be achieved from vastly different starting points.
This is actually more interesting in PF2, because we now will have (much more) class specific feats.
We probably disagree on a fundamental level then: to me it is not a problem, but a desirable feature that Pathfinder is a complex game where the same/similar results can be achieved from vastly different starting points.
I actually really like complexity and meaningful difference too. I just don't see what the difference is between this version of a monk champion of Irori and this version of a paladin champion of Irori would be.
I actually really like complexity and meaningful difference too. I just don't see what the difference is between this version of a monk champion of Irori and this version of a paladin champion of Irori would be.We probably disagree on a fundamental level then: to me it is not a problem, but a desirable feature that Pathfinder is a complex game where the same/similar results can be achieved from vastly different starting points.
We'll probably have to see the actual implementation of both monk and paladin to see where the distinction comes in. From what I gather, there is a different emphasis in the class choice:
A paladin champion of Irori is more focused on defenses, especially defending allies. Healing, sustaining. Possibly distinction between smiting evil-vs-chaos.
In contrast a monk champion of Irori is more focused on self-perfection. Independence, mobility, control. More general-focused as opposed to the paladin who emphasizes anti-evil/chaos.
We'll probably have to see the actual implementation of both monk and paladin to see where the distinction comes in.
I agree that we will need to see the implementation to know for sure.
The Enlightened Paladin archetype though gets rid of smite evil and detect evil to focus on self-perfection and personal protection and seeking out that excellence in others. For me, that doesn't really make sense as a type of Paladin. I am not saying that such a character wouldn't be fun or shouldn't exist, but it is so removed from what a paladin is, it weakens the argument for the paladin as a unique class.
The enlightened paladin even gets to forsake a general code for one she personally writes.
I am very curious to see what Archetypes are like and how they overlay classes, and how much they can change the narrative design of the classes built and balanced around narrative mechanics.