Reject My Paladin Compromise, and Then Talk About What Martial Characters Should Be Capable of Please


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The other thread up about what it would be cool for Paladins to have had some very cool ideas that would both be envied by people who really don't want to be stuck with a single alignment class and some of which seem like a nice step forward for more 'Mundane' characters to have.

So first, I want to suggest a compromise for the Paladin alignment and have it rejected. Everyone else got theirs rejected, I want to have a turn:

Paladins in the Core book are either listed as Lawful Good and have a sidebar that says many DMs and certain settings open that to other alignments (Maybe just usggest Any Good, or only Chaotic Good, or only Neutral Good and Lawful Neutral, I dunno) and its suggested that if a player request that, the DM discuss it with them to reach an agreement.

Or

Paladins are listed as "Any Good" and have a sidebar or flavor text noting that in Golarion and many other settings, Paladins are only Lawful Good with very few exceptions, and it will be a common house rule for DMs to not allow Neutral or Chaotic Paladins.

Either way, in PFS, since its Golarion based, they're limited to Lawful Good, but you can get a special exception (Boons? I don't know, I don't play PFS, someone help me.) to play a different alignment. So that Lawful Good players aren't bother with constant Chaotic Paladins, but players that are really into it have a shot.

If anyone can explain in detail why I is dum and they reject that idea, I'd appreciate it.

--- --- ---

That aside, the other thread has some cool ideas. Sword beams, creating weapons from light, whatever amazing idea I had. All of them great. But aside the obvious issue that people who don't play Paladins wouldn't get to use the really cool stuff, it struck me to wondering what kind of cool abilities martial characters without magic should get.

Caster/Martial Disparity is fun, I look forward to arguing about it endlessly once a real spark lights that fire. But for now just wondered what kind of abilities people want to see for classes that lack magic.

Like, the "Cut the air and still hit someone" theme of a Paladin Sword Beam is something I'd love Fighters to have. If not a 'Beam', then at least slicing the air and cutting something 30ft away in half. And in the Paladin blog thread there was a note made of angel wings for the Paladin. That's not something I'd say should be shared, but it is super ridiculously cool. I want non-magical classes to have the super ridiculously cool abilities.

So ideas about what super ridiculously cool abilities for Fighters and Rogues and Barbarians would be great. Even if you want to keep a lid on mundane characters, just what you think they could do at high levels that cool would be interesting to read about.

To start, I want Fighters to be able to cut things 30ft away, I want Barbarians to throw massive objects as their ranged attack, and I want Monks that throw hadokens at level 1 and move on to Kamehameha Waves by level 10. Really hope those Monks will have sword options too...


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Abilities to fatigue enemies that hit you with a reaction, possibly added to a shield bash, because you are so well-defended with armor and shield that even the rare attack that finds its way through is costly to the attacker.

Ability to use your shield for someone else instead of yourself, possibly at an AC penalty to you, as a way of baiting foes into striking you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paradozen wrote:
Abilities to fatigue enemies that hit you with a reaction, possibly added to a shield bash, because you are so well-defended with armor and shield that even the rare attack that finds its way through is costly to the attacker.

THat'd be interesting. I do like the notion of a tough, gruff warrior that fights conservatively to wear over-eager fighters out before stepping on the gas.

Paradozen wrote:
Ability to use your shield for someone else instead of yourself, possibly at an AC penalty to you, as a way of baiting foes into striking you.

Multiple varieties of tanking would be great to have. Even though I personally hope for some more grand scale feats, I really like the notion of actually using that shield for others.

I want to be able to throw a shield to smack an attack away from an ally, and have the shield bounce back into my hand to defend against the next hit against me. Fights that look like they had good choreographers, that's what I'm hoping for. Within the first 10 levels or so at least.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

How is that idea a compromise to the group that wants LG only Paladins?

I don't think you should suggest that the gm compromise either, or work with the player to create a non-LG Paladin. The implies that the player has some kind of right to a non-LG Paladin and they don't.

Instead I'd use language that is much more neutral:

"If A player requests to play a non-Lawful Good Paladin, the GM should consider the request before deciding if they feel such would benefit their campaign."

As for booms for it in PFS? No.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to see out of combat utility for all martials - information gathering for the rogue that approaches divination, a network of contacts that can arrange transport on short order to nearly anywhere, that kind of thing


3 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

How is that idea a compromise to the group that wants LG only Paladins?

I don't think you should suggest that the gm compromise either, or work with the player to create a non-LG Paladin. The implies that the player has some kind of right to a non-LG Paladin and they don't.

Instead I'd use language that is much more neutral:

"If A player requests to play a non-Lawful Good Paladin, the GM should consider the request before deciding if they feel such would benefit their campaign."

As for booms for it in PFS? No.

I knew I could count on you for the first part of the thread Walsh! Thanks for your support!

Its a compromise for the group that wants only LG Paladins because it explicitly says Golarion or other settings essentially only have LG Paladins. It establishes that standard, takes the weight off the DM's shoulders to ban it. Says right in the book "Dude, Golarion has LG Paladins, other Paladins are on DM permission basis brah."

And I didn't say compromise, I said agreement. The notion is presented as something common, and it is, and the book encourages a player that's interested to talk to their DM. Doesn't say DM has to allow it, just that they should talk. A player in your group would have no hope, need to be let down early. A player in a different group? Maybe they can work something out.

Still, I gotta say, you came strong right out the gate for the first topic of this thread. You're an All-Star Walsh, go get your game on.

dragonhunterq wrote:
I'd like to see out of combat utility for all martials - information gathering for the rogue that approaches divination, a network of contacts that can arrange transport on short order to nearly anywhere, that kind of thing

I'd love for 'mundane' characters to at least get more 'mundane' resources. If you don't mind me questioning, how would you envision that information gathering working? Does the Rogue automatically get a spy network, does she just always somehow seem to figure out the secrets people don't want her to know? Do you see a different way?

If it were an automatic spy network, then I could see some push back against DMs having to adjust their setting to fit that. If its just "Always seems to know secrets..." then demands to explain how it works.

I personally like the idea of a Rogue effectively having a "Spider Sense" that just slips little secrets into their mind. Explained by them just learning to read the clues no one else notices, or just shadows themselves whispering secrets to them. I think it'd be super cool. A spy network is great if your DM lets you, but then I do start to wonder if you can do other stuff with your network of minions.

Oh! Series of feats for Rogues to build their own criminal underworld they're in charge of. That could be fun.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

How is that idea a compromise to the group that wants LG only Paladins?

I don't think you should suggest that the gm compromise either, or work with the player to create a non-LG Paladin. The implies that the player has some kind of right to a non-LG Paladin and they don't.

Instead I'd use language that is much more neutral:

"If A player requests to play a non-Lawful Good Paladin, the GM should consider the request before deciding if they feel such would benefit their campaign."

As for booms for it in PFS? No.

How ironic that you yourself would never qualify to be a paladin :3


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
HWalsh wrote:

How is that idea a compromise to the group that wants LG only Paladins?

I don't think you should suggest that the gm compromise either, or work with the player to create a non-LG Paladin. The implies that the player has some kind of right to a non-LG Paladin and they don't.

Instead I'd use language that is much more neutral:

"If A player requests to play a non-Lawful Good Paladin, the GM should consider the request before deciding if they feel such would benefit their campaign."

As for booms for it in PFS? No.

How ironic that you yourself would never qualify to be a paladin :3

To the contrary...

Being respectful and adherent to tradition is quite lawful. As I have a history of working on charity projects with no compensation, helping underprivelaged kids, and helping people when I can despite not getting the same in kind and often at personal expense, I think I'm pretty good.

Am I perfect in real life? No. I doubt I'd not fall from a minor infraction eventually.

I'm pretty sure I fall under lawful good though as my alignment.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

come on, dont egg him on.

we all know where he stands o the hill.

so I purpose

we open it to any good.

and have a set of class features and regular feats, and arch types if there are going to be any, that grant apower bonus to LG paladins, and have hwalsh make the layout for it


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steelfiredragon wrote:

come on, dont egg him on.

we all know where he stands o the hill.

so I purpose

we open it to any good.

and have a set of class features and regular feats, and arch types if there are going to be any, that grant apower bonus to LG paladins, and have hwalsh make the layout for it

Want to be clear that I was serious, and was perfectly happy that Walsh did what I asked in the thread. I'm aware Walsh can't compromise on the Paladin, but I wanted the holes shot into it regardless, why not? Walsh shot my compromise down, exactly like I asked, and I wanted to have a sense of humor about it instead of getting angry or sad.

The compromise wasn't really going to go anywhere, but there's still some value to get out of criticisms. We don't necessarily need the most extreme sides of the debate satisfied. If something can be cooked up that satisfies the majority of the "Lawful Good only in my preference, but I guess I can deal if they aren't." players, by establishing that their variety takes precedence in the setting/other variety needs permission, then there may eventually be a point of happiness for most players. Not all, but maybe most. Better than half is the current mark for me.

As for yours, giving the Lawful Paladin some kind of advantage over the others (Maybe just the social thing occasionally brought up?) might make Lawful Paladin players happier about a middle-ground.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

PF2 is trending towards Golarion, so I dont think the CRB need worry about mentioning homebrewing pallys.

I hope I can get a good 8-10 levels before the game goes supers gonzo. If I can have that, I dont care what the second half looks like.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Xerres wrote:


As for yours, giving the Lawful Paladin some kind of advantage over the others (Maybe just the social thing occasionally brought up?) might make Lawful Paladin players happier about a middle-ground.

Sadly I can't get behind the idea of giving one player a mechanical advantage for taking on a RP restriction that they wanted to take on in the first place. That just reeks of the exclusionary idea that their choice MUST be provably the best choice.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

More on topic.

I had this idea in the horribly derailed mandatory magic items thread.

What all characters could invest Resonance into held items to treat them as if they had a potency rune on them equal to their proficiency. Thus disarming a fighter is a good idea, but they can pick up that bar stool, imbue it with part of the personal martial awesomeness and treat it as a +1/2/3/4/5 bar stool.


Planpanther wrote:

PF2 is trending towards Golarion, so I dont think the CRB need worry about mentioning homebrewing pallys.

I hope I can get a good 8-10 levels before the game goes supers gonzo. If I can have that, I dont care what the second half looks like.

Depending on how much Golarion is infused to the Core I guess. Just seemed like the Paladin being 'Special' is a common sticking point, so saying that Lawful Paladins are the default seemed like it might draw in more agreement to allow other alignments.

What do you consider supers gonzo, is there a line that would get crossed where there's no way you're continuing with it?

Malk_Content wrote:
Xerres wrote:


As for yours, giving the Lawful Paladin some kind of advantage over the others (Maybe just the social thing occasionally brought up?) might make Lawful Paladin players happier about a middle-ground.
Sadly I can't get behind the idea of giving one player a mechanical advantage for taking on a RP restriction that they wanted to take on in the first place. That just reeks of the exclusionary idea that their choice MUST be provably the best choice.

I understand that. My preferred alignment is Lawful Good, and I really don't want rewards for it either. But I think there's a larger number of players that are willing to accept non-Lawful Paladins than there are those not willing at all. Making a compromise more acceptable to that group may be the key to an overall happier resolution. Its hard to say, that eventual poll will hopefully be enlightening.

But if the Lawful Paladin being either the 'Default' or the somehow superior concept helps to grease that along, I"d probably accept it and just not use it later.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

As for just general martial powers...

I don't want to go into magic territory, that's fine for Paladins as they have magic, I'm thinking more mythical or improbable powers.

Things like deflecting an arrow, bullet, or ray attack with a melee weapon or an open hand if possessing improved unarmed strike as a reaction.

Being able to shoot an arrow out of the air with one's own arrow.

Disarming a foe as a reaction to an incoming melee attack. Like a parry/disarm.

Leaping attack. A charge that ignores difficult terrain.

The ability to use a whip, chain, or grapple to yank a flying opponent from the air and smash them into the ground.

Being able to grab an enemy and throw them into/at another enemy.

Operation human shield. Being able to grab a foe and use him as a shield.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
HWalsh wrote:


I don't want to go into magic territory, that's fine for Paladins as they have magic

Sorry, this is going to veer into Paladin thread again. But I just can't let this attitude slide.

Not only do you want Paladins to be exclusively how you want them, now that you've effectively got that you also want to advocate for nobody else getting magic toys.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:

More on topic.

I had this idea in the horribly derailed mandatory magic items thread.

What all characters could invest Resonance into held items to treat them as if they had a potency rune on them equal to their proficiency. Thus disarming a fighter is a good idea, but they can pick up that bar stool, imbue it with part of the personal martial awesomeness and treat it as a +1/2/3/4/5 bar stool.

That would be a great feat, being able to treat improvised weapons (or any random weapon you pick up in the gutter or off the battlefield) as basic magic weapons based on some fraction of your level :)


Malk_Content wrote:

More on topic.

I had this idea in the horribly derailed mandatory magic items thread.

What all characters could invest Resonance into held items to treat them as if they had a potency rune on them equal to their proficiency. Thus disarming a fighter is a good idea, but they can pick up that bar stool, imbue it with part of the personal martial awesomeness and treat it as a +1/2/3/4/5 bar stool.

So they'd make the barstool a magical weapon by channeling their ambient magical energy into it? Or they'd just focus their chi/concentration/I dunno to become really dangerous with it?

I do like the notion that if everyone has resonance, then everyone can use it. I could get behind that.

HWalsh wrote:

As for just general martial powers...

I don't want to go into magic territory, that's fine for Paladins as they have magic, I'm thinking more mythical or improbable powers.

Things like deflecting an arrow, bullet, or ray attack with a melee weapon or an open hand if possessing improved unarmed strike as a reaction.

Being able to shoot an arrow out of the air with one's own arrow.

Disarming a foe as a reaction to an incoming melee attack. Like a parry/disarm.

Leaping attack. A charge that ignores difficult terrain.

The ability to use a whip, chain, or grapple to yank a flying opponent from the air and smash them into the ground.

Being able to grab an enemy and throw them into/at another enemy.

Operation human shield. Being able to grab a foe and use him as a shield.

The chain grab is a cool visual. I may actually try to do that in a different game.

But I'd ask you and maybe PlanPanther if the plotting cat is with you on the 'Not something I think should be magic' angle, do you extend that logic to Monks? Barbarians? Is it fine for Ki or Rage... Spirit... Power... to do the "You need Magic!" stuff?

Because I desperately want hadokens and kamehameha waves. I have that in PF1 through Path of War. But I know it bothers other people to have that in their game. But the modular nature of PF2 makes me think that Fighters could have feats/archetypes that access that stuff, by explicitly using Ki stuff like a Monk. Or whatever it is that lets Barbarians do their stuff. Then the Fighter, as a base, would remain 'Mundane, likely improbablye, low level humanly impossible.' with stuff like you suggest. If someone wants to go Wuxia/Anime they play Monk or use archetype/feat to have their Fighter use Ki. And for 'Old myths and legends' type stuff use Barbarian.

Maybe Paizo intends that already. Would make me happy. And at least explaining it through "Mystical Ki Powers!" would answer the "How without Magic?" question.


The "You can do the Wuxia/Legendary stuff without magic by using Ki/Rage power source feats/archetypes." notion would be a question I'd ask you all in general. It might be annoying to people that prefer to explain it as "I'm just that awesome." Which is a fine explanation to me, but I dunno, compromise and such.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want to see martials debuff the crap out of things they fight. I want effective bleed abilites, penalties to hit and damage and movement restrictions.

I honestly think that in PF1, the unchained rogue, the dirty trick combat maneuver and ablities like bleeding/impaling critical are the coolest aspects of martial characters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want a fighter with legendary sword prof. to be able to wave their sword and teleport attack an enemy a la dimensional assault.


Barbarians that channel rage powers should be able to do supernatural things if they're supernatural.

Like if you have an Eagle Totem I could see popping wings while raging or a fire totem sheathing you in flames, but those are less martial powers and more totem powers. So not something I think a fighter should be able to do.

The same with ki. Like I see a monk using ki to punch the ground and unleash a shockwave, or even be able to fire a ki blast. Though I was referring to martial powers as suggestions.


Malk_Content wrote:
HWalsh wrote:


I don't want to go into magic territory, that's fine for Paladins as they have magic

Sorry, this is going to veer into Paladin thread again. But I just can't let this attitude slide.

Not only do you want Paladins to be exclusively how you want them, now that you've effectively got that you also want to advocate for nobody else getting magic toys.

Malk_Content, you're going to stay offended if you try to look for reasons to be offended all the time.

Just relax and take a statement as it is sheesh.


Ryan Freire wrote:

I want to see martials debuff the crap out of things they fight. I want effective bleed abilites, penalties to hit and damage and movement restrictions.

I honestly think that in PF1, the unchained rogue, the dirty trick combat maneuver and ablities like bleeding/impaling critical are the coolest aspects of martial characters.

That's a good point. I do want to get the 'Super Gonzo' stuff at some point, but the real meat of combat is having choices and options. Being able really strategize your approach.

A favorite example for me is Batman vs the Mutant Leader.

Fight in mud to slow him down.
A cut above the eyes to mess with his vision.
Attack "A nerve bundle in your deltoid, might not have hurt, but you won't be using that arm for awhile."
And then start snapping arms.

Its not as flashy as replicating Street Fighter, but being able to say "This isn't a mudhole, its an operating table. And I'm the surgeon." from low levels makes the 'Mundane' characters still so obscenely cool.

HWalsh wrote:

Barbarians that channel rage powers should be able to do supernatural things if they're supernatural.

Like if you have an Eagle Totem I could see popping wings while raging or a fire totem sheathing you in flames, but those are less martial powers and more totem powers. So not something I think a fighter should be able to do.

The same with ki. Like I see a monk using ki to punch the ground and unleash a shockwave, or even be able to fire a ki blast. Though I was referring to martial powers as suggestions.

Right, but I'm saying that because of how modular PF2 seems to be shaping up, the idea is that if/when a Fighter gets access to blatantly Supernatural effects to placate players like myself, its explicitly "The Fighter is using Monk training to tap into Ki and do crazy things. They channeling their Inner Tiger like a Barbarian to do crazy things."

Its a means to keep the basic flavor of the Fighter mundane, and more 'realistic' because I know that's important to other players that aren't me. When players that are me want to do crazy Wuxia/Ancient Myth stuff, the mechanics are explicitly said to use Ki or Rage Juice, so that it doesn't mess with others and their suspension of disbelief.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

A martial class that can stamp its foot and enemies just fall over.
A martial feat to grab a weapon out of the opponent's hand and hit him with it before he can react.
A rogue ability to shift from shadow to shadow
Monks who can smash doors, shields, tables etc with a single punch

All of the above without having to justify it with a magical power base. Just being a high level rogue allows you to vanish in plain sight, steal the wig from under the mayor's hat and be seen by six witnesses in the tavern at the same time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My rejection of your compromise:
That doesn't provide very good mechanics for the other alignments.

My acceptance of your compromise:
Hey, you're just talking about the CRB. There's no rush, and it works as a stopgap.

Talking about cool martial stuff!:
For some of the more impossible things, like a wind blade, maybe they should require tapping into magic weapons as a bit of handwavery? By the time you can get those sorts of abilities, you should have access to magic weapons. Although, at that point, maybe just make it a rune?

More than lobbing hadokens, I think it'd be cool if Monk could wreck other people's ki, possibly at a distance. Fort-save targeting debuffs for things like slow, spell failure, fatigue, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well I would think anyone who can access a totem or ki should be able to qualify for totem/ki feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like, so long as we're talking supernatural powers, every martial character should eventually have the ability to use or manipulate something like qi to create supernatural effects, but monks should be able to do things beyond what the others can. A fighter or barbarian could strike a distant foe through the air or invoke their own inner fire to set their soul alight, and a rogue could steal something from across the room and put out an aura of "I'm not even here," but a monk who simultaneously embodies harmony with all things and the oneness of self should be like a qi wizard.


Something else I'd like to see is ways to take armor off/put it on faster as proficiency increases. So eventually a legendary-armor-proficiency martial can don full plate as a standard action. That would be pretty cool.

Also, legendary armor/weapon proficiency available to all martials but with a feat cost of you aren't one of the classes that normally gets it.


Paradozen wrote:
Also, legendary armor/weapon proficiency available to all martials but with a feat cost of you aren't one of the classes that normally gets it.

I think that's confirmed already.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xerres wrote:
it struck me to wondering what kind of cool abilities martial characters without magic should get.

The problem with this thread is your going to get the complete range. You'll have people who want things that can only be done in real life and you'll have people who want spell slots for martials with there being absolutely no mechanical difference between a spellcaster and a non-spellcaster except for the special effects that accompany each ability.

I personally want abilities that are more grounded in reality than creating demiplanes. Save the swimming across oceans as a move action stuff for level 21+/mythic tier.

I'd be happy with leadership being a fighter ability. I don't want summoning divine angels as a fighter ability though.


I wouldn't mind some tactical and leadership buffs.

Like, "Designate a target, spend an action, until the beginning of your next turn all allies who heard you designate that target gain +2 to attack rolls against that target."

Or, "When directing 2 or more allies in a group skill check for which you are trained. Grant all allies an additional +2 to the roll."


QuidEst wrote:

My rejection of your compromise:

That doesn't provide very good mechanics for the other alignments.

My acceptance of your compromise:
Hey, you're just talking about the CRB. There's no rush, and it works as a stopgap.

Talking about cool martial stuff!:
For some of the more impossible things, like a wind blade, maybe they should require tapping into magic weapons as a bit of handwavery? By the time you can get those sorts of abilities, you should have access to magic weapons. Although, at that point, maybe just make it a rune?

More than lobbing hadokens, I think it'd be cool if Monk could wreck other people's ki, possibly at a distance. Fort-save targeting debuffs for things like slow, spell failure, fatigue, etc.

Rejection noted, thank you. I don't love it either, but a low-grade annoyance on both sides may work better than half in celebration and half in ignominious defeat.

Using the inherent magic of a weapon is an avenue I'd definitely say is worth exploring. Maybe something ado with Resonance like someone mentioned up thread.

As for Monks and debuffing through Ki, that sounds like a cool style of attacks. Really makes them all mystical style.

John Lynch 106 wrote:
Xerres wrote:
it struck me to wondering what kind of cool abilities martial characters without magic should get.

The problem with this thread is your going to get the complete range. You'll have people who want things that can only be done in real life and you'll have people who want spell slots for martials with there being absolutely no mechanical difference between a spellcaster and a non-spellcaster except for the special effects that accompany each ability.

I personally want abilities that are more grounded in reality than creating demiplanes. Save the swimming across oceans as a move action stuff for level 21+/mythic tier.

I'd be happy with leadership being a fighter ability. I don't want summoning divine angels as a fighter ability though.

I know that people want Fighters at least to remain more 'Normal', which is why the compromise I suggest there is just that if a Fighter or any other given 'Normal' class starts to do the mythic feats of legend, they're use Ki or Rage Juice. They're using something Supernatural to accomplish their goals.

Also that its explicitly done through feats/archetypes, so that its a deviation from standard Fighter path. Creating Demiplanes is out of the picture, but punching the ground to make shockwaves and throwing out kamehameha waves is at least really freaking cool. And that satisfies many people like myself who want that nonsense.

Does it satisfy everyone? No, but I'm really just aiming for the largest group of people I can. My tiny net is a perfect trap, because its a net and its tiny, but I have to accept there's a limit to what I can get under it.

Fighters being the ones with Leadership is an interesting notion, but I do anticipate an argument that your sidekick is more useful than you are if they're using spellcasters. Though it does depend on what they make Leadership into this time. If its just getting a large army of people to follow you, it would at least have other uses.


Xerres wrote:

The other thread up about what it would be cool for Paladins to have had some very cool ideas that would both be envied by people who really don't want to be stuck with a single alignment class and some of which seem like a nice step forward for more 'Mundane' characters to have.

So first, I want to suggest a compromise for the Paladin alignment and have it rejected. Everyone else got theirs rejected, I want to have a turn:

Paladins in the Core book are either listed as Lawful Good and have a sidebar that says many DMs and certain settings open that to other alignments (Maybe just usggest Any Good, or only Chaotic Good, or only Neutral Good and Lawful Neutral, I dunno) and its suggested that if a player request that, the DM discuss it with them to reach an agreement.

Or

Paladins are listed as "Any Good" and have a sidebar or flavor text noting that in Golarion and many other settings, Paladins are only Lawful Good with very few exceptions, and it will be a common house rule for DMs to not allow Neutral or Chaotic Paladins.

Either way, in PFS, since its Golarion based, they're limited to Lawful Good, but you can get a special exception (Boons? I don't know, I don't play PFS, someone help me.) to play a different alignment. So that Lawful Good players aren't bother with constant Chaotic Paladins, but players that are really into it have a shot.

If anyone can explain in detail why I is dum and they reject that idea, I'd appreciate it.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disappoint you. Option 2 is just fine for me. I basically never play or run in Golarion and the only games where I've ever had to twist anyone's arm about running a Chaotic Good paladin were games I wasn't too thrilled about being in anyway.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Paladins
It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.

Fighters
Fighters are like Batman. They’re defined by their lack of superhuman abilities. Aka magic. If the fighter starts being able to do fantastic things, it’s like Batman having the ability to read minds or fly. It defeats the whole purpose. They lose what makes them special.

A magical fighter is cool. That’s a magus or eldritch knight. But that’s not the baseline. Wuxia is cool, but sometimes you want to play Lord of the Rings, Willow, or Robin Hood.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jester David wrote:

Paladins

It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.

Fighters
Fighters are like Batman. They’re defined by their lack of superhuman abilities. Aka magic. If the fighter starts being able to do fantastic things, it’s like Batman having the ability to read minds or fly. It defeats the whole purpose. They lose what makes them special.

A magical fighter is cool. That’s a magus or eldritch knight. But that’s not the baseline. Wuxia is cool, but sometimes you want to play Lord of the Rings, Willow, or Robin Hood.

I'd be happier if the baseline fighter was more scalable things like i pointed out, with archetypes for the jump over a mountain/throw wind slashes etc.

Edit: the logic behind that is that, much like archetypes for divine champions, its easier to add supernatural things with an archetype, than it is for someone wanting grittier realism to sift through all the options and narrow them down.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

How is that idea a compromise to the group that wants LG only Paladins?

As I said in other thread, compromise is a middle ground. Compromise between those who want to keep status quo, and those who want a revolution, is a moderate change of the status quo. Staying exactly in the status quo is not compromise.

If the paladins are LG only and everyone else is a warpriest or inquisitor want to compromise, then the solution can't be only LG are paladins and everyone else is a warpriest or inquisitor. Well, it can, but. It called compromise. It's called victory.


I think the PF1 baseline is close to ideal. Specifically, I worry that adding too many bells and whistles to the Fighter could alienate players who liked it for its simplicity - something I've already seen happen in 4e and 13th Age...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Freire wrote:
Jester David wrote:

Paladins

It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.

Fighters
Fighters are like Batman. They’re defined by their lack of superhuman abilities. Aka magic. If the fighter starts being able to do fantastic things, it’s like Batman having the ability to read minds or fly. It defeats the whole purpose. They lose what makes them special.

A magical fighter is cool. That’s a magus or eldritch knight. But that’s not the baseline. Wuxia is cool, but sometimes you want to play Lord of the Rings, Willow, or Robin Hood.

I'd be happier if the baseline fighter was more scalable things like i pointed out, with archetypes for the jump over a mountain/throw wind slashes etc.

Edit: the logic behind that is that, much like archetypes for divine champions, its easier to add supernatural things with an archetype, than it is for someone wanting grittier realism to sift through all the options and narrow them down.

Xerres wrote:

I know that people want Fighters at least to remain more 'Normal', which is why the compromise I suggest there is just that if a Fighter or any other given 'Normal' class starts to do the mythic feats of legend, they're use Ki or Rage Juice. They're using something Supernatural to accomplish their goals.

Also that its explicitly done through feats/archetypes, so that its a deviation from standard Fighter path. Creating Demiplanes is out of the picture, but punching the ground to make shockwaves and throwing out kamehameha waves is at least really freaking cool. And that satisfies many people like myself who want that nonsense.

I'm not trying to be rude, but I do hope I'm on the same page and just not being clear about it.

Fighter is normal Fighter, the 'mundane' class who is the Lord of the Rings bound sort. That's the standard Fighter that is presented.

Lots of people, including myself, want the Fighter to do more outrageous stuff. Truly, truly, truly outrageous. My suggestion is that it be made available in feats and/or archetypes.

Problem with that? The peeps that like their Fighters non-magical want to know how those Fighters are doing that. My solution is to say the feats/archetypes explicitly say "Fighter is using Ki like a Monk dude, they have supernatural power because of this feat/archetype."

The "I'm just a normal guy!" Fighter is still there. He's the standard, he's the one you have by default, and hopefully that default is the really cool technique driven warrior Ryan suggests. He only gets supernatural if you get feats to use Ki Power/Rage Juice. That is the "Compromise" I see between the 'Mundane" Fighter camp, and the "Jem" Fighter camp. Fighter is "Mundane" to start, but later people can make it outrageous and justify the flavor by saying its Monk/Barbarian training/power.

I guess the way I'd sort it is the say that Core Monk gets the crazy "Anime/Wuxia", and Core Fighter gets "Mundane But Please Oh Please At Least Be Cool This Time..." And then in the equivalent of Advanced Player's Guide gives feats and such to let the Fighter in on that Wuxia jam. And for the Monk to lose the Wuxia and just be a guy who trains to punch things I guess, like a Brawler.

I mean, I could still be screwed and there's nothing close to Wuxia in the game at all. In which case I'm just boned and have to remain in PF1 Town with Path of War, which is unfortunate for me. But if the Wuxia is there, that seems like a fair way to handle it.


Xerres wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:
Jester David wrote:

Paladins

It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.

Fighters
Fighters are like Batman. They’re defined by their lack of superhuman abilities. Aka magic. If the fighter starts being able to do fantastic things, it’s like Batman having the ability to read minds or fly. It defeats the whole purpose. They lose what makes them special.

A magical fighter is cool. That’s a magus or eldritch knight. But that’s not the baseline. Wuxia is cool, but sometimes you want to play Lord of the Rings, Willow, or Robin Hood.

I'd be happier if the baseline fighter was more scalable things like i pointed out, with archetypes for the jump over a mountain/throw wind slashes etc.

Edit: the logic behind that is that, much like archetypes for divine champions, its easier to add supernatural things with an archetype, than it is for someone wanting grittier realism to sift through all the options and narrow them down.

Xerres wrote:

I know that people want Fighters at least to remain more 'Normal', which is why the compromise I suggest there is just that if a Fighter or any other given 'Normal' class starts to do the mythic feats of legend, they're use Ki or Rage Juice. They're using something Supernatural to accomplish their goals.

Also that its explicitly done through feats/archetypes, so that its a deviation from standard Fighter path. Creating Demiplanes is out of the picture, but punching the ground to make shockwaves and throwing out kamehameha waves is at least really freaking cool. And that satisfies many people like myself who want that nonsense.

I'm not trying to be rude, but I do hope I'm on the same page and just not being clear about it.

Fighter is normal Fighter, the 'mundane' class who is the Lord of the Rings bound sort. That's the standard Fighter that is presented.

Lots of...

I don't really want Wuxia in the game.

It wasn't in PF1, a 3pp that adds it isn't really it being in PF1, it is just a 3pp that has it.

The lore of Golarion is more down to earth. There are some extreme powers, but they are straight Ki, and even then they don't go into the Dragonball Z levels.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Neurophage wrote:
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disappoint you. Option 2 is just fine for me. I basically never play or run in Golarion and the only games where I've ever had to twist anyone's arm about running a Chaotic Good paladin were games I wasn't too thrilled about being in anyway.

You fiend! Did you not read the title of the thread? How dare you bring this positivity into a Paladin thread!

Begone with you!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

I don't really want Wuxia in the game.

It wasn't in PF1, a 3pp that adds it isn't really it being in PF1, it is just a 3pp that has it.

The lore of Golarion is more down to earth. There are some extreme powers, but they are straight Ki, and even then they don't go into the Dragonball Z levels.

And yet it is something many other people would be excited to see. Hence why I suggest compromises, so that it can be included or excluded based on what an individual group wants.

You can get hung up on the fact I mentioned Path of War if you want, but Path of War was a response to people wanting Wuxia in Pathfinder. Something they had in 3.5, albeit toward the end.

My compromise is that the 'Mundane' Fighter guys get what they want first. And then I get options to put some Wuxia in his shoes. Options that you can ignore at your leisure.

But I'll definitely push to have the Monk start Wuxia, so that there's a basis for it and better chance of it being a supported idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xerres wrote:


dragonhunterq wrote:
I'd like to see out of combat utility for all martials - information gathering for the rogue that approaches divination, a network of contacts that can arrange transport on short order to nearly anywhere, that kind of thing
I'd love for 'mundane' characters to at least get more 'mundane' resources. If you don't mind me questioning, how would you envision that information gathering working? Does the Rogue automatically get a spy network, does she just always somehow seem to figure out the secrets...

I'll be honest I don't have a good idea.

Most of the ideas I do have are very generic or require at least a modicum of handwavium that would no doubt drive some people absolutely batty.
I don't mind a little sketchiness in the 'why' or the 'how' for instance so just saying you can obtain x information in y hours is good enough for me. I can add flavour to suit me.

The creative uses of having (for example) a network of informants would require severe limits - I'm not sure how persuasive a simple "they provide these services and cannot be persuaded to do anything else" clause would be. I'm not really great at setting those limits - I assume (despite evidence to the contrary) that people a) have a modicum of common sense and b) won't try to break the game.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jester David wrote:

Paladins

It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.

I really think that’s the best approach. Keep the core paladin lawful good and add a sidebar as suggested above.

Future archetypes or whatever can come along later that open up the paladin to other classes. But the core paladin class needs to remain lawful good only in my opinion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh I am not touching the Paladin part of this post.

For Martial classes, I like using baselines derived from pop culture.

So for me, A high level fighter is on par with Captain America or Black Panther, and I expect them to be able to pull off all the ridiculous action movie tropes. Think Heightened action movie reality, not actual reality.

For Monks, They should be able to pull off ridiculous Wuxia/Anime like moves.

So abilities that stay within those themes are in my mind appropriate.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jester David wrote:

Paladins

It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.

That's nearly admitting that players often won't like the restriction. If you need to hide behind the rulebook to convince your fellow players that a roleplaying restriction makes sense, then it's possible your restriction sucks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pandora's wrote:
Jester David wrote:

Paladins

It’s easier to grant permission than take it away.
A sidebar where the GM is encouraged to allow non-LG paladins is fine, but I like making the baseline tied to an alignment.
That's nearly admitting that players often won't like the restriction. If you need to hide behind the rulebook to convince your fellow players that a roleplaying restriction makes sense, then it's possible your restriction sucks.

Uh, not so.

Not so at all. Some players like to follow the rules.

Please stop trying to paint the opening of the class as something that needs to happen or something players universally want. It clouds the issue.

Many players like it and want it to stay LG.

Many players dislike it and want Paladins opened.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jester David wrote:

Fighters

Fighters are like Batman. They’re defined by their lack of superhuman abilities. Aka magic. If the fighter starts being able to do fantastic things, it’s like Batman having the ability to read minds or fly. It defeats the whole purpose. They lose what makes them special.

A magical fighter is cool. That’s a magus or eldritch knight. But that’s not the baseline. Wuxia is cool, but sometimes you want to play Lord of the Rings, Willow, or Robin Hood.

Fighter being completely mundane is both the point and the problem. If high-level casters are going to be what they are, then high-level martials need to be Wuxia-type characters. Mundane Fighting Man is a low-level concept for low-level games and/or low-magic settings. Likewise, Batman either needs non-superpowered opposition, or gadgets that effectively turn him into a superhero.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So long as Fighters aren't forced into magic/wuxia I see no problem with those options existing. Now obviously limited magic over pure martial ability is hard to balance but I think it can be achieved with "wuxia" feats granting a small amount of Spell Points. Thus your fighter who can literally balance on the wind has superior movement options than the fighter who pumped their upgrades into just being really great at jumping... until he runs out of spell points.


Athaleon wrote:
Jester David wrote:

Fighters

Fighters are like Batman. They’re defined by their lack of superhuman abilities. Aka magic. If the fighter starts being able to do fantastic things, it’s like Batman having the ability to read minds or fly. It defeats the whole purpose. They lose what makes them special.

A magical fighter is cool. That’s a magus or eldritch knight. But that’s not the baseline. Wuxia is cool, but sometimes you want to play Lord of the Rings, Willow, or Robin Hood.

Fighter being completely mundane is both the point and the problem. If high-level casters are going to be what they are, then high-level martials need to be Wuxia-type characters. Mundane Fighting Man is a low-level concept for low-level games and/or low-magic settings. Likewise, Batman either needs non-superpowered opposition, or gadgets that effectively turn him into a superhero.

It would be possible to deliver everything people want, but possibly not in one game. If people want fighters that wouldn't be out of place in Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones, then those people also get casters that would fit into those stories. Which probably means at least three game-equivalents, one for the LotR/GoT level warriors and mages, one for where you get the equivalent of Beowulf/Odysseus/Cuchulain/Medea, and one where you go wild with characters who'd fit into Wuxia, Superhero comics, the Mahabharatha, Journey to the West or other high-powered material. More realistically, pick one of those for PF2, and in a later supplement provide the alternatives for more/less powerful types of game.

1 to 50 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Reject My Paladin Compromise, and Then Talk About What Martial Characters Should Be Capable of Please All Messageboards