I know in 3 e Forgotten Realms there was a class called "Divine champion" which was like this (I think they had to be the same alignment as their god, and their smite worked on any followers of enemy gods). I guess you could just convert it but is there anything like this in Pathfinder already?
Nope. You'd have to convert.
Cavaliers fill some of the niche of paladins without alignment restriction, but they're more "pseudo-medieval knight" and less "divine champion".
The gray paladin archetype lets you play an actual paladin that isn't quite lawful good, but that only broadens alignment by a single step, and you're still restricted to the same deities as a normal paladin.
Among prestige classes, holy vindicator and sentinel are reasonably paladin-like.
The Insinuator Antipaladin needs to be evil but can serve a single alignment of Neutral god as well. CE Insinuators can serve CE, NE, or CN. NE Insinuators can serve LE, CE, NE, and N. LE Insinuators can serve LE, LN, and NE forces.
Unfortunately, you do have to be evil which is a shame because its a perfect archetype to be neutral.
There's a warpriest archetype, champion of the faith, which is a bit like a paladin and can be any alignment. There's also the chevalier prestige class which is any good.
Wasn't Divine Champion a prestige class ?
If so, there's a bunch of those, from generic (Sentinel comes to mind) to specific to a god or pantheon.
For base classes, depends on what you're looking for, I guess. A few can kinda fit ?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
try 2nd ed. I hear that system is into watering down the flavor of classes
The warpriest class may actually be the closest to what you are looking for follows the clerics within 1 step for alignment.
EtG.
That, Inquisitor, Zealot, probably Reliquarist, the Niobe class, and a bunch of other classes and archetypes do a decent job of being divine warriors.
Divine tracker ranger, deliverer slayer, sacrament alchemist, and shifter as well, depending of flavor of deity involved.
I just found this one, the omdura. It's kind of a cross between paladin and Inquisitor. Like vampire hunter it's kind of 1st party and kind of not. Looks like a fun class though. Definitely a good option for an any alignment paladin.
Just play an Inquisitor. Can detect any alignment and has Judgement in place of Smite. They even get Bane in place of Divine Bond.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Warpriest follows the concept of martially-inclined divine combatant that most people want when they ask for any-alignment Paladins, and has abilities far closer to a Paladin than an Inquisitor does (with the exception of the Smite/Judgement equivalency).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I would like to have a cat, provided it barked."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can have something with the heavy armour and all martial weapons proficiencies, Lay On Hands equivalent, and Channel Energy with the Warpriest, or you can have something that has a Smite equivalent and actively hunts down enemies of its deity but has a different general flavour for its suite of abilities with the Inquisitor. It depends on what about the Paladin you want to emulate. My point was that there are overall more similarities in the Warpriest class than in the Inquisitor class.
LG is best alignment is in full effect for empowering its servants.
I'm sorry, I guess I missed where Paladin was determined to be outright better than Cleric, Warpriest, Inquisitor, and Antipaladin across the board.
I mean, if your GM is fine with house rules you can have a paladin of any alignment other than neutral as follows:
Take a Warpriest, give it D10 HP and Full BAB but replace its spell progression with that of the Paladin. Change the line to where it says "Cleric spells of 7th level and above are not on the warpriest class spell list," and replace the 7th with 5th. Remove Sacred Weapon and Focus weapon, give them Divine Grace and Smite Evil. Then replace the word Evil in smite Evil with whatever alignment the god hates most. Swap the Capstone with that of the Paladin. Lastly, replace the word Wisdom with Charisma.
Tada, you have a Paladin that can be anything except True Neutral because I have no idea what a N Paladin would smite. This is a chop job, I made this up in 5 minutes, but an amenable DM would probably rule that as an under-powered Archetype of the Warpriest.
I know in 3 e Forgotten Realms there was a class called "Divine champion" which was like this (I think they had to be the same alignment as their god, and their smite worked on any followers of enemy gods). I guess you could just convert it but is there anything like this in Pathfinder already?
Warpriest, Champion of the Faith archetype is probably as close as your gonna get to an any alignment Paladin. You trade out your sacred weapon effects for smite opposite alignment and detect evil.
You get more spell power but only 3/4 bab and weaker 'lay hands/channel' which you won't use anyways since you'll be using your Fervor for swift action self buffs.
With the spell buffs you can be as offensively strong as a Paladin while having a bit more spells too boot as a 6 level caster with access to the Cleric list from 1-6.
Not really. Besides the awkward use of the term crusader there (historical crusaders were...not as constrained by a code of conduct as the class paladin), warpriests and inquisitors really can lay down the smack as well as a paladin. Possibly better in the case of the Molthuni arsenal chaplain warpriest, or if you have good rolled stats the champion of the faith warpriest likewise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No class is going to work exactly like another. If you want a class that play exactly like a paladin but with a different alignment your only choice is to play a paladin and convince the GM to allow you to change the alignment.
If you want to play something that can achieve the same results there are options, but they will achieve it in a slightly different way. For example the warpriest may not have the full BAB of the paladin, but with extra feats and spells he can get the same chance to hit as the paladin.
There is the vindictive bastard archetype. They can be any alignment.
Awesome archetype.
But it is explicitly a fallen Paladin.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I get knocked down
But I get up again
Eh, I "fell" because I like freedom too much seems fine. Nothing says you can't be good. Heack you can still be lawful good and still fall.
Precisely, but you still fell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't "fall" I was enlighened. It's all about perspective.
Sure-sure
You know, I tried suggesting once that the Paladin class should function like the 5e Paladin class, with each variant having its own Oath that includes its own specific, concrete Code of Conduct.
I recall that conversation did not go well for me.
Apparently a Lawful "Neutral" Paladins that tortures people doesn't offend peoples' delicate moral sensibilities nearly as much as a Chaotic Good Paladin that overthrows unjust authorities.
Grey paladins can be lawful neutral, and I suppose could still engage in torture if it were lawful to do so. Maybe that's what he's referring to?
Grey paladins can be lawful neutral, and I suppose could still engage in torture if it were lawful to do so. Maybe that's what he's referring to?
I'm conflating the Gray Paladin archetype with the Gray Guard PrC from 3.5, both of which boil down to official developer support for Lawful Neutral and Lawful "Neutral" Paladins...
So we can have Lawful Good, Lawful Neutral, Lawful "Neutral", Lawful Evil and Chaotic Evil Paladin archetypes and those are all fine, but the merest suggestion of a Neutral Good or a Chaotic Paladin makes a certain segment of the fanbase bang their widdle heads on the floor until Paizo accommodates them.
It's the same thing with actually having functional Codes of Conduct for Paladins instead of relying on the practically undefined boundaries of Lawful Good-- somehow, actually knowing the rules Paladins are expected to follow will make it harder for players to follow them.
I've probably derailed this poor thread enough, but I am incredibly salty about the garbage-tier reasoning behind D&D/PF's morality mechanics.
They have CG 'paladins' in PF2 so that's one more sacred cow gone. Admittedly at least one person declared in a post that they wouldn't play PF2 for that reason.
Well you can be a neutral good paladin, and a neutral evil one in pf1 with various archetypes. The alignments you can't be. (aside from vindictive bastard) are chaotic neutral and chaotic good. I think part of the reluctance to creating such is that the rigidity of a code is a deep part of the paladin mystic. It's hard to have a hard and fast code when you are chaotic. Antipaladins get a pass because of being the antithesis if a paladin.
https://www.realmshelps.net/charbuild/classes/prestige/realms/chm.shtml here is the class I mentioned in the OP, tho I noticed they all have lay on hands. I think it should depend on alignment whether they have that or touch of corruption.
Well, the PF2 liberator(CG champion) has these tenets:
You must never knowingly harm an innocent, or allow immediate harm to one through inaction when you know you could reasonably prevent it. This tenet doesn’t force you to take action against possible harm to innocents at an indefinite time in the future, or to sacrifice your life to protect them.
You must demand and fight for others’ freedom to make their own decisions. You may never engage in or countenance slavery or tyranny.
Which seems like a reasonable code for CG for the most part, tho' the no force or threatening part seems like it's asking for a fall as an adventurer.
Does rather seem to be that CG Paladins should be able to force and/or threaten slavers and tyrants to behave in a particular way-- which is, to say, stopping. But yeah, that's what I would want and expect from a CG Paladin Code.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the PF2 liberator(CG champion) has these tenets:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
Which seems like a reasonable code for CG for the most part, tho' the no force or threatening part seems like it's asking for a fall as an adventurer.
The “You must never knowingly harm an innocent, or allow immediate harm to one through inaction when you know you could reasonably prevent it.“ part supersedes the don’t force/don’t threaten part.
They have CG 'paladins' in PF2 so that's one more sacred cow gone. Admittedly at least one person declared in a post that they wouldn't play PF2 for that reason.
More than one actually.
The “You must never knowingly harm an innocent, or allow immediate harm to one through inaction when you know you could reasonably prevent it.“ part supersedes the don’t force/don’t threaten part.Well, the PF2 liberator(CG champion) has these tenets:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
Which seems like a reasonable code for CG for the most part, tho' the no force or threatening part seems like it's asking for a fall as an adventurer.
Yeah, the finer points of that are asking for it. Fortunately falling isn't as bad for PF2 champions.
Which seems like a reasonable code for CG for the most part, tho' the no force or threatening part seems like it's asking for a fall as an adventurer.
The “You must never knowingly harm an innocent, or allow immediate harm to one through inaction when you know you could reasonably prevent it.“ part supersedes the don’t force/don’t threaten part.
But in any situation where an innocent isn't in immediate danger, there's nothing in that part of the code forcing or permitting you to intervene.
you can’t force someone to act in a particular way or threaten them if they don’t
It sounds like it's there to distinguish them from the kind of pushy, "I don't tell lies or use poisons, therefore none you are allowed to," Paladins that sometimes appeared in old editions. But forcing someone to release their slaves probably should be allowed.
Fortunately, there's no rule against just stabbing someone to death if you don't approve of what they're doing. (Unless they're an innocent, of course.)