Antipaladin Rename

[Rysky]

I was just reminded this was the name for the CE Tenants for Champions, yes, reminded, since I hate it so I commonly forgot that’s what it was called. It’s also pretty heavily and specifically and OGL DND thing so pretty much assured to get the axe with the rest of the OGL stuff, like Rust Monsters, which we will actually mourn.

Not this. And before any tired reactionaries huff and puff there’s nothing offensive to my knowledge about the name, other than it’s bland, boring, and unfun to say and use as a label.

So!

What do y’all think they’ll rename it?

I’m guessing Reaver or Ravager.

[Jacob Jett]

I like Reaver. Someone got ChatGPT to suggest Rampager for Barbarian in another thread and if not Berserker then Rampager for that one. Reaver works quite nicely here. Destroyer might also work (if we can avoid the obvious warship jokes). Annihilator might work too?

[Sanityfaerie]

I like Reaver... and I'll agree that "Antipaladin" is a poor name that ought to go.

[HumbleGamer]

Little ot: can really something like anti + name fall under the OGL?

[Lurker in Insomnia]

I know I should just ignore the thread, but I think that anti paladin is actually supported in setting?

Maybe I'm getting my head cannon mixed up with lore though. I had thought that the first champions were Paladins and were first empowered to fight against Rovagug. In response, Rovagug empowered its own champions, so they were referred to as anti paladins.

Anyway, Reaver is cool.

[CorvusMask]

I like reavers, its gives me warm fuzzy memories of dragon age

[CynDuck]

Lurker in Insomnia wrote:

I know I should just ignore the thread, but I think that anti paladin is actually supported in setting?

Maybe I'm getting my head cannon mixed up with lore though. I had thought that the first champions were Paladins and were first empowered to fight against Rovagug. In response, Rovagug empowered its own champions, so they were referred to as anti paladins.

Anyway, Reaver is cool.

Even if there's a canonical reason like that for the name it still might fall under the OGL, and if so would probably be best to remove

[QuidEst]

Foeadin.

[Golurkcanfly]

Lurker in Insomnia wrote:

I know I should just ignore the thread, but I think that anti paladin is actually supported in setting?

Maybe I'm getting my head cannon mixed up with lore though. I had thought that the first champions were Paladins and were first empowered to fight against Rovagug. In response, Rovagug empowered its own champions, so they were referred to as anti paladins.

Anyway, Reaver is cool.

If that's a case, deriving the name from Rovagug itself may be an alternative.

Perhaps Unmakers? Breakers? Devourers (coming from the idea that the Devourer from SF and Rovagug are the same entity)?

Another possibility unrelated to Rovagug would be Despoiler, coming from "despoil," meaning to violently rob or take.

[keftiu]

Blackguard and Reaver are both delicious, IMO.

Now if only we had Judge and… whatever you call a formerly-CN Champion.

[John R.]

QuidEst wrote:

Foeadin.

Fauxadin

[Sanityfaerie]

keftiu wrote:

Blackguard and Reaver are both delicious, IMO.

Now if only we had Judge and… whatever you call a formerly-CN Champion.

Iconoclast?

[Golurkcanfly]

keftiu wrote:

Blackguard and Reaver are both delicious, IMO.

Now if only we had Judge and… whatever you call a formerly-CN Champion.

I suspect they won't use Blackguard because it's tied to the 3.x OGL iirc.

[Golurkcanfly]

keftiu wrote:

Blackguard and Reaver are both delicious, IMO.

Now if only we had Judge and… whatever you call a formerly-CN Champion.

Anarch, perhaps?

[Tangorin]

Annihilator? Now with 15% more edge

[zeonsghost]

I do like Reaver, though Marauder is a close runner up for me.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think the name "antipaladin" is pretty awkward, but I don't really have an idea for a better one since I don't really understand what this class is about other than "the last thing I would ever allow a PC to play."

[CorvusMask]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the name "antipaladin" is pretty awkward, but I don't really have an idea for a better one since I don't really understand what this class is about other than "the last thing I would ever allow a PC to play."

its pretty much "opposite of paladin, aka dishonorable lying murder hobo who makes sure to be as evil as possible"

[CynDuck]

Jacob Jett wrote:

I like Reaver. Someone got ChatGPT to suggest Rampager for Barbarian in another thread and if not Berserker then Rampager for that one. Reaver works quite nicely here. Destroyer might also work (if we can avoid the obvious warship jokes). Annihilator might work too?

The antipaladin has always felt like a bit of a cheesy villain themed subclass to me, and annihilator sounds perfect for that.

[pixierose]

Tbh I find the cheesyness of Antipaladin really charming in a way.

But I understand peoples complaints with the name. Reaver i feel like works really well.

[zeonsghost]

I always felt like you could take anti-Paladin in a different direction from 'the photo negative of a Paladin' to something more weird.

As is, the Paladin and Anti-Paladin are part of the same system. They're warriors for a deity granted powers by that deity sent forth to extoll their beliefs. I feel like to be 'the opposite of a Paladin' you'd need to be outside that divine system. A warrior for justice and order who does so because they belong to an order of warriors who believe gods either endorse injustice or are apathetic to it, would be as much an anti-paladin philosophically as the current anti-paladin.

Though I get that no longer fits the champion class chassis and lacks a certain charm that comes with the schlocky one we have today.

[Golurkcanfly]

Between Reaver and Despoiler, I like the latter more.

Both mean the same thing, but Despoiler feels more sinister due to its phonetic similarities to words such as Despot, Despise, Despair, etc.

Meanwhile, Reaver feels more like a generic raider/bandit/viking. Like, a Reaver takes because they want to steal what you have, but a Despoiler takes because they want to see you suffer.

[Lucerious]

I like the title antipaladin. I personally fail to see an issue, but each to their own tastes.
Is it the “anti” part? Do words like antihero, antibiotic, or antilock seem bad too? The title antipaladin at least lets me know quite clearly what the class philosophy is.

[Golurkcanfly]

Lucerious wrote:

I like the title antipaladin. I personally fail to see an issue, but each to their own tastes.

Is it the “anti” part? Do words like antihero, antibiotic, or antilock seem bad too? The title antipaladin at least lets me know quite clearly what the class philosophy is.

The distaste for the name stems from the fact that it's both incredibly goofy and not really indicative of what it does without prior knowledge of what paladins are. It's not even goofy in a campy way like Desecrator is, since it doesn't even sound like it's trying to be cool.

That and the name isn't really indicative of what it does in the first place. For some terms such as antibiotic or antilock, the anti-prefix is used to describe how to stops or eliminates the attached suffix (killing bacteria stopping brakes from locking, respectively).

For other terms such as anti-hero, it's often used to describe a similar concept with a subversion of methods. There's the classical anti-hero who performs good and is good while displaying unheroic traits (weakness, regret, self-doubt, etc.). Then, there's the modern anti-hero which can range from heroic deeds with villainous methods to outright villains who are just not actively evil.

Neither uses of the prefix actively describe the relationship between the Paladin and Antipaladin, and solely defining the CE Champion as the opposite of the Paladin is rather limiting to what the CE Champion can be.

[Lucerious]

How is it goofy? How is an antipaladin not about being anti-paladin? The paladin came first and the antipaladin came as an opposition to the paladin. Calling them ravagers or villains or some of the other suggestions made tells me little to nothing about the class (other than it is “evil” or now “unholy”). Since there are other evil/unholy champions with their own philosophies to fulfill other concepts, why do we need to change the name of this one?

My only issue with the antipaladin is how weak I believe their mechanics to be.

[Ectar]

I like Blackguard. It's somewhat iconic, but it's also just a regular word so I kinda doubt there can be much of a legal claim.

[Golurkcanfly]

Lucerious wrote:

How is it goofy? How is an antipaladin not about being anti-paladin? The paladin came first and the antipaladin came as an opposition to the paladin. Calling them ravagers or villains or some of the other suggestions made tells me little to nothing about the class (other than it is “evil” or now “unholy”). Since there are other evil/unholy champions with their own philosophies to fulfill other concepts, why do we need to change the name of this one?

My only issue with the antipaladin is how weak I believe their mechanics to be.

The Antipaladin cause isn't against paladins specifically, though. It's not even mechanically in opposition to paladins relative to the other evil causes.

It'd be just as silly as naming the Tyrant the Anti-Liberator. Sure, the causes are naturally in opposition of the other, but the name is goofy, clumsy, and non-indicative to the purpose of the Tyrant.

[CorvusMask]

Lucerious wrote:

How is it goofy? How is an antipaladin not about being anti-paladin? The paladin came first and the antipaladin came as an opposition to the paladin. Calling them ravagers or villains or some of the other suggestions made tells me little to nothing about the class (other than it is “evil” or now “unholy”). Since there are other evil/unholy champions with their own philosophies to fulfill other concepts, why do we need to change the name of this one?

My only issue with the antipaladin is how weak I believe their mechanics to be.

I mean, imagine if Tyrant was called "anti-liberator" and Desecrator was called "anti-redeemer"

Edit: dagnabbit 40 second late

[QuidEst]

They could also rename it to focus on what the subclass is really about.

Spoiler:

Pig-Punter

[Secret Wizard]

I don't care what they do, just as long as:

(1) They realize that "selfish" reactions don't play well with Shield Block as a free feat, and should likely offer more alternatives to getting Shield Block,

(2) Yes please rename Antipaladin to anything else by the love of jove

[Lucerious]

The Redeemer and Liberator are game specific titles that didn’t exist as classes until this edition. The Paladin is iconic and existed well before it appeared in any TTRPG. To have a class be the antithesis to the paladin is interesting as well as playing the antipaladin as something other than that. I would also say that being the exact opposite alignment is mechanically in opposition.

That said, flavor is dictated by the table regardless of a name. I currently play a monk that isn’t flavored as such. He is a warrior who doesn’t like armor because it chafes so learned how to avoid attacks by being evasive. I also had a Dhampir monk that used the monk mechanics to demonstrate vampiric ability from another system. Eg. Flurry of Blows and Ki Rush operated like celerity, while Mountain Stance and high constitution acted as fortitude (resilience now).

Anyway, my only point is that though some of the posters here don’t like the title Antipaladin, there are still others that do and those folks deserve consideration too.

[Squiggit]

OGL or not it's just kind of a bad name. Paladin might be an iconic term, but Antipaladin certainly isn't.

[The Raven Black]

I remember fondly the appearance of the Antipaladin class long ago.

But yes, the current holder of the title has nothing to do with either the class or its mystique.

Might as well call them something else, even though they will still be the polar opposite of the Paladin.

Wrecker would work for me.

[AestheticDialectic]

I don't think calling it "anarch" or "iconoclast" is smart. I think you could argue (when alignment was a thing) CG characters and dieties could be at times iconoclasts and often anarchistic

Idk what to name the thing tho. I would say "defiler" but it is too close to desecrator

***Edit***

Looking it up to reave is to "plunder, pillage, rob, pirate or remove". So actually, Reaver sounds pretty alright

[Charon Onozuka]

Murderhobo

[The Raven Black]

Charon Onozuka wrote:

Murderhobo

Alternate solution : PC

[Unicore]

Gugavor! Gugavor!

[Unicore]

Nidalap!

[graystone]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the name "antipaladin" is pretty awkward, but I don't really have an idea for a better one since I don't really understand what this class is about other than "the last thing I would ever allow a PC to play."

this. The evil champions are about the least played characters I've seen: As such, I find it hard to really care what the names are. For the one or two times I've see them in play since PF2 came out, whatever name they give them is fine for me. Really, anti[thesis] paladin works fine as hey only seem to exist to be a foil for paladins...

[Sanityfaerie]

AestheticDialectic wrote:

I don't think calling it "anarch" or "iconoclast" is smart. I think you could argue (when alignment was a thing) CG characters and dieties could be at times iconoclasts and often anarchistic

Idk what to name the thing tho. I would say "defiler" but it is too close to desecrator

***Edit***

Looking it up to reave is to "plunder, pillage, rob, pirate or remove". So actually, Reaver sounds pretty alright

"Anarch" and "Iconoclast" were being suggested for the CN name, not the CE. That's not so unreasonable. I mean, you can totally have a Paladin and/or Liberator who occasionally takes time out of their busy schedule to redeem someone, right?

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

antipaladin are pretty horrible name

keep it simple so maybe destroyer

[Freehold DM]

Noone has come up with Nidalap?

[Aristophanes]

I like "Reaver".
It makes me think of "Firefly".

[Freehold DM]

Aristophanes wrote:

I like "Reaver".

It makes me think of "Firefly".

grumble

[PossibleCabbage]

graystone wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the name "antipaladin" is pretty awkward, but I don't really have an idea for a better one since I don't really understand what this class is about other than "the last thing I would ever allow a PC to play."

this. The evil champions are about the least played characters I've seen: As such, I find it hard to really care what the names are. For the one or two times I've see them in play since PF2 came out, whatever name they give them is fine for me. Really, anti[thesis] paladin works fine as hey only seem to exist to be a foil for paladins...

It just seems like "I'm going to do the worst things I can think of and make everything worse for everybody but me" is precisely the sort of thing you don't want to have in a game.

The LE and NE Champions at least kind of work from a "I'm trying to take over" and "I'm just deeply selfish" perspectives, but the CE Champion appears to be "I'm going to make everything worse"- the class.

[Leon Aquilla]

AntiPaladin.

[Sanityfaerie]

Freehold DM wrote:

Noone has come up with Nidalap?

Unicore wrote:

Nidalap!

Someone had come up with Nidalap.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

It just seems like "I'm going to do the worst things I can think of and make everything worse for everybody but me" is precisely the sort of thing you don't want to have in a game.

The LE and NE Champions at least kind of work from a "I'm trying to take over" and "I'm just deeply selfish" perspectives, but the CE Champion appears to be "I'm going to make everything worse"- the class.

I'd be hard-pressed to come up with a game where I'd be happy to see a player with a CE Champion. Possibly if it was intended from the outset to be PVP-heavy and/or over-the-top evil? At the same time, I think there's value in having them there, just to make it clear that they do exist in the world.

That "Uncommon" tag is definitely there for a reason.

[The Raven Black]

CE Champion is about doing what you want, rejecting authority and not being squeamish about it.

They are not the worst Evil any more than LG is the best Good.

[Sanityfaerie]

The Raven Black wrote:

CE Champion is about doing what you want, rejecting authority and not being squeamish about it.

They are not the worst Evil any more than LG is the best Good.

CE champion is, however, the hardest to work with.

[PossibleCabbage]

The Raven Black wrote:

CE Champion is about doing what you want, rejecting authority and not being squeamish about it.

They are not the worst Evil any more than LG is the best Good.

This speaks to the basic asymmetry between Good and Evil in the game- specifically that Good is positioned as aspirational in a way that Evil is not. Good characters have to avoid committing Evil acts in order to avoid "not being Good anymore" but Evil characters don't have any similar pitfalls (even if you do commit an act of kindness, you can still spin it as selfish).

So you get Good champions who are about "being a good person who does the most good they can in the best way they can manage" (the three flavors just disagree on "what is best") the Evil champions don't really mirror that.

But isn't "I'm going to do what I want, without a care for how it affects anyone, and won't let anybody stand in my way" more the NE Champion than the CE one?