Pathfinder 2's Armor & A Preview of the Paladin!

I came here looking for wit and snark from lowkey. Alas.

a paladin as I see it is just a fanatical holy warrior of a god or cause he puts above all else. so, in this case, he could be of any alignment or faith, even evil, you could even have two lawful good one at odds with one another that their god it the only true one.

Parmandur said:

The Paladin Code is a rather bizarre mutant form of Consequentialism

Click to expand...

I'm not sure this is right, because avoiding evil acts is ranked higher than protecting others. (I'm not sure avoiding conflicts counts as consequentialism.)

It's the conditionality of each commitment (by figuring in a strict ranking) that seems odd. That seems an admission that the world is morally imperfect, which - to me - is what seems at odds with a paladin's conviction.

TwoSix said:

They should have been a little more daring and replaced paladins with inquisitors. Same general flavor, not nearly as much baggage.

Click to expand...

You're saying that if you're going to go with a morally pessimistic vision of the thing, you should go all the way?

If you don't like the Paladin's code, you can always a Fighter/Cleric! Assuming that PF2 has multi classing.

Zansy said:

PF2 is repeating the same grudge I had with the paladins in PF1. I'm rather disappointed by the perceived inflexibility that paladins have in both PF1 and PF2. all that PF1 had to offer was "The paladin is LG flavor with different shapes of sprinkles on it." That's a very narrow vision for what paladins are and can be, even for the core game (Especially when you say that the rogue, in contrast, is having her options and horizons broadened!) I hope that if and when they move on they'll be able to contemplate that quite a few people don't want to play the paladin because there's only one interpretation of it. the idea of different types of paladins are best off already in the core game, and not a peripheral, or perhaps obscure, supplementary product.

Click to expand...

Zansy said:

On paper, If there was any room for interpretation for what LG is, and what their code of conduct should be. I might be able to tolerate it. if they gave out the code of conduct and stuck to just the anathemas and the other rules deities have (their name eludes me at the moment. I apologize--) that would have been fine, it's weird to me that paladins have to follow more rules than, say, clerics of the same faith, but lose everything they have going if they break any of them. even if you put aside all those extra, universal rules - even if Clerics could theoretically "convert" in PF1 and 3.5e by changing deities, paladins don't have that privilege except to be the exact opposite of what he was, and most players don't even get that.

once again -
1 flavor of paladin ice cream. with several other shapes of sprinkles. Shapes - not even flavors.

Click to expand...

Zansy said:

The problem is not that people don't want to play paladins just because they're a niche market. paladins aren't as big a niche as you make them. If paladins were such a niche, as opposed to something iconic that a lot of people want to play, then why haven't hey just stuck with a "knight" or a "cavalier" for the core book and put the paladin in a supplement?

The real problem, my friend, that paizo isn't thinking about (or at least, are putting on the backburner) is what else a paladin could be - and it should be their every interest for paizo to make the class more accessible and attract a wider audience for it. WotC, in 5e, shows that's possible, they let the paladin pick his own code of conduct from a selection. Even if the selections are limited, and don't cover EVERY possible demographic, they still allow people to think that paladins aren't bound to the stigmas that haunt them.

there's no shortage of people who want to play a paladin. I want to play a paladin too. I just want the rules to allow me to make the paladin my own.

Click to expand...

Sorry for multiquoting you, but I kinda felt like I needed to. From what I see, Paladins are a quite specific thing, archetypal, with tons of baggage and many necessary tropes. Just like the D&D wizard. I think -and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, sorry if it comes that way- you don't want to play a paladin, you want to play a holy warrior of an specific deity with features that reinforce that, and then you want to call that a paladin. But -from where I'm coming from- that isn't a paladin, that is a holy warrior. A paladin is a virtuous knightly defender of justice or a noble cause. Can a paladin be a holy warrior of a deity? of course, as long as that deity is aligned with good and justice. Does every deity have paladins? I don't think so. Can all deities have dedicated holy warriors? yes. Are all of them paladins? no, they aren't.

The solution is not to remold the paladin into something it isn't, the solution is to have a separate class (Call it Champion or Holy Warrior) to embody that diversity you seek while leaving the paladin be what it is meant to be. Just like with wizards, I don't like them, they are quite specific and reduced into what they do and what kind of characters you can make with them. But I'm happy because I have the sorcerer, the warlock, the druid, the bard and the witch to fill those spaces instead of a watered down class that wouldn't ring true to a wizard fan because it was repurposed for my ends. Why remake something for people who don't like it at the expense of people who like it as it is?

ddaley said:

I guess I am just old school at heart... I like that Paladins are tied to being LG. That seems to mesh well with the intent of the class.

Click to expand...

So do I

dwayne said:

a paladin as I see it is just a fanatical holy warrior of a god or cause he puts above all else. so, in this case, he could be of any alignment or faith, even evil, you could even have two lawful good one at odds with one another that their god it the only true one.

Click to expand...

You are describing holy warriors, not paladins. Paladins are empowered by Good itself, not by any random deity, that for all we know could be killed or depowered tomorrow.

IMO, the base class should be something like "crusader", "champion" or something like that. Then paladin could be the lawful good sub-class of that.

Also, I dislike the "if you do evil you lose all your powers" and would much rather see something like "when you do good, you gain a spell point", or "when defending the innocent, you gain +1d6 radiant damage".

mellored said:

IMO, the base class should be something like "crusader", "champion" or something like that. Then paladin could be the lawful good sub-class of that.

Click to expand...

Cavalier would have precedent from AD&D.

mellored said:

Also, I dislike the "if you do evil you lose all your powers" and would much rather see something like "when you do good, you gain a spell point", or "when defending the innocent, you gain +1d6 radiant damage".

Click to expand...

At least you don’t lose all your class features. Just power points and righteous ally. And at least it’s “just” a ritual to atone (we’ll see how difficult the ritual is to pull off). Generally though, I agree. Carrots work better than sticks.

I'm a little disappointed they decided to stick to the LG paladin. There's just so much more creative space without it. A simple "must stay true to the alignment of your deity" would allow for variety, but also alignment stickiness.

I’m a bit disappointed too. Not at any one poster for their opinion on Paladins, but that so many are being myopic about Paizo’s supposed intentions with the class when they clearly told folks up front in the blog post exactly why the classic Paladin was in the play test and it wouldn’t be the only option in the final game.

I’d hoped for better in folks, oh well

Aldarc said:

I will say this much. 5E is definitely better than Pathfinder when it comes to the issue of Paladin alignment.

Click to expand...

I do prefer the PF2 version of the Paladin over the 5e version but to be fair it is probably because the 5e one is just based off the problems that began with the 4e Paladin.