The Crimson Binome
Hero
What do you have against paladins?Because they were playing Paladins.
One Paladin is a tragedy. A party of Paladins is a Pestilence.
What do you have against paladins?Because they were playing Paladins.
One Paladin is a tragedy. A party of Paladins is a Pestilence.
The better question is, what DOESN'T [MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION] have against paladins?What do you have against paladins?
Seriously, though. What's the deal? I've always had good experiences with paladins in my games. As a player, they help to carry the tanking and healing burden. As a DM, they help to keep the party on track instead of wandering off into random nonsense. What's not to like?Sometimes, I think people are just creating posts to hurt me, man.
I've often found there's a fine line between "awesome stuff" and "stupid sheet". The problem becomes when being able to do awesome stuff becomes the expectation, and then the party starts doing the stupid and thinks it's awesome stuff, and wondering why they're not allowed to do whatever.
In older-style games such as mine, Pallies are rather restrictive about the company they will keep - no Evils, and no long-term Chaotics. As most of my players (and me) like playing Chaotics - our long-term average alignment is probably CG - they'll feel very limited in their options if someon drops a Paladin into the group.Seriously, though. What's the deal? I've always had good experiences with paladins in my games. As a player, they help to carry the tanking and healing burden. As a DM, they help to keep the party on track instead of wandering off into random nonsense. What's not to like?
Or smart, or anything else.Thinking on this some more...
The players owe it to the GM not to make the game unfun for the GM nor for the other players. Players can, in fact, have a great time in more constrained settings and styles of GMing, as, if not, I'd not have a steady group.
The OP's post comes across as a form of monte-haul entitlement more than actual good GMing. Which is fine for some, but for others will fall flat. I don't think it's as literal as the OP wrote it.
It's not even stupid substitution for awesome - it's unfettered "Say-Yes" mentality rearing it's gruesome and destructive head. "Creativity is enhanced by constraints" is a standard of educational psychology, and it's equally true in games - being creative within a framework is easier than outside it, and taken at face value, the OP is advocating no restraints.
A true, no-restraints game is prone to that misperception of stupid for awesome. Why? Because the GM doesn't say no to stupid.
There is never in any situation anything wrong with a player declaring this or anything else as an attempted action for their PC.Player: "I will myself to fly!"
And equally there is never in any situation anything wrong with something like either of these two responses to a clearly ridiculous or impossible action declaration.Normal GM: "You fail Next"
Old School GM: "Roll 100 on a d20+Wis. On a 1, fall and hurt yourself."
Even that carries risks, as if the roll succeeds you then have to find a way to narrate the wacky stuff into ongoing events and - worse - explain it and codify it so if the same thing comes up again it's resolved in the same manner.If the OP really means "Set a difficulty they can reach for all the wacky stuff," that's very different than simply allowing it.
I guess that makes sense. Personally, I see 'chaos' as 'evil' by another name; someone who wants to play a 'chaotic good' renegade anti-hero is every bit as disruptive as someone wanting to play a 'lawful evil' honorable killer. If having a paladin means that everyone else is within one degree of LG, then that's less chance for significant party friction.As most of my players (and me) like playing Chaotics - our long-term average alignment is probably CG - they'll feel very limited in their options if someon drops a Paladin into the group.
What I'm looking for and haven't found yet are solid Codes of Conduct for CG, LE and CE Paladins that can match what the Code of Chivalry gives for the usual LG types; so I can expand the class into other alignments.