Stonefist Academy - 3.5 D&D - OOC - Recruiting Closed

[Axel]

Or, OR, you could actually BE a Paladin of Moradin... and make @Sphyh happy.

Ha! I truly hate playing Paladins in D&D 3.5. They are such a bastardized combination of Fighter and Cleric that they end up being just crap. I hate the LG alignment restriction. Seriously, why would a Paladin of a TN god by LG??

And I hate the code of conduct... The bloody code always seems to end up railroading my Paladins into being Lawful Stupid instead of Lawful Good. That or I end up with moral and ethical dilemnas about unjust but legitimate authorities...

Finally, they're just crappy in 3.5. Back in 2nd edition (ignoring the excitement of actually rolling well enough to GET a Paladin) they were fearsome, and awesome. Lay-on-hands was brilliant. Now it sucks. By the time you get to use half your fun abilities the rest of the party has outpaced you in capacity without even trying.

I have had my share of Paladins in D&D. I am reluctant to play any more. It is more fun to play a religous Fighter (like Olek) or a militaristic Cleric (like Lune).

 

[Herobizkit]

@Axel : I just checked Olek's alignment on your character sheet. Guess what it says? ... here's a hint.

Olek *could* be a Paladin.

 

[Axel]

It's an option I'm keeping open. Olek MAY be a Paladin later...or he may change alignment and become bitter at the world...or he may just enjoy killing stuff and stay a Fighter. I don't know yet and will wait and see what he experiences.

 

[Herobizkit]

I'm thinking the same with my character. Might go all Bard/MoM or might throw in some Warlock goodness. She doesn't have 14 Str anymore, so she'll be far less eager to get into melee.

... Which is odd, considering my 2e Bards had no fear of melee combat... but they could also wear chain mail and use bastard swords. And Fireballs.

 

[Sphyh]

Might want to double-check what you posted, Sphyh. I don't intend to run two characters in this game.

I stand corrected sir.

yea as far as the variant roll thing goes im good with what I have personally. I had decent rolls plus im entirely too lazy to edit my sheet again

 

[Fangor the Fierce]

Take a look at the new character...

 

[ahayford]

So...I went a little overboard with my character background in the rogue's gallery. Honestly, its the first thing remotely creative I have written probably in over 15 years. I had kind of an idea to write the background as the character's memoires or a journal, and it kind of got away from me. At the end I was just trying to finish it off as quickly as possible. I realized after I posted my half complete sheet there that I probably should have put it here first. Sorry I'm new at pbp.

My character is planning to be a wizard/malconvoker. Basicly, a summoner. However, I would be willing to shelve the background I wrote and roll him as a cleric/thaumaturgist or cleric/malconvoker if we need a little extra heals (and also reign in the backgorund sheesh). Let me know what you guys think.

Also, am I cool to reroll stats as described above or should I stick with what I have.

 

[ahayford]

I will commit to finishing off my character tonight so the DM can get started.

 

[Sphyh]

i think either a wizard / malconvoker or a cleric / malconvoker would benefit the party. either way it will add depth both on and off the battlefield. If your asking opinions I say the later of the two but play what you think you will enjoy most

 

[Dragonwriter]

Ha! I truly hate playing Paladins in D&D 3.5. They are such a bastardized combination of Fighter and Cleric that they end up being just crap. I hate the LG alignment restriction. Seriously, why would a Paladin of a TN god by LG??

Uh... because they're a paladin!

And I hate the code of conduct... The bloody code always seems to end up railroading my Paladins into being Lawful Stupid instead of Lawful Good. That or I end up with moral and ethical dilemnas about unjust but legitimate authorities...

That's a DM issue, IMO. I think one of the best pieces of advice I've ever seen for playing a Paladin is "work out what your Code is with the DM". That tends to head off a goodly portion of Code railroading. The authority problem... gotta say that's a long-time DM move. It works for some, but if you're playing a Paladin as a "Crusader Against Evil," tossing in those Catch-22s are just a bad move.
If the campaign is, on the other hand, a much more social/societal game, then those dilemmas fit in perfectly. It's a question of style...

Finally, they're just crappy in 3.5. Back in 2nd edition (ignoring the excitement of actually rolling well enough to GET a Paladin) they were fearsome, and awesome. Lay-on-hands was brilliant. Now it sucks. By the time you get to use half your fun abilities the rest of the party has outpaced you in capacity without even trying.

Pretty much... Divine Grace is a sweet ability, but not being allowed to multiclass bites you in the ass so hard... And Lay On Hands is practically a joke. They did a smart move with the Dragon Shaman's Touch of Vitality and boosting it to Level*2*CHA, which they should have done to also power up the Monk and Paladin.
Then Smites limited by day, with a rare few feats/PrCs giving extra smites... which still only work on Evil creatures, which you are not guaranteed to fight in every game. PF did a fair boost to the Paladin, from what I've heard. In 3.5, your generally better off doing Cleric or Crusader (Tome of Battle, if you and your DM use the book).

My character is planning to be a wizard/malconvoker. Basicly, a summoner. However, I would be willing to shelve the background I wrote and roll him as a cleric/thaumaturgist or cleric/malconvoker if we need a little extra heals (and also reign in the backgorund sheesh). Let me know what you guys think.

Going back, tweaking the sheet and changing the background entirely may be a bit of a hassle... I really don't know if we'll be able to function fine without a second Cleric in a group this large, but I'm pretty sure Fangor can roll with it. Adventures are made to be altered!

So basically, like Sphyh said, play what you want.