Where to me both of those are perfectly acceptable character archetypes that the presence of a standard Paladin would render unplayable.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.
Also less chance of being able to independently think for yourself both as a character and a player, and follow up on those thoughts with immediate action rather than running it by the planning committee (which IME is what mainly-Lawful parties quickly turn into).If having a paladin means that everyone else is within one degree of LG, then that's less chance for significant party friction.
Never looked at V:tM at all. Thanks for the tip, I'll check it out.I have not looked at the them in a long while, but have you seen the Vampire the Masquerade and Vampire Dark Ages Paths?
Agreed.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.
Don't get me wrong, though: this stuff can be fun - but the old principle applies here too: if everything's wacky, nothing is.
Lanefan
"If everyone is super, no one will be", I guess."Awesome stuff" is great for an adventure or two, but when you're running a multi-year campaign, a focus on "awesomeness" can turn the genuinely awesome into the mundane.