A bit toooo useful

[Graf]

In my game recently the party wound up running for their lives through the Hornsaw (a dangerous forest in the Scarred Lands). For reasons that are a bit complex they were one man down and everyone but the mage had single digit hitpoints.
We called game.

the party has a number of escape routes availible to them (though the players aren't really thinking clearly yet about all of them).
The wizard had been preparing rope trick recently so that the party could have an excape route availible but he abandoned that idea because of the paladin's mount, a dire boar, couldn't come with the party.

The paladin's player came to me recently with a dragon magazine (299) with paladin spells including a second level spell that makes his mount into a diminutive creature for 1 hr/lvl.

Looking over that other article I saw a lot of things I'd love to have as a player, that makes me a bit uncomforable. its an extension of a trend that puts me in a bit of an awkward position.

game style
Paladins spells are pretty limited. They are usually straight combat enhancement (improve weapons weapons, combat related bonuses, avoid mind control effects, etc), defensive/healing or detection (focused on finding evil).

Though I don't actually give access to either of the books in my game
Relics and Rituals & Magic of Faerun significantly enhanced the complement of spells availible to paladins. Generally spells increased either paladin's abilities or their functionality without altering what was availible to the class.
Techincally though paladin's got access to teleportation & attribute enhancement.

However the dragon mag goes a lot further. its not that spells aren't flavorful, they generally are. The strong orientation towards paladin's mount related stuff is kind of refreshing.
But now paladins can effectively cast fly (Winged Mount 4th leve), can cast hold person at first level with a successful weapon strike (word of binding), negatgate mind effecting spells (moment of clairy 2nd), among other things.
As a DM I see this stuff and think that it would be great for the players to have access to this stuff. The wizard is always getting confused, the mount thing has been a problem and a flying dire boar would be intersting later in the game.
But the 9th level wizard can't make a large creature diminuitive, just learned the spell fly and can't break a mind-enchantment without dispelling everything else on the person.
A spell casting oriented paladin can be a neat game idea and would give the class some more flexibility (often people complain about Paladin's multiclassing restrictions).

overcoming through roleplaying not book buying
A paladin with a special mount has some interesting roleplaying issues. Getting the creature saddled and cared for, dealing with its peculiar desires (the wild boar like to hunt in the wild for food for example).
I'm not sure that every class being able to overcome its detriments through spell casting is a good game blance idea.
Warriors in heavy armor don't have abilities that remove their movement and dex restrictions.
Druids can't cast a spell to allow their wild shape to benift from to wear armor.
Should paladin's be able to cast a spell to make a class benift (the mount) not have any of the associated pentalites (you have a bit animal which can't go everywhere).

Comments?

 

[Piratecat]

I think these spells are great.

Paladins in most campaigns get consistently hosed because there is no way to involve their mount on most adventures. Anything that makes this easier, and allows the paladin to use those part of their class abilities, is generally okay in my book.

 

[Chrisling]

On one hand, paladins do get the shaft because of that stupid horse. Most of the games I play in have a heavily urban element, lots of intrigue and stuff -- which is OK when you're playing a paladin, lotsa fun -- but do you know how much use a magic freaking horse is in all of that? De nada.

BUT, to address the specific issue, you're right. It's unbalancing. Sorcerers get a limited number of spells that they can cast, ever, and wizards have their spellbooks -- but divine spell casters, and bards, tend to get these ever escalating lists of spells that their character can cast IMMEDIATELY. I'm far more reluctant, as a DM, to let a new divine spell into a game because otherwise in terms of both versatility and power a divine spellcaster will outstrip a wizard . . . as well as having a better BAB and more hit points and the ability to wear armor, etc.

If you're uncomfortable with divine spell casters having these enormous, elaborate spell lists to which all divine casters, essentially, have instant access, practice saying the word "no."

 

[Jeremy]

Bards have to pick spells like sorcerers. As far as I know divine casters are the only casters whose spell repetoire spontaneously expands with each rules supplement.

 

[Piratecat]

I allow divine casters to acquire new spells by replacing existing spells on their spell list. Most people are happy to axe a spell they seldom use in favor of a more useful spell, and it keeps balance by maintaining the same number of spells to choose from.

 

[Duncan Haldane]

Just tell the player s/he can use those spells when pigs fly

Seriously,
Paladins, like other divine casters, can access all spells on their lists, and this makes them more versitile than arcane casters generally.

But I don't think that Paladins have too much choice. I think that PC has made a good point - this allows you to get the mounts involved in situations where they otherwise can't.

I'll have to worry about this myself soon - my Scarred Lands campaign has two paladins (out of four characters).

Duncan

 

[Nightfall]

Agog. Two paladins?! Geez we're getting full up on paladins here! Mental note, we need to get more clerics involve in this gig!

Anyway I have that issue. My own thoughts Grraf, I see no reason WHY a paladin SHOULDN'T be able to involve his or her mount more. After all, Corean can take his mount anywhere! Why shouldn't the same be for those mounted paladins?

 

[Duncan Haldane]

Agog. Two paladins?! Geez we're getting full up on paladins here! Mental note, we need to get more clerics involve in this gig!

Yep, two. One follows Corean, and one Madriel.

Interestingly enough, the one who follows Corean has put points into healing, but the one who follows Madriel hasn't

The other two characters in the group are a wizard and a rogue/druid (to take up driud at 2nd level).

So for the first level games they only had 4 points of Lay on Hands a day, with no other in-party healing available - made it interesting.

They're second level now, so with 8 points of Lay On Hands and 1st level Druid spells they are going to have a bit more healing on hand - not to mention the extra hitpoints

Duncan

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

On one hand, paladins do get the shaft because of that stupid horse. Most of the games I play in have a heavily urban element, lots of intrigue and stuff -- which is OK when you're playing a paladin, lotsa fun -- but do you know how much use a magic freaking horse is in all of that? De nada.

Minor nitpick - "De nada" means "you're welcome." You wanted to use "nada."

One of the characters I've had floating around in my head is a paladin who is dumber than his horse. That's right, I want to play an insanely stupid champion of good. Sorta like Dudley Do-right, only not quite so Canadian.

 

[Nightfall]

Yep, two. One follows Corean, and one Madriel.

Interestingly enough, the one who follows Corean has put points into healing, but the one who follows Madriel hasn't

LOL! The First Angel might be wondering about that!

I hope the druid is willing to take a little flak now again. He/she IS a druid of Denev right?