How Did I Become a Grognard?

[Dannyalcatraz]

My d4 brings all the grogs to the yard,
And they're like,
Its better than yours,
Damn right its better than yours,
I can teach you,
But I have to charge

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Zhaleskra]

Paladins are not the problem. Bad paladin players and paladin hating GMs are the problem.

While this is a dominantly D&D/Pathfinder board, there are systems where a fighter (or any other class for that matter) can take a "lay on hands" ability.

Given that in one of those games that I own, a Cleric selects two of their favored categories and is considered a Paladin of one of those selected: I would say that despite the sources, Clerics and Paladins are thematically similar.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Zhaleskra]

You must have posted before I edited.

I agree to an extent. The whole point of including "Falling" in the first place was to prevent a foreseen problem of a paladin's player ruining everyone else's fun, e.g., "I don't have to obey the local laws, I answer to a higher power." When you feel the need to include a mechanical solution to a social problem, maybe you should rethink how to write the class.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Zhaleskra]

Yes, the horror days of the dumb fighter, because it was the only class to which you qualified. That said, things did get fleshed out over time. From Elf as warrior mage "Class" and Dwarf as class to multi and dual classing, then actual warrior mage classes.

It reminds me of the catch 22 of job descriptions: the job is listed as entry level, yet it wants you to have X years of experience. I know to the classified writer it makes sense, but to your average person searching for a job it just leads to "how is this entry level?" or "how do I get experience before I get the job?"

Also, Percentile Strength, only X class gets bonus HP for high Con.

 

[GreyLord]

Yes, the horror days of the dumb fighter, because it was the only class to which you qualified. That said, things did get fleshed out over time. From Elf as warrior mage "Class" and Dwarf as class to multi and dual classing, then actual warrior mage classes.

It reminds me of the catch 22 of job descriptions: the job is listed as entry level, yet it wants you to have X years of experience. I know to the classified writer it makes sense, but to your average person searching for a job it just leads to "how is this entry level?" or "how do I get experience before I get the job?"

Also, Percentile Strength, only X class gets bonus HP for high Con.

You know, the Elf as a Class and Dwarf as a Class was actually a BX and BECMI thing. They came out AFTER OD&D and even AD&D.

Originally, Elves could be a Fighting Man and Magic-User. However, they were only one class at a time, but could switch classes each adventure and advance in each. A Dwarf would be a Fighting Man.

After Greyhawk came out they had it so that Elves could also be Thieves (as well as Halflings and I believe Dwarves). The Elf could act as a Fighter/Magic-User/Thief as well but had to split XP equally between the classes (so a change in the supplements).

AD&D also let races be separate from classes.

Holmes reverted to the idea that Elves could only be Fighters and Magic-Users and could switch between them or had to choose. I had that original set of rules.

However, that changed quickly (probably because it had changed in the supplements previously) and later Holmes printings simply had it that the Elf had to be a Fighter and Magic-User at the same time that divided their experience equally.

I think this is how it translated that Elves came to be their own class (along with Dwarves and Halflings).

Of interest, this changed in BECMI D&D. Originally in BX and BECM an Elf could only get up to 10th level, a Halfling up to 8th level, and a Dwarf to 12th level. They could continue to advance in combat ability.

In GAZ 5 it came out that Elves could continue to advance, but would have to advance as a Fighter and Magic-User separately, though they could get spellcasting abilities up to level 20. Halflings could advance in an alternate class that would take them up to level 35 (GAZ 8). Unfortunately, Dwarves still got stuck to level 12 (13 max) though they could still advance in combat ability. Dwarfs did gain the option to become Dwarf Clerics instead of Dwarfs default class or what was basically the Dwarf Fighter (GAZ 6).

So, it was actually the other way around in that the Race as Class basically came after/evolved from the original races and classes of OD&D.

 

[pemerton]

[MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION]

Poul Anderson didn't invent the notion of a holy warrior who can heal with a touch and whom no evil being can approach. He drew on well-known literary/legendary sources and wrote them into his novel.

Hammer studios didn't invent the notion of calling on holy power to repel evil. They likewise drew on well-known tropes.

Nor did Gygax invent the notion of a holy leader who can throw a staff to the ground and have it transform into a serpent.

(And an imaginary story for good measure: person X might design the ranger inspired by Aragorn/Strider, while person Y designs the woods hero inspired by Robin Hood and Jack the Giant Killer. It may well be that X and Y's classes, while perhaps mechnically different in certain respects, express the same archetype.)

Clerics are serious combatants who use heavy arms and armour. They turn the undead. They call upon magic which heals with a touch, which buffs allies, which detects and wards off evil, and which emulates the odd Biblical miracle. Paladins are serious combatants who use heavy arms and armour. They turn the undead. They call upon magic which heals with a touch and which detects and wards off evil.

What differentiates them in the D&D context is (1) mechanical minutiae like memorising and casting a Cure Light Wounds spell vs using a class ability to Lay on Hands, and (2) the slightly different way they interact with the alignment rules, although in AD&D if one follows Gygax's rules for clerics changing alignment and deity then even that difference between them narrows somewhat.

In my own experience, what has driven this point home has been the attempt to build PCs in non-D&D systems, and in 4e D&D, that emulate or evoke AD&D characters I have played. 4e, DW and Rolemaster all have clerics and paladins as class options, but which will best realise a particular AD&D character depends on mood and detail - there is no archetypal difference that is captured by the class labels. (In my 4e game, there are two characters whom I routinely describe as paladins when trying to convey the idea that they are holy warriors, but one of them is, in mechanical terms, a fighter/cleric). In Burning Wheel, it is possible to build a military character who is also Faithful and thus able to perform miracles, but nothing distinguishes a cleric from a paladin in this respect.

Yet another way in: someone tells you about their PC in non-mecanical terms: I wear heavy armour and fitht with a mace, detecting and smiting evil calling upon the powers of the divinity to aid me. Is that character a cleric or a paladin? Or a cleric/fighter? The only hint one way rather than the other is the use of a mace, which suggests cleric because of purely mechancial features of the D&D classes.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*