D&D General One thing I hate about the Sorcerer

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Ditching these were majorly instrumental in making them the best.
Alignment isn't really gone. It's hidden.The oaths don't mesh with most alignments, so they limit the paladin that takes them to a few or even less, depending on the oath. And I had paladins of a cause as well. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yaarel

He Mage
The term "cavalier" can have an awesome meaning.

To be "cavalier" about something, means someone who is devoted to something. But they are so confident in that something, that they can be playful and irreverent about it. And they get away with this irreverence because their shocking playfulness so clearly heightens their admiration, respect, and devotion to that something.
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Just because they still waste page space describing them doesn't mean it's not gone from the class.
I'm talking about in the oaths. You MIGHT be able to get away with NG and not LG for the oath of devotion, but CG, any of the neutral and any of the evil alignments simply won't fit the oath's tenets. Even if you do away with alignment, the roleplay will still be "LG" in the actions the PC takes following those tenets. The other oaths are similarly limited. If you follow the tenets, you will be behaving withing a few alignments, not any of them.
 

Because "devotion" doesn't give you superpowers by itself.
To be fair, in a magical world it can if we want to.

It is too vague for me, so I linked paladins back to gods, but I can see that it doesn't necessarily need to work this way.

And I'm in full agreement with everyone who though unlinking paladins from alignment was a great move. To me paladins are are warriors dedicated to the deities, and uphold whatever values these deities (or at least their religions) profess.
 

Remathilis

Legend
But how does an oath give them power at all? Where does the power come from?
They are still knights and squires, and they are preparing to take your oath, but they have not yet fully devoted themselves to a single path. Like they have taken all the undergrad classes and are now going to declare their major. Or a Padawan who is preparing for the trials, or a wizard of high sorcery who hasn't yet picked his robes.
 


Remathilis

Legend
So that I'm clear, the following does not provide you with magical power:

  • Anger
  • Devotion to a cause
  • Fanatical Faith
  • Performative arts
  • Reading

And the following things do:
  • Being a badass
  • A powerful otherworldly being giving you that power

Did I miss anything or have we now cleared up who is giving these abilities and who isn't?
 

So Bard should have never been able to kill Smaug with an arrow? It may very well have been that the "Black Arrow" was not magical, the chant he used before shooting was magical in some way or that the "missing plate" was a retro explanation by the DM for why it hurt him at all.
If the chant that Bard used before shooting the Black Arrow was magical, does that make Bard magical as well? I would argue that it doesn’t, and therefore Bard is a reasonable representative of a mid-to-high level fighter.

The main point is that it is Bard’s player’s choice as to how magical he is, and whether actions in game are magical. Maybe one Rogue’s Evasion ability is tied to his being a tiefling, tabaxi or a halfling, or having some sort of latent magical ability, or just being that good.

But tagging Evasion with a Ex tag or a Su tag is a solution in search of a problem.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
They are still knights and squires, and they are preparing to take your oath, but they have not yet fully devoted themselves to a single path. Like they have taken all the undergrad classes and are now going to declare their major. Or a Padawan who is preparing for the trials, or a wizard of high sorcery who hasn't yet picked his robes.
What does any of that have to go with getting superpowers?
 

Remove ads

Top