Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pathfinder 2's Armor & A Preview of the Paladin!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lokius" data-source="post: 7745745" data-attributes="member: 6952382"><p>I like PF 2e paladins, they embody what the paladin concept originated as a holy champion of good and justice. I think sticking to that as the starting point is good. The paladin code for me was also a good move, it makes it much more accessible, previously it was vague. I will also add that the DnD 5e paladin 'oaths' are also articulated. The Paizo paladin is much more representative of the paladin class roots in AD&D. </p><p></p><p>As a design choice I like it. It sets a point of difference to 5e and that is a good thing for us the players. PF 2e shouldn't be a clone or be dictated to by the design choices of Wizards. I like it as a design choice that says 'a paladin is not just a fanatical warrior, a paladin is a holy champion of good and justice.' If you want to play a fanatical warrior (hellknight etc) then you can play a cleric or fighter who RP's that devotion. Paladins as a concept get great benefits and are thus held to higher standards for always having to be good. LG is the hardest alignment to stick to in terms of RP advantage, it means the character always has to work for someone else rather than herself. This is much more of a burden, LE can use the law for personal advantage, CE can steal, murder etc all they want. Also the armour champion and protecting others works a lot better with a good alignment than neutral or evil alignments.</p><p></p><p>Next. Crunch. I would say PF 2e is looking to be a medium crunch system same as PF 1e. 5e is definitely a low crunch system. Players make about 6 choices after creation (excluding spells) that shape there character, the most meaningful one being for when they pick a specialisation (if that isn't determined at creation). But in reality the only other choices after creation are feat or stat increase. I like 5e, its a low crunch accessible game and a great way to get people into roleplaying. It isn't a good system if you like really tailoring the way a character plays. 5e was really set up for its hard to get character builds wrong and that is great. What is good is we have other games like PF that do allow us to do that if we feel like it. PF 2e looks to be cleaning up and having a good base system for all the curly rules and interactions PF1e had. So while it has a medium amount of crunch it had a solid simple framework to underpin it and now these are built right into their classes from the get go. This is a good natural evolution, it just takes it in a different direction for 5e, but again this is a great thing for us players. </p><p></p><p>Tying back to the paladin thing, PF2e seems like it will have a lot of flavour options for paladins in the way you want to build them. The flavours will all be 'good' but the things you aren't allowed to do based on your diety or culture will help differentiate the RP aspects that are enshrined by 'oaths' in 5e. PF2e will enable you much greater flexibility in the way you build your paladin (more support, defense or attack) by the class options as you build rather than locking them to an oath that says what aura you will get. In the long run each PF2e paladin is likely to play a lot more different that each 5e paladin.</p><p></p><p>TLDR: Paladins being special is a good thing, its what differentiates a paladin from a fighter, cleric of fighter/cleric devoted to a deity. </p><p></p><p>PF2e looks to be a medium crunch system built on a simple action economy framework. Simple actions but a lot more character choices and abilities chose from.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lokius, post: 7745745, member: 6952382"] I like PF 2e paladins, they embody what the paladin concept originated as a holy champion of good and justice. I think sticking to that as the starting point is good. The paladin code for me was also a good move, it makes it much more accessible, previously it was vague. I will also add that the DnD 5e paladin 'oaths' are also articulated. The Paizo paladin is much more representative of the paladin class roots in AD&D. As a design choice I like it. It sets a point of difference to 5e and that is a good thing for us the players. PF 2e shouldn't be a clone or be dictated to by the design choices of Wizards. I like it as a design choice that says 'a paladin is not just a fanatical warrior, a paladin is a holy champion of good and justice.' If you want to play a fanatical warrior (hellknight etc) then you can play a cleric or fighter who RP's that devotion. Paladins as a concept get great benefits and are thus held to higher standards for always having to be good. LG is the hardest alignment to stick to in terms of RP advantage, it means the character always has to work for someone else rather than herself. This is much more of a burden, LE can use the law for personal advantage, CE can steal, murder etc all they want. Also the armour champion and protecting others works a lot better with a good alignment than neutral or evil alignments. Next. Crunch. I would say PF 2e is looking to be a medium crunch system same as PF 1e. 5e is definitely a low crunch system. Players make about 6 choices after creation (excluding spells) that shape there character, the most meaningful one being for when they pick a specialisation (if that isn't determined at creation). But in reality the only other choices after creation are feat or stat increase. I like 5e, its a low crunch accessible game and a great way to get people into roleplaying. It isn't a good system if you like really tailoring the way a character plays. 5e was really set up for its hard to get character builds wrong and that is great. What is good is we have other games like PF that do allow us to do that if we feel like it. PF 2e looks to be cleaning up and having a good base system for all the curly rules and interactions PF1e had. So while it has a medium amount of crunch it had a solid simple framework to underpin it and now these are built right into their classes from the get go. This is a good natural evolution, it just takes it in a different direction for 5e, but again this is a great thing for us players. Tying back to the paladin thing, PF2e seems like it will have a lot of flavour options for paladins in the way you want to build them. The flavours will all be 'good' but the things you aren't allowed to do based on your diety or culture will help differentiate the RP aspects that are enshrined by 'oaths' in 5e. PF2e will enable you much greater flexibility in the way you build your paladin (more support, defense or attack) by the class options as you build rather than locking them to an oath that says what aura you will get. In the long run each PF2e paladin is likely to play a lot more different that each 5e paladin. TLDR: Paladins being special is a good thing, its what differentiates a paladin from a fighter, cleric of fighter/cleric devoted to a deity. PF2e looks to be a medium crunch system built on a simple action economy framework. Simple actions but a lot more character choices and abilities chose from. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Pathfinder 2's Armor & A Preview of the Paladin!
Top