For myself i do not restrict my view of classes to pair up with role playing like this.[MENTION=6802951]Cap'n Kobold[/MENTION] You are right i did exagerate a bit in my example, propably mainly i want to criticize the multiclassing simply built for some game mechanics gimmic coming into effect, e.g. Pally able to Nova + gets a sneak attack or whatever that build was.
A Pally in my Point of view is something Special. In the 2nd ed i remember it was stated in some official book, that a Paladin is a 1 in 100. Means on every PC Paladin there are 99 other PC. That was reinforced with the Minimum required stats for Pallys back then, which were very hard to roll with certain roling methods.
A different Paladin like todays 5E variations still should still be something Special, in so far that he takes an oath on something and is devoted to a higher goal than mundane wealth or whatever other funs.
That means a personality, someone who would not easily stray from a given path. Means purely rp - wise a Paladin should be a class which is among the least used for multiclass.
The easiest hitch in your position idms that yes, the paladin has devoted himself to an oath and something greater than himself and a goal. But what if that goal is best accomplished with multiclass build?
If for a character "my purity" is more important than the goals of his calling, seems like rhe character has put the calling second, not first. First is me, me, me. Second is the other stuff.
Doesn't really sound all that special, just a better PR intro.
More to the point, the key is a gm *can* impose his preferences on his world and say "to be rogue must steal" and "to be wizard must pointy hat and pipe" and "to be cleric must be pompous windbag" and so on and so on if he feels his world needs that characterization forced or is better for it.... But... These lock- downs should be made clear to all involved at outset, not when someone has an idea that conflicts.
If foljs join in with open eyes its always easier when conflicts need resolution. Well, most always.
Me? Classes in my games are bundled packages. A warrior might be any number of classes even multiclassed. The "class" is a measure of "how the character works" not "who the character is". Those elements should fit together with "what they have done" like three pieces of a puzzle and create a beautiful thing... A character.
To require and mandate that any one of those **must** be supreme is to me just a waste of opportunity, a culling of potential and not a restriction that i find helps my games.
But each is different.
Sent from my VS995 using EN World mobile app