Twowolves
Explorer
Not to derail the topic or anything, but IMHO, said barkeeper wouldn't be evil for overcharging or watering down drinks, he's be selfish and greedy, thus Chaotic Neutral.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder Sneak Peeks (Old thread)
- Thread starter dm4hire
- Start date
Not to derail the topic or anything, but IMHO, said barkeeper wouldn't be evil for overcharging or watering down drinks, he's be selfish and greedy, thus Chaotic Neutral.
frankthedm
First Post
I say just plain old neutral.
Hunter In Darkness
First Post
what I am saying is being evil does not mean I kill people.. CE maybe as they see no right or wrong they are psychopaths more or less.
Now say that barkeep stole from the books, made sure he got a little extra, he robs people by over charging giving drunks the wrong change back, maybe lets pickpockets know whos the best mark.
You can find selflish NE people just because they glow under a spell that says they are evil that don't mean they like to kill people or do it at all. The man who Bleeds a family for every penny they own in taxes is evil but that does not mean he goes around stabbing and murding folks
Now say that barkeep stole from the books, made sure he got a little extra, he robs people by over charging giving drunks the wrong change back, maybe lets pickpockets know whos the best mark.
You can find selflish NE people just because they glow under a spell that says they are evil that don't mean they like to kill people or do it at all. The man who Bleeds a family for every penny they own in taxes is evil but that does not mean he goes around stabbing and murding folks
I feel it important to note that I know of at least one book in specific and that several other books have heavily implied and hinted that you can't just smite someone because they glow in your detect evil vision. Doing so is an easy way to loose your paladinship.
Hunter In Darkness
First Post
That is the way I would rule it. Yes they must be evil, but they also must be smite worthy.
1. your fighting with a evil foe and you call upon smite...yes
2. You trying to get something from a evil merchant and he just tells you to bugger off...No
Kinda like haveing a gun just because you can shoot people at will does not mean it's ok to
1. your fighting with a evil foe and you call upon smite...yes
2. You trying to get something from a evil merchant and he just tells you to bugger off...No
Kinda like haveing a gun just because you can shoot people at will does not mean it's ok to
Shroomy
Adventurer
Yeah, I should have probably phrased my point better since I knew that paladins have long been exemplars of the lawful good alignment (its not exclusive to 3e). On the whole, I don't like alignment restrictions and I especially did not like how alignment-based mechanics seemingly became more prominent in the 3e. I probably should not have taken it out on the poor pally.
Roman said:
If there had to be alignment restricted classes, this would be a better approach than what we got in 3.5e in terms of that archetype, a whole host of alternate and prestige classes that were essentially paladins with a different alignment.
DaveMage said:
Yeah, this is more in line with what I would want if I ever played 3.5e again. I'd rather have the power key off the evil subtype, the undead type, a cleric's evil aura, etc. than just the alignment entry.
My copies of the PF RPG are already ordered and I am a big fan of Paizo to say the least. However, this Paladin preview is the first one I don't really like. Here is what I see that frustrates me.
1) I dislike the LG alignment restriction, even though it's been around
forever. This is one area I see that 4e got right in not restricting it to this. I see the Paladin as a Warrior for his church regardless if it is good or not. Just my opinion and easily modified but why restrict a it to LG when they could have given options based upon the alignment of the deity they fight for? Just my $0.02 and I know it can be house ruled anyhow so nothing big I guess.
2) I hate 'detect evil' (It is a DM fun sponge IMO) This ability could have gone by the way side and something else could have been added based upon the alignment of the deity he represents.
3) I can't believe the 13th level paladin sample they show can heal 6d6
hp TEN TIMES PER DAY as a SWIFT ACTION (if used on himself). This is just way to much healing and we have an invincible fighter in combat as he can constantly be doing it round after round and still swinging at his opponent. Maybe I'm wrong here and I will have to see with the final book but just way to much healing IMO and house rules will come in to play here for sure if that is the case. I just see this as a big problem.
4) Standard magical item smorgasbord (which PF should have gotten rid
of, said they were gonna get rid of, and didn't and this has been the case with about all the character class previews) This may be a personal preference but somehow I thought it would get toned down. I guess that falls to the DM though.
I know there will be things we all like and things we don't like but these are the problems I see with the most recent preview. However, I can't wait until August to get my hands on it to make a better determination as it is and it will certainly be my game of choice going forward.
1) I dislike the LG alignment restriction, even though it's been around
forever. This is one area I see that 4e got right in not restricting it to this. I see the Paladin as a Warrior for his church regardless if it is good or not. Just my opinion and easily modified but why restrict a it to LG when they could have given options based upon the alignment of the deity they fight for? Just my $0.02 and I know it can be house ruled anyhow so nothing big I guess.
2) I hate 'detect evil' (It is a DM fun sponge IMO) This ability could have gone by the way side and something else could have been added based upon the alignment of the deity he represents.
3) I can't believe the 13th level paladin sample they show can heal 6d6
hp TEN TIMES PER DAY as a SWIFT ACTION (if used on himself). This is just way to much healing and we have an invincible fighter in combat as he can constantly be doing it round after round and still swinging at his opponent. Maybe I'm wrong here and I will have to see with the final book but just way to much healing IMO and house rules will come in to play here for sure if that is the case. I just see this as a big problem.
4) Standard magical item smorgasbord (which PF should have gotten rid
of, said they were gonna get rid of, and didn't and this has been the case with about all the character class previews) This may be a personal preference but somehow I thought it would get toned down. I guess that falls to the DM though.
I know there will be things we all like and things we don't like but these are the problems I see with the most recent preview. However, I can't wait until August to get my hands on it to make a better determination as it is and it will certainly be my game of choice going forward.
Hunter In Darkness
First Post
This needs left alone if you want a non LG paladin house rule it. It's something many people consider as unchangeable as vancain magic
See above
Humm not sure on this one it seems alot, but as you said we have not seen the whole thing. How much runs off that ablity channel uses 2 charges does mercy cost?
And he has a feat that gives him more so that why she has 12
This could also be an issue but we have been told they will have stuff in the book talking about setting magic item limits and low magic settings. So maybe they have a sliding scale
we can only hope
frankthedm
First Post
What's with so many folks being opposed to paladins making use of their gods given ability to Smite Evil?
