D&D 5E The Paladin excerpt

[Morentis]

Considering how Ragnarok has not happened in D&D's interpretation of Norse mythology, and Thor and Odin are very much alive, I don't see why Tyr would be dead...

Oh, you meant in FR.

Oh, yes. I should've been more specific.

 

[Andor]

So, I absolutely love what I'm seeing here, but I do have one tiny nitpick. (Said nitpick applies even more to the ranger, working under the assumption that the ranger follows a similar pattern.)

I was really hoping that the game had left room for future non-spell-casting rangers and paladins through the use of subclasses. (I loved the 4E martial ranger as an option.) That would've been fairly smooth, simple to accomplish.

But what does that mean? If it means a devout warrior who is not supernaturally empowered, then what you want is a fighter with the acolyte background. If it means your prayers do get answered then that means spells. Alternately you could go Paladin 1/monk X. That way you get the monastic tradition, and some supernatural powers other than spells.

 

[Zhaleskra]

Considering how Ragnarok has not happened in D&D's interpretation of Norse mythology, and Thor and Odin are very much alive, I don't see why Tyr would be dead...

Oh, you meant in FR.

Well, depending on which collection of Norse Myths you're reading, when you get to the last chapter: Ragnarok is either going to happen or has already happened.

 

[Mouseferatu]

But what does that mean? If it means a devout warrior who is not supernaturally empowered, then what you want is a fighter with the acolyte background. If it means your prayers do get answered then that means spells. Alternately you could go Paladin 1/monk X. That way you get the monastic tradition, and some supernatural powers other than spells.

You're not necessarily wrong, although I can at least partly conceive of a version of a paladin whose powers don't take the form of spells.

Truth is, this is a much bigger deal (to me) for the ranger than the paladin. I'm just bringing it up here because this is the only context I have for it, until/unless we get a ranger preview that confirms (as I expect) that the classes share advancement traits.

 

[AverageCitizen]

You're not necessarily wrong, although I can at least partly conceive of a version of a paladin whose powers don't take the form of spells.

Truth is, this is a much bigger deal (to me) for the ranger than the paladin. I'm just bringing it up here because this is the only context I have for it, until/unless we get a ranger preview that confirms (as I expect) that the classes share advancement traits.

I think you are probably right. Cross your fingers for the DMG though.

 

[gyor]

Here is how you build a non magic Paladin, take the Acylote Background, then take either Champion ir Battlemaster fighters focusing on defensive, protective, and healing features. Call yourself a Paladin. Done.

I'll point out that the Blackguard in 4e didn't have to be evil, merely emo (kidding). I actually like the Fluff for the 4e Paladin and how they get thier power through vices, basically a specialized set of universal consciousnesses, a shadowy back door to the Gods.

And even the Cavalier can have a Chaotic interpratation.

Honest: I tell you wants on my mind, a stream of consciousness, Courage: I leap before thing about it, Compassion: have a hug, Duty: I have a Duty to follow my instinctive sense of right and wrong.

 

[I'm A Banana]

So, I absolutely love what I'm seeing here, but I do have one tiny nitpick. (Said nitpick applies even more to the ranger, working under the assumption that the ranger follows a similar pattern.)

I was really hoping that the game had left room for future non-spell-casting rangers and paladins through the use of subclasses. (I loved the 4E martial ranger as an option.) That would've been fairly smooth, simple to accomplish.

But it appears paladins (and rangers?) get spells a level before they choose their subclass. Which means, if there ever is to be a spell-less option, it'll require something clunkier/more encompassing than just a new subclass.

As I said, that's me being picky. I'm a huge fan of what we've seen so far, paladin-wise. I just could've been an even huger one.

I think there's room for it, you might just be looking at DMG territory.

Though honestly my preferred solution to both this and whatever other niche builds the game overlooks would be three little letters that Ryan Dancey introduced to me back in 2000.

 

[gyor]

The Oath of the Ancients has a strong nature theme, but its different from say a Rangee, Nature Cleric, Druid, or Monk of the 4 Elements. In the Alpha, its heavily focused on Beauty, Light, Kindness, and Joy, and not all the powers are nature focused, a few like Turn the Faithless CD, the Feeblemind Spell, Misty Step spell, Ward Aura, and Undying Sentinel give it a Fey feel. And terms like Fey Knight, Green Knight, and Horned Knight give it a feel of a wide domain.

Vibe Wise I say it'd be a good fit for Nature Gods, d'uh, but only neutral and good ones, the Seldarine as a whole, Gnome Gods, Chaotic Good Gods of Passion and Light, like Sune, Sharess, Llirra, Tymora, Lathander, and Gods of Magic like Mystra, and because Ancient is so emphasised perhaps none evil Dragon and Giant Gods. Any Gods with a fey vibe in general.

The Cavalier I'd see as Strongly focused on Justice and Honor, but also Chivalary, Gods like Tyr, Torm, Helm Amauntor, Siamophe, and Sune again (she was the only Chaotic deify to have Paladins when they were lawful good only, I think because of the romance of the knight in shining armour).

The Avenger would be common amoung Gods of both Justice and Vengence, and unlike the other two that includes evil Gods. War Gods would common too. Still all Gods have enemies so they likely to be everywhere. My favourite Avenger was a Void Genasi Avenger of Shar, from the Shadowbane novels.

Still they all have themetic room for alot of ideas.

I'd say the Oath of Devotion is a mash up of the traditional LG Paladins, The Chaladin, and the Cavalier subclass of Paladin in 4e.

I'd say the Oath of Vengence is a mix of the 4e Avenger, the Al Qadium Holy Slayer, the Grey Guard, and the PF Inquistor in theme.

The Oath of the Ancient seems to be a mash up of the 4e Warden Class, the Green Knight Myths, the Paladin of Colloron Latherian Paragon Path of 4e, Glorious Servitor Prestige Class abit without full transformation, and some of the Elderin pagagon paths from 4e, and I see this subclass as being the most likely to multiclass into a primal or arcane class.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

The reason I love this paladin is that it actually ties the class to some meaningful ethos without getting all sappy or "lawful stupid" about it. As a paladin you can be noble or greedy or lazy or angry or stupid or brilliant or devious or insane, but one thing's for sure: you signed up for Team Good Guys, and you're going to kick some evil ass, and everybody knows it.

Don't want to be on Team Good Guys? Play a different class. Lord knows there are so many ways to maki a gish in 5e that you can probably do it playing RAW.

 

[Henry]

So Tyr died in the Realms update a few years ago? I really didn't know that. Huh. Just one more thing for me to dislike about the post-spellplague realms. He was one of my favorite deities in the FR.

As for the paladin, there's not enough for me to get excited about! Darn it, I want my book!