D&D 5E The Paladin excerpt

[gyor]

So what weapon/fighting style combos are the best and worst for Paladins?

Best Great Weapon Fighting weapons are I'd say Halbert/Glaive with Pole Arms Master Feat, reat Sword/Maul for the 2D6 damage.

For Protection I'd say Lance when mounted, with Longsword/Battleaxe back up and the Shield Master feat to make the best use of your shield and to keep enemies at a distance when using your lance.

Armour for any Fighting Style that no fighting style avialable to Paladins. TWF is not available to Paladins in the Alpha so unless that changes in the PHB, if you wish to TWF you may as well go Armoured.

Duelist is for those who wish to have a free hand to cast somatic spells without War Caster Feat and or use the Duelist feat. I'd go Lance when mounted, Flail, or Morningstar when unmounted, after all nether has verstile which is of no use to you. Any race with racial spells that use somatic compentents maybe pushed in this direction, since you can't aquire war caster till level 4. An Example of this is Tiefling who aquires Hellfire Rebuke at level 3, which in Alpha has a Somatic Compentent in Alpha hopefully this changes in the PHB.

 

[gyor]

I forgot Captain America style, a shield and unarmed attack, protection fighting style and Tavern Brawler.

And I just solved the Hellfire Rebuke problem, the Tiefling makes his/her attacks, then sheaths the weapon, this is probably not a problem because Hellfire Rebuke uses up the reaction that a possible Opportunity Attack would use.

Which is awesome because I can use a Halberd with Polearm Master, and still be able to use Hellfire Rebuke as a Tiefling Paladin.

And in the Unlikely event I choose to use Thematurgy in battle, its only verbal compentent Spell.

A Halberd and Glaive are awesome with that for Paladin's especially after level 11 when you get improved divine smite.

At level 11 you'd do 1d10 slashing + 1d8 radiant + strength Mod first attack, 1d10 slashing + 1d8 radiant + Strength Mod Damage + 1d4 blungeoning damage + 1d8 Radiant damage + Strength Mod Damage per round assuming you hit all three times, plus reroll 1's and 2's and that's without spells.

 

[jadrax]

Cool. I see symbols of Helm, 4e Corellon, and Lathander.

Interestingly, the text mentions Torm (Helm's 4e replacement), not Helm--but the symbol on the shield is surely not Torm's, since Torm's is specifically a right hand with palm forward (so the thumb would be on the viewer's right). It might not he Helm's, though, since there's no eye (though the gold spiral certainly implies it).

One of my players is saying its the symbol of the 'Order of the Gauntlet', an order of paladins devoted to Tyr, Helm, Torm and Hoar.

 

[The Black Ranger]

In my games there will be know groups of Paladins. They will be rare servants who are lawful good only. They will follow the ideal of good and purity and if a god just happens to represent that ideal then the paladin will worship them. If you want to be an avenger then you can be a fighter with a background and role play it out. You don't need magical powers to implement the concept and I think it's stupid of Wizards to do this.

The paladin being lawful good fits what it means to be a paladin. I can't stand these little offshoot versions that have come around do to NPCs that have popped up through the years.

 

[mrv3rtig0]

I disagree. Throughout the years of playing 3.5/Pathfinder I have only seen one Paladin being played. Partly due to the MAD it had and the strict requirement to be LG. The idea of a CG "the greater good comes first" style Paladin sounds like a breath of fresh air to a musty-old-under-used class.

By all means, restrict the class to fit your world. I just don't think that such a strict restriction should be in the books.

 

[The Black Ranger]

I disagree. Throughout the years of playing 3.5/Pathfinder I have only seen one Paladin being played. Partly due to the MAD it had and the strict requirement to be LG. The idea of a CG "the greater good comes first" style Paladin sounds like a breath of fresh air to a musty-old-under-used class.

By all means, restrict the class to fit your world. I just don't think that such a strict restriction should be in the books.

I think the problem has nothing to do with concept but with stats. In your second sentence, you mentioned the class being MAD and nothing to do with the Lawful Good restriction. The Pathfinder Paladin is far from MAD and one of the most powerful classes in the game. I would say the Paladin of 3.5 was played because of the MAD problem and less about the restriction. Changing the restriction does nothing to change the MAD problem.

 

[mrv3rtig0]

You just focused on the one snipit that I added in about MAD. I wasn't trying to bring up the 3.5 MAD as a reason why they shouldn't be restricted to LG, just noting the two reasons why my groups almost never saw a Paladin at the table. I worded the sentence to say that the MAD was "partly the reason" with LG being the other.

Like I said at the end of my last post: restrict what you want at the table to fit your world, but other groups can work with the non-LG Paladin idea and it is good to see that represented in the PHB.

 

[Arryn]

Forgive me because I have been a little out of the loop for a while, but I've seen
numerous allusions to a "Forbidden Text." What is everyone talking about?

 

[Hussar]

So you think that Paladins should be LG and that elves should be Paladins while dwarves shouldn't? Yet elves are by nature more chaotic and dwarves more lawful, and your reasoning is you don't see the "stunty-race" Paladin thing? Wow, I hope that isn't the logic you use with you players. Why can't they play a "stunty-race" Paladin or half-orc Paladin? Because it doesn't fit your view of a Paladin? Why can't a half-orc be a LG Paladin or a dwarf be a LG Paladin?

First off [MENTION=4446]Arryn[/MENTION] - they are talking about a bootleg copy of an old Alpha document of the PHB. It has been much changed from what we've seen in the previews.
[MENTION=59359]pkt77242[/MENTION] - I have to admit, I'm with you on this. Why is it that some DM's have it in their mind that paladins can be one and only one thing? I tried playing a paladin from a sort of aboriginal native tribe and the DM was over me like a dirty shirt - "WHAT?!??! No armour, no sword, you're using a spear??! That's not a paladin." On and on and on. It's the main reason I don't even bother trying to play paladins anymore. Just too many DM's like this.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I tried playing a paladin from a sort of aboriginal native tribe and the DM was over me like a dirty shirt - "WHAT?!??! No armour, no sword, you're using a spear??! That's not a paladin." On and on and on. It's the main reason I don't even bother trying to play paladins anymore. Just too many DM's like this.

If I am ever, by some quirk of fate, running a game that you're in--at a con, maybe--you hereby officially have my permission to play that character. Because not only is that not "not a paladin," it's an awesome paladin.