Do you have any class? The class discussion thread (Paladins and Warlocks and Clerics, OH MY!!

[Paul Farquhar]

And it appears that PF, from what I see, also has the base classic lawful stupid paladin.

I can confirm this is true, at least for 1st edition PF.

But the Paladin had over 4 straight decades of an exceptionally strong class identity, while it has 4 years of a 5e identity. So it's hardly surprising that people often import older ideas into it.

It may be understandable, but it doesn't make them any less wrong. It should be enough to say "the paladin isn't like that in 5e". They can then go away, check the rules, and accept that it has changed.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Garthanos]

For me the Oath bound hero is much older archetype. Cú Chulainn, Samson, and Lancelot are examples, They have a number of things in common (berserkergang, oaths in conflict which force hard choices and many other things too.) I am quite fond of them, not so fond of locking them down to only one thing really

 

[Garthanos]

Also? Why the heck do y'all keep roping me into these Paladin conversations?

Because you are truly loved?

 

[MoonSong]

A rose by any other name...

Names matter, there is power in naming things and in being denied names. In some scenarios creating a name makes it feel more real. In others being denied a name causes erasure. People have gone to court over names, people have gone to war over names...

Never a name is just a name.

 

[Garthanos]

Names matter, there is power in naming things and in being denied names. In some scenarios creating a name makes it feel more real. In others being denied a name causes erasure. People have gone to court over names, people have gone to war over names...

Never a name is just a name.

Naming things badly can also create communication issues even if its just via connotation

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Champions were classically a societal role from way back you were the champion of a noble... you fought in their stead or in their name generally speaking (usually means a sort of impressive at one on one fighting)

In my system, The Champion is one Archetype you can pick, that represents working directly for a higher power of some kind. You are a Champion of Odin, or The Red Dragon of Whales, or The Holy See, or whatever.

So, while it fits the Paladin, it also fits the cleric, and other concepts. Even a 5e warlock of some varieties, of you are like a Fey Knight of [patron archfey that you’re super into].

 

[Garthanos]

In my system, The Champion is one Archetype you can pick, that represents working directly for a higher power of some kind. You are a Champion of Odin, or The Red Dragon of Whales, or The Holy See, or whatever.

So, while it fits the Paladin, it also fits the cleric, and other concepts. Even a 5e warlock of some varieties, of you are like a Fey Knight of [patron archfey that you’re super into].

Yeh the historic role does relate AND overlap with the oath bound hero since a champion was bound to fight for their lord but so was historically basically every single knight or thane.

The distinction might be in legend there was considered to be empowerment involved in oaths (the oath itself not whom it was made to) and this might only be blatant for heroic types and only poignant for those who had empowering oaths conflicting with more social oaths. (The Cu Chulainn, Samsons and Lancelots)

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'm researching an idea I'm having brought on by the thread about systems, and found this poll. Which is a little confusing ...

But it seems that the majority (or at least plurality) of people here, at one point, thought that a classes mechanics and its fluff were intertwined. Do people think that is the same now?

I am wondering about some of the canonical examples in D&D-

Fluff that is unsupported by mechanics; e.g., Druids not wearing metal armor (THEY EXPLODE).
Or fluff that may or may not be hooks- such as Patron/Deity requirements for classes, and how that might interact.

 

[Scribe]

But it seems that the majority (or at least plurality) of people here, at one point, thought that a classes mechanics and its fluff were intertwined. Do people think that is the same now?

I do.