D&D 5E Should the Paladin be changed into a more generic half-caster magic knight?

[Micah Sweet]

I'd even argue that the existence of the fighter class is actively damaging to DnD. It prevents any other martial concepts from existing, and is so broad that I endlessly see people saying that barbarian, monk, ranger, and paladin should just be fighter subclasses.

Perhaps, but there's no getting rid of it. Ever. The people you're talking about are screaming into the wind, or, like me, just amusing themselves with the conversation.

 

[Shardstone]

Actually, martial esque slightly anime Exorcist sounds perfect

 

[CreamCloud0]

Yeah, but 11 out of the 13 classes have lore and theme. That's the way classes get made. The generic classes of Fighter and Rogue are there basically for legacy, not because the game wants more of that type of class.

Every single class except fighter has narrative guidelines (though wizard has very little). Building a narrative into the class is an expectation of DnD.

i'm not saying make them fighter/rogue level generic, but the quote i replied to was speculating about a narrative (amongst others) of making them 'the chosen of the gods of magic to hunt down those who abuse it's power', that is more than a little specific and would likely shape the entire class as a result.

you don't need the entire history of a mystic order of people attuning themselves to the primal forces and honing their emotions in order to justify why barbarians exist, a blessing, being born under the right star, or simply being exposed to too much magic, there are multiple ways sorcerers can exist for a reason so that not every single one has to be the ancestor of a dragon, paladins were released from the mold of being lawful good religious boyscout and are better for it.

edit: all the narrative the baseclass probably needs is 'is specially trained to combine martial abilities with magical powers to deal with specialised threats'

 

[Micah Sweet]

i'm not saying make them fighter/rogue level generic, but the quote i replied to was speculating about a narrative of making them 'the chosen of the gods of magic to hunt down those who abuse it's power', that is more than a little specific and would likely shape the entire class as a result.

you don't need the entire history of a mystic order of people attuning themselves to the primal forces and honing their emotions in order to justify why barbarians exist, a blessing, being born under the right star, or simply being exposed to too much magic, there are multiple ways sorcerers can exist for a reason so that not every single one has to be the ancestor of a dragon, paladins were released from the mold of being lawful good religious boyscout and are better for it.

I'm really not convinced they are, necessarily. A more generic "paladin" should IMO be a different class.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

i'm not saying make them fighter/rogue level generic, but the quote i replied to was speculating about a narrative of making them 'the chosen of the gods of magic to hunt down those who abuse it's power', that is more than a little specific and would likely shape the entire class as a result.

you don't need the entire history of a mystic order of people attuning themselves to the primal forces and honing their emotions in order to justify why barbarians exist, a blessing, being born under the right star, or simply being exposed to too much magic, there are multiple ways sorcerers can exist for a reason so that not every single one has to be the ancestor of a dragon, paladins were released from the mold of being lawful good religious boyscout and are better for it.

I feel that broad strokes is the best approach for it, but with some common points and specifics.

"Person who uses arcane magic + martial ability to either fight casters and magical entities, and/or guard forbidden lore and artifacts."

That can be span in practically any way for backstory, and is easily as broad as something like the ranger when it comes to theme.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I feel that broad strokes is the best approach for it, but with some common points and specifics.

"Person who uses arcane magic + martial ability to either fight casters and magical entities, and/or guard forbidden lore and artifacts."

That can be span in practically any way for backstory, and is easily as broad as something like the ranger when it comes to theme.

Especially as magic is at least as prevalent (if not more so) than nature in most D&D-esque fantasy worlds. Certainly that WotC's default if that matters.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I'm really not convinced they are, necessarily. A more generic "paladin" should IMO be a different class.

the 5e paladin 'is' the more generic paladin, emphasising the tenets of the specific oaths being important rather than the class being tied to a specific moral cornerstone

 

[Micah Sweet]

the 5e paladin 'is' the more generic paladin, emphasising the tenets of the specific oaths being important rather than the class being tied to a specific moral cornerstone

I liked the 3e paladin better. Said so upthread.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I liked the 3e paladin better. Said so upthread.

but i'm not discussing individual taste of which version is better, can you not agree with the point that the 5e paladin is a more approachable and versatile concept for people to play?

 

[Hattly82]

With 5E, the Paladin's fluff changed to be less reliant on a deity and more reliant on an oath. Conviction in said oath unlocks all kinds of supernatural powers for the Paladin; essentially, their Charisma -- their Force of Will -- enables them to create miracles, smite enemies of their oath, heal the sick, and so on.

But what if the Paladin embraced this generic oath idea more? An oath doesn't have to be divine magic, and the Paladins IRL aren't that far apart from the Knights of the Round. In this way, perhaps "Lay on Hands" could be turned into one of a few potential options the Paladin picks, and their choice of subclass has a greater impact on their spell list. A Paladin in service of a lich would essentially be a Death Knight, and have more necromancy spells; a Paladin in service to an Archmage is your more generic spellblade. The best part is that by giving Smite a customizable damage type, you could easily flex the Paladin's flavor any number of ways. And of course you can still have a Paladin who serves gods or whatever.

Anyway, this is just a little idea, not one I'm sure I'll pursue as I enjoy my own Pendragon class, but the Paladin-as-Magic Knight could potentially better address the many varied tastes D&D players are meant to have.

Your idea is really interesting! I’ve found the Paladin’s current setup a bit limiting. Customizing Lay on Hands and Smite sounds like a great way to mix things up. For example, a Paladin with necromancy spells could be a cool twist. I’ve tried something similar with homebrew rules before, and it added a lot of fun. Giving players more options to match their character’s story could make games more exciting and diverse.