Search results

But you and I are modern and we're talking chivalry. That we can talk about it, and non-D&D gamers too, shows the word still gets usage and so there must be a shared definition. The way I see it, if chivalry is about anything it is about ideals. Ideals of honour, ideals of virtue, courtly love...

Sure, many of King Arthur tales are pretty flippant in regards to lives. You're talking about fairly faithful adaptations of tales told in a time that had, to put it bluntly, less morally demanding or sophisticated ideals. Ironic as it was closer to the dawn of Christianity - the cultural...

Sorry but I'm not following this attack on LG being the best alignment to reflect the chivalric ideal - ideal being the key word here. Lawful as from the social-individual axis, and Good as from the altruistic-predatory axis, although the exact terminology can be debated. Move away from lawful...

The problems you'll have here is that D&D is laden with story plus all the casual gamers who expect at least enough world-building built in so they can get on with gaming. Still, with a stripped down basic game with attachable modules, I think it must be possible to satisfy both wants without...

I totally agree, and there needs to be a way to reconcile both these needs. The question then becomes where's our starting point? Do we present the whole lot and people remove what they want, or just the basics and people add what they want? Regarding the paladin, the basics laid out in the...

Can we really implement an alignment restriction when it's removed? For those who consider it a core part of the class, once it's removed the class has essentially moved on to a new definition. Trying then to rebottle this new definition into what was is probably going to be an unsatisfactory...

I agree with change when it's improving something. Story wise the open-aligned paladin has a lot of convincing to do to cast it as an improvement. That said I for one will give it a chance. You've alluded to the conflict in loyalty of causes - monarch, god, spouse. These have been fertile...

You know I don't think the paladin class is responsible here. First up, after rolling your stats and getting at least one 17+, you have to go and put that score on what is basically a combat dump stat. If you stuck to plain fighter you'd have that lovely score in one of your physical three. Oh...

I realy do hope you're right, because my (albeit limited) experience with 4E leads me to think otherwise. We could well see Wizards calibrating the game at too high a level of optimization where 'smite evil' and other class equivalents are the assumed standard of power. That would remove their...

Ok, now for my thoughts in order: 1. The paladin is a champion of a divine calling. Good that they're treating this as the most salient aspect of the class. I'd prefer LG only but as far as compromises go I can handle the 'must be lawful' and alternate powers for non-good paladins. EDIT...

Well, it's sensible to take online polls with a pinch of salt, but then again there is something to it - we can't turn around and say it's telling us nothing. Regardless, the fact Wizards is releasing the design concept and people are replying is evidence enough for me about the issue of class...

For Q2, whenever I've seen polls for class popularity the Paladin gets about 6-7% Ok that's not scientific, but regardless that's not much less than the core 4, and usually just shaded by the ranger. In short, yes, the paladin is pretty popular.

You know, if I was play 3E-Pathfinder again, I'd take the approach of a gentle(wo)mens agreement to play nice. There is a lot of flavour I wouldn't want to whack from the spells with the nerf bat. I'd also put in spell casting options for the non-spellcasters, fonts, teleport sites, flying...

Add divine favour, righteous might, bears endurance, shield of faith, the power attack/cleave feats and martial weapon proficiency - greatsword. That beats your fighter with a ton of feats hands down. In effect each of those spells are worth 1-3 feats in themselves. And before you answer with...

Last time I played 3E we finally reached level 13. At level up my paladin received 7 hps and +1 bab. The cleric received similar hps plus 3 7th level spells plus a broadening of his lower spell slots. And no, I never over-shadowed his PC at lower level. If you call that balanced let me sell you...

Why should OA/AoO be where the fighter get something special?? This wasn't the case in all editions prior to 4E, the odd optional supplement excepted. I don't think this is a good enough reason to take a universal mechanic that supports melee engagement and 'turn it off' all other melee...

What I think could be cool is the Ranger becoming the master warrior of wilderness terrain. They'd be able to out-scout the enemy, pick the advantageous ground and spring the ambush. Surprise attacks and hit and run. They would also be masters with all the varieties of improvised natural snares...

Oh for sure there is a limit to how much you should listen. Simply open listening is no good, it's got to be solicited feedback over specific points. Most of my gaming friends don't even lurk on any D&D web-sites, but they play and they spend - more than me. So in my gaming group I'm the tip of...

Yep, and there was no request for feedback when they were planning the open-aligned 4E Paladin. If they had done so sure there would have been plenty of roar, but dialing out the real concern from the noise could have led to a better class than what was initially released. Thankfully Wizards is...

I don't know why the healing skill is so neglected edition after edition when it comes to natural healing. What's wrong with marrying self or assisted healing mechanics with things like splints, bandages, stitches, slings, surgery, ointments, medicines, bed rest etc... The bloodied and...