Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gargoyle" data-source="post: 5892550" data-attributes="member: 529">My explanation was in my post above...I felt like it was more fun that way, so that's how I'd like to see LG paladins in the core rules.&nbsp; Sure I could house rule it and say &quot;LG paladins only&quot;, but you could do the same and say &quot;Your paladin can be of any alignment&quot;.&nbsp; As a DM, I want as few house rules as possible, so I'd prefer it to be my way.&nbsp; Another reason I think LG only is the way to go in a unifying edition of D&amp;D is that was the central design point of the original paladin for many editions of D&amp;D.&nbsp; Detect Evil.&nbsp; Smite Evil.&nbsp; Code of Conduct. These were the things that made paladins unique and fun and challenging to play.&nbsp; It was all alignment based.&nbsp; They really weren't that much different otherwise from fighters until 4E.&nbsp; Really it's not about ruining someone else's fun just because they wanted to play a chaotic neutral paladin.&nbsp; It's just that's not an option I think I'd want in my game, or that belongs in 5e except as an optional or house rule.Personally, if I had it my way, alignment would go away completely, and there would be a system of allegiances.&nbsp; But that's not going to happen, so my thinking is that if you're going to keep that sacred cow, keep this one too.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gargoyle, post: 5892550, member: 529"] My explanation was in my post above...I felt like it was more fun that way, so that's how I'd like to see LG paladins in the core rules. Sure I could house rule it and say "LG paladins only", but you could do the same and say "Your paladin can be of any alignment". As a DM, I want as few house rules as possible, so I'd prefer it to be my way. Another reason I think LG only is the way to go in a unifying edition of D&D is that was the central design point of the original paladin for many editions of D&D. Detect Evil. Smite Evil. Code of Conduct. These were the things that made paladins unique and fun and challenging to play. It was all alignment based. They really weren't that much different otherwise from fighters until 4E. Really it's not about ruining someone else's fun just because they wanted to play a chaotic neutral paladin. It's just that's not an option I think I'd want in my game, or that belongs in 5e except as an optional or house rule. Personally, if I had it my way, alignment would go away completely, and there would be a system of allegiances. But that's not going to happen, so my thinking is that if you're going to keep that sacred cow, keep this one too. [/QUOTE]

Verification