Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DDNFan" data-source="post: 6316199" data-attributes="member: 6776483">So do I.Paladins and clerics are two sides of the same coin, one is merely more melee focused and the other more magic focused. They can both, given the same background, have the same exact role. They should both be held to the same standards of their gods. Makes no sense otherwise. If the god can't watch and answer every prayer of every earthly representative, then it's impossible to even consider how any spells work or are granted, given they are divine in source and when gods die, all their followers cease having any magical abilities of their own.It makes no sense that a god could chose to allow a champion to join his cause and grant him or her abilities to carry out that cause, but not take it away. It also makes no sense that a cleric would receive less scrutiny than a paladin. For what reason? Clerics are often far more powerful overall, so if anything the scrutiny should be more severe.The main problem of paladins is the lawful good part. If people can't roleplay lawful good because they find themselves losing their powers again and again (probably by acting like murder hobos one too many times for the patience of the DM, who was probably already bending over backwards to not roleplay a wrathful god faithfully), they should pick a different Oath or alignment to follow, one which actually suits how they play. Probably chaotic good or chaotic neutral, which would be an Agent of Chaos. Kind of like the Joker or the assassin in Fargo. Many of the paladins I've seen over the years are actually probably closer in temperament to the Fargo idiot twins (the sons of the bully guy). Lawful stupid would be an improvement, I'm talking chaotic stupid, pretending or trying to ascend towards lawful stupid.</blockquote>

Verification