Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="devoblue" data-source="post: 1024497" data-attributes="member: 11906">SHARK, There are two assumptions in your post that I think are wrong1.)  That a paladin is a cavalier.That a paladin is not a cavalier is a concept that was new with 3e and I think it is a good concept too.   Back in 1e the paladin was what you would be if you wanted to be a knight before unearthed arcarna came out.  The paradigm has changed and it is for the better because it allows a huge variety of paladins that are not cavaliers.  A cavalier is a customised fighter.  The flexibility with multi-classing that 3e has also allows you to take level of fighter, both before and after you gain levels in paladin.  The only change I would consider making to this system is to allow a paladin to freely multi-class as either a fighter or a cleric.2.)  That to be a cavalier you require all of your listed feats.Whilst the list of feats may be desirable, a perfectly functional cavalier can be built with only a few of them.  Focus on only one weapon; you are still proficient with the rest.  Take the mounted combat feats if you want to be a specialist at mounted combat, or take great cleave and improved shield bash if you prefer to be a specialist at hand-to-hand combat.If you really want to you could take one level of paladin, then build your character with levels of fighter.  You can still be lawful-good, crusade against evil and call yourself a paladin, but you would have all of the cavalier parts too, and all you are really giving up is undead turning and spell casting that don’t fit with the character concept.Or, take only levels in fighter, be lawful evil, act noble and be honourable, crusade for what you think is right and call yourself a paladin.  Who’s going to argue?</blockquote>

Verification