The New Romance
Villager
I'd say it's good for the class flavour. Many abilities in B/X are situational or rarely come up, I think that's okay.
Greyhawk is such a strange book to me - the original LBB's read to me like a solid core for a system that has a lot of interlocking parts, and then along comes Greyhawk, and it's a bunch of ideas, some interesting and some no, that just kicks that all over to a degree. Fascinating example I think of rules accreting from play. I do wish the arquebus had made it off the Weapons v. Armor table and onto the variable weapon damage one though.Just for reference here are the powers of the original paladin from OD&D Greyhawk:
Great point! The rules around magic swords + fighters and the dwarven throwing hammer always struck me as a fascinating bit from OD&D that was under appreciated in OSR space and today in the Post-OSR. Nice set of abilities there all around that seem very powerful.Paladins with any form of “Holy Sword” are virtually immune to all magic (see MONSTERS & TREASURE, MAGIC & TREASURE, Swords).
[...]
8th level dispelling evil at will is the surprisingly kick butt capstone one for me. Also any form of holy sword, not just a specific individual type of magic sword is more promising than the 1e version.
This was the first version I ever encountered, since I started with BECMI.Here's the Paladin from the BECMI Rules Cyclopedia for comparison (note, these abilities kick in at 9th level, but if you want it from the start, it shouldn't be difficult to change the level the effects kick in):
Paladins
A Lawful traveling fighter may be known as a paladin if he meets the following requirements. If he does not meet those requirements, he may become a knight (described below).
---
IIRC, Old School Essentials gives you the option of giving Clerics a lay on hands ability. cures 1 +1/cleric level damage. Not quite the same, but someone else was thinking about how to add LOH to B/X rules, too.I don't think these are a bad way to do a humanocentric world - I tend to do similar things with the "elf" class - though I should finish that write up...
Paladins
The main thing is that I've never really thought the "Dwarf" class was especially distinct from fighter beyond some minutia in OD&D. There are some bonus skills, but in newer versions (I think AD&D, but some OSR versions at least) you don't get as good an attack table. In this case (assuming OSE) I think I'd have the Paladin have CHR as a prime req, but not require a roll - you can be a paladin if you want. I'd also give them the limitation that they cannot use missile weapons.
I would consider the following bonuses either at higher levels or even as a pick some at creation:
Lay on Hands - allows the Paladin to heal another up to 5HP per level to a max of 25HP once per session at an equal cost of HP to the Paladin.
Divine Fury - Paladin's weapons strike as if they are "Silver".
Paragon - Paladin's may interpose themselves between an ally and a foe instead of taking an action in the next round - foe must direct all attacks at Paladin.
Rangers
Things are even weirder here. The Halfling has a bundle of abilities that just generally aren't great - or maybe they are depending on the game. The ranger in old D&D is the "Aragorn" class... it's bizarre. The Ranger archetype now is someone with a bow and a pet bear/lion etc.
So is this a beastmaster class, a wilderness tracker class, a missile specialist fighter or - the blood of ancient "special people" who are almost elves?
The Halfling might be a good woodsy fighter, but I don't think it really scratches the itch most people wanting a ranger have?
In my opinion, the race for the class would not work as a Paladin. I think the 1st ed. UA has the class pretty well nailed down in it's accuracy. As for the Ranger class from the 1st ed PH and UA there is no way in becoming a Ranger class for a Halfling. However, that doesn't mean you cannot make rules for one. I see in the Known World, or Mystara, where they do have adventurer's becoming classes outside of the norm for Halflings in the 5 Shires, because in the 0D&D B/X Box sets there was no class distinctions made really.I've mentioned a number of times how I see the Halfling as sort of the "secret Ranger" class of B/X, with a suite of abilities that conform very well to that archetype, and how easy it is to re-skin it to be a Ranger if one wants.
Similarly, I've discussed with folks how the Dwarf is almost a monster hunter/mage hunter/paladin-type class, between the fighting abilities and great saving throws.
I was just tinkering with the idea of actually formalizing these re-skins for my B/X house rules, and maybe giving them one signature special ability each to help round out the archetype. So here are draft initial versions:
-----------------
Paladin: A character with a minimum Strength of 9, Charisma of 17, and Lawful alignment may be designated a Paladin. They have no Prime Requisite and do not gain XP bonuses for one. This class otherwise functions as a Dwarf, but without the small size, weapon restrictions, infravision, improved ability to find "room" traps, or extra languages. They count as a Fighter for magic item usage and spell effects.
Paladins are immune to magical and non-magical fear and diseases.
Ranger: A character with a minimum Strength, Wisdom, Constitution, and Dexterity of 9 may be designated a Ranger. They have no Prime Requisite and do not gain XP bonuses for one. This class otherwise functions as a Halfling, but without the small size, weapon restrictions, or extra language. They count as a Fighter for magic item usage and spell effects.
Rangers may track corporeal creatures outdoors with the same chances as a Thief of equal level Hearing Noise, and indoors on a 1 in 6.
-----------------
What do you think?
I'm tempted to simplify the Ranger minimum ability scores to minimize any need for looking up the requirements. A Halfling normally is minimum Con and Dex of 9, so I thought about just keeping those.
I also initially thought 16 was a high enough requirement for Cha on the Paladin, and that's the break point for +2. But 17 is the classic minimum and easy to remember for any old schoolers.
Of course, OSE Advanced has its own full class write-ups for these, more closely emulating the AD&D versions. But I like how these don't require a detailed two page write-up. A single paragraph each that I can fit into my page of house rules, and I can memorize easily.