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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8862708" data-attributes="member: 18">Maybe, but it's nonsensical as an approach. There's nothing about the doctrines of Devotion or Ancients (let alone Vengeance!) Paladins that suggests they should do that. It's certainly not how home games play it and we shouldn't pretend they do. That's Redemption Paladin nonsense.Maybe that's true on their official forums, but on the subreddit and Discord they fairly often comment, and tend to acknowledge when things aren't working as intended. It's a little concerning, thus, that they haven't made any comment I can find on Paladin oaths, especially not on that it seems like Ancients and Devotion are being treated as if they're the same thing for the most part.Yes, which is bizarre, frankly, because only Devotion Paladins are even likely to be Lawful, of Devotion, Ancients, Vengeance and Oathbreaker.It didn't have to be.It would have been very easy to give a few simple, straightforward options in dialogue (particularly early in the game) labelled "Oathbreaker" or "Break Paladin Oath" or the like, and mostly left the rest to player judgement.Larian did a total Larian though and tried to make it so it's "organic" even though that was hard to implement, but what they seem to have done is ended up with a weirdly inconsistent system and zero warnings about what an oathbreak is.I will say one thing for Larian, they have substantively improved the game for the most part, but they have a long history of doing that throughout EA, then completely failing to build on on those improvements for release, until an Enhanced Edition a couple of years later. Paladins are my 2nd-favourite class in 5E and I'm kind of concerned they may just be stuffed until said Enhanced Edition unless they're Oathbreakers (who are cool, but it's like, that's a bit off from what I want from a Paladin).If there were say, another two or three patches, I honestly wouldn't even be worried, because the feedback would sort it out. However there are zero.Did they? I'm not denying it, but it's been 20+ years and I've forgotten. What sort of stuff amounts to "massive deviation"?My hazy memories are more that they:A) Failed to implement some stuff which some classes kind of even crappier than they were in 2E.B) Added a 2E version of 3E's Sorcerer, which was pretty awesome. I wouldn't call that a massive deviation myself, because it's nothing wilder than a sourcebook might add.C) Had a bunch of FR-specific spells that some people thought they made up.I'm probably forgetting tons of stuff though.</blockquote>

Verification