Paladin as core class or Prc, simple poll

[Ciaran]

Actually, my ideal choice would be neither; paladins would simply be multiclassed fighter/clerics. But given the two options presented above, I chose the prestige class. I don't think that paladins really need to be a separate class; if you want a holy warrior blessed by a god, just give a fighter some levels of cleric (or vice versa), and if you want a holy warrior with some special powers granted by neither the fighter nor cleric class, create a prestige class to cover it.

And as to the paladin code, shouldn't all clerics have a code that they have to adhere to? And if a cleric violates their deity's code, shouldn't they suffer penalties unless they atone?

 

[Nifft]

I think there should be some benefits and restrictions to having a religion, even if you're not a full Cleric. One who has a religion with a strict code, and who adheres to that code for several levels, ought to become eligable for Paladinhood.

The above statements should not be construed as an offer to craft such a system.

-- Nifft

 

[Hygric]

I voted prestige class, because in my current campaign, they are a relatively new concept and exceedingly rare. Because of this consideration, I made them a PrC.

In a more normal DnD setting, I would leave them as a core class. To much can be setting dependant in the flavour-heavy classes to make a blanket statement about them.

 

[Spatzimaus]

Can you start out evil and become a Paladin? No. If you have been truly evil, then you are forever tainted.

You've equated Paladin and Good. First of all, they're LAWFUL Good. More specialized. But that's not the point.

I like symmetry. For every paragon of Lawful Good, there should be one of Chaotic Evil (and to complete the set, one CG and one LE). Each should have a corresponding code of conduct, and each should have comparable abilities. You shouldn't have one extreme as a core class with the othes as Prestige classes if they're meant to be balanced with each other.

The core rules are heavily biased towards Good characters, and I don't like that. The only reason you should see so many more Lawful Good ones is that most adventurers live in a Good-biased city-based society, but I loved the idea of evil races having Blackguards as their Paladin-equivalent core class.

So, while you might have 4 Paladin subclasses, you wouldn't see some Evil Paladin try to switch to the Good side (although I have rules for that, and it's not easy). There's nothing in the PHB that says someone who was Evil in the past can't become a Paladin once they become LG, and I like it that way; outsiders may be inherently Good or Evil, but all Humans have the capacity for both and are only defined by their actions.

 

[Ace]

I won't answer the Poll because my answer is Both

I have "trained" Core Paladins and "Called" PRC Paladins

 

[MonkeyBoy]

I voted core class; it allows the DM to demonstrate to the player what their going to expect of a paladin BEFORE they are in the position to mess up their character by making one mistake...

"Now, you see, if you were a paladin, that would have cost you your status"

You'd get to RP the whole learning process. Much goodness.

 

[Lela]

I voted prestige class, because in my current campaign, they are a relatively new concept and exceedingly rare. Because of this consideration, I made them a PrC.

In a more normal DnD setting, I would leave them as a core class. To much can be setting dependant in the flavour-heavy classes to make a blanket statement about them.

Dito. Word for word actually.

I won't answer the Poll because my answer is Both

I have "trained" Core Paladins and "Called" PRC Paladins

Now I've got to get more info on this one. Are the classes different? Is one better than the other (more power to the called guys?) or are they just better at different things? Any chance I can get a look at the two of them?

 

[reapersaurus]

Core Class:
Reasons?

I am strongly of the mind that a Paladin does NOT have to be a lackey of the church, or some Order.
Divine Selection doesn't require BAB or feats - it requires Strength of Heart and Conviction, Dedication, and Righteousness.

or something to that effect.

Yes, this opens up the door for weaker paladins (power-wise) being killed by Evil, but that's always been a stupid argument, IMO.

Also, if Paladin was a PrC, I think its powers would have to be increased. It just can't compete, power-wise, with a Ftr/Clr.
And every single Paladin PrC I've seen neglects to change the Lay On Hands, Mount, and Smite abilities (all of them) to be level dependant, not Paladin-level dependent.

Without doing that, the abilities are a joke.

 

[reapersaurus]

Spatzimaus - you can like 'symmetry" all you want, but you are ignoring the fundamental difference between Good and Evil.

Blackguards are not a core clas not because of discrimination, or a Good-bias in D&D.

There aren't a core class because Evil requires someone to be powerful before letting them join their club and share in the power.
Evil is selfish.
Evil is not into granting powers before you have proven yourself worthy.
Evil is more interested in what you bring to the table, than in what is in your heart.

THAT is why there's no Blackguard core class.
A simple analysis of the nature of Good and Evil takes care of that little "symmetry" angle.

And using the Holy Liberator to argue against a Paladin core class is absurd - the Holy Liberator, while a nice idea, is simply an add-on PrC in a splatbook they thought people were looking for to fill a 'whole' for some people.
You might as well say that since there is a Soldier of Light PrC (NG) (Dieties and Demigawds), than the Paladin should be a PrC too, for 'balance.'

 

[N Hammer]

I voted core class, because I believe if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Since playing 3rd ed. I have seen no problem with the Paladin Core Class.