Paladin Behavior?

[diaglo]

In previous editions of the game, like clerics, paladins gained divine powers because they were granted by a god, and the god also had the ability to withdraw those powers. The archetypical paladin is also part of an Order, like the Knights of the Round Table or the Knights of Solamnia.

not allows the case.

OD&D paladins were fighting men. they qualified by having a 17 or 18 in charisma.

and a lawful alignment.

the powers weren't from a specific deity although they could be if the player so chose.

if they ever performed an act that was Unlawful. they lost their special powers. FOREVER. no atonement. no way to redeem. they didn't stop the player from trying however.

they were heroes. but so too was every other adventurer. just like hong is saying.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed by author

 

[hong]

You mean, apart from hit dice, weapon selection, special abilities (such as paladin's mount), and spell selection, right?

We are talking about the underlying archetype and class identity, not super powers. Try to keep up.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed

 

[hong]

Edit: A little while ago, you pointed out that the distinction LP was making was couched in role-playing terms, not superpowers. I note that your definition of druid is couched in superpowers, not role-playing terms. If you couch any class in role-playing terms, any other class can get a handle on that archetype.

Exactly. This is why defining things purely in terms of RP doesn't really work. You still want a RP niche, or the class is rootless, without any reason for being, but if that niche is too broad it becomes meaningless as a foundation for a class.

By your reasoning, then, why have any class other than "adventurer"?

Not my reasoning. LP's reasoning. He defines a paladin's schtick not in terms of class-specific abilities, but as a "hero". However, being a "hero" is not a schtick, if everyone else can also be a hero.

Thank you for agreeing that it has problems.

 

[Voadam]

Hong, my reading of LPs response to my post was that a paladin who just meets the bare technical rp requirements of the class (no evil actions, no gross violations, lg alignment) is not matching the "spirit" of the class and he would have problems with that in his campaign as a DM. I don't believe his point was that a fighter can't be a hero.

 

[hong]

Unless we are talking druids, in which case we are talking super powers? Make up your mind.

One more time, but with small words.

Druid got nature schtick. This good, but not enough. Anyone can be nature warrior. Druid also got funky druid nature powers. This better. People can be nature warrior, but will not be _druidic_ nature warrior.

Some people think funky druid nature powers not relevant to schtick. Anyone can be nature warrior. Not a problem. Not everyone in usual D&D campaign will be nature warrior. Schtick is still a schtick.

Paladin got hero schtick. This good, but not enough. Paladin also get sword-swinging powers. This good, but still not enough. Fighter got sword-swinging powers. Paladin also get funky spells and healing. This good, but also still not enough. Cleric get funky spells and healing.

LP think hero schtick good enough for paladin. Not so. Paladin with hero schtick same as fighter with hero schtick or cleric with hero schtick. Still swing sword, cast buff spells, smash orc skulls. Heck, paladin with hero schtick same as wizard with hero schtick. Swing sword, smash orc skulls. Cast fireball, smash orc skulls. Still smash orc skulls in the end. In usual D&D campaign, many people want be hero. Schtick is not a schtick.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed by author.

 

[hong]

Diaglo, you're not giving me a lot to work with here.

It's perfectly obvious to me what diaglo is saying. Do you want _everyone_ to use small words?

The problem here arises in that no class is limited to any specific archetype more than the paladin is. With the exception of alignment restrictions, and the paladin's code, any class can easily be used to mimic any other class's standard archetype. It is not only possible to do, it is easy to do, and I imagine that we've all seen lots of examples.

Make a fighter that can cast wish. Go on.

If you rather examine, as Hong would sometimes like, what the class does in terms of its "super powers" (i.e., "the druid's schtick in 3E is as a shapeshifting, spellcasting nature-priest-hybrid" doesn't exactly talk about behavior and philosophy so much as about class abilities, does it?), then the paladin is clearly distinct from the fighter.

The problem is with LP's interpretation of the paladin's schtick as a "hero". Not my interpretation. Do try to keep up.

I don't know if his "point" such as it seems to be, is your point, Diaglo. If so, it certainly needs more support than it has achieved so far. Hong says "We are talking about the underlying archetype and class identity, not super powers. Try to keep up." but he clearly cannot keep up with his own altering positions.

It's nice to see that you believe LP to be one of my army of clones, but I assure you this is not the case.

Anyway, in recap:

(1). If your point is that any class can reach for the heroic ideal, then I agree.

Exactly. And hence using that heroic ideal as the starting point for a class is bad.

(2). If your point is that the paladin is no different from any other class in this regard, I disagree. The paladin is the only class that specifically has consequences for failure in this regard. Even the cleric gets to switch gods and get on with it.

Which is a stupid way of instilling class identity. The only thing that distinguishes a paladin from a fighter or fighter/cleric is that the DM gets more leeway to screw him/her? No wonder people think paladins got teh shaft.

(3). If your point is something else, it needs to be stated a bit more clearly.

... or you could try to keep up.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed