Paladin Design Goals ... WotC Blog

[KidSnide]

On the other hand, if the paladin is really a distinct class, then I expect the code to do more than be a bit of character flavor. I expect it to be the hinge around which the synergy of fighter and cleric is woven into something notably different than a fighter/cleric multiclass of the same level. That means it has to interact with the fighter-type and cleric-type abilities mechanically in some ways. (Simple example off the top of my head. When a paladin turns undead or demons, it works the same way as it does for a cleric as far as odds, numbers, power, etc. However, the effects are somewhat different. Perhaps the cleric is more focused on causing such creatures to cower and then flee and then be "banished", where the paladin causes them to weaken and eventually turn to dust.)

I would hope/expect the code to have a mechanical effect, and I think the Essentials version of the paladin goes in this direction. As a minimal example, I would hope that paladins get some kind of "smite" class ability that is only usable on enemies to the paladin's code/deity. That's not much of a restriction since a typical paladin will be fighting evil 90%+ of the time, but it's a good character restriction in that some of the paladin's powers won't help in morally ambiguous situations. I likewise think it would be cool if paladin's tended to get a defensive "heal self" or "throw off effect" power that only worked while consistent with code. (The details of these powers could depend on the code chosen.) Either way, this (along with detect evil and maybe a horse) is the sort of thing I see as unique to a paladin.

The synergy with other classes comes in spell lists and shared class abilities. To the extent paladins get class abilities that involve spell casting (or maybe specific spells appropriate to the code), I would like to see those spells mostly come off the cleric list. Likewise, they may get some class abilities in common with fighters (weapon use? maybe number of attacks?). If a paladin wants to get more fighter-y or more cleric-y, they could take a theme that gives them combat maneuvers or maybe a theme that provides a cleric domain.

Of course, this is all shot-in-the-dark speculation. We'll know more when we see a paladin playtest.

-KS

 

[TerraDave]

I really liked this.

The blog post I mean.

The thread has been more of a mixed bag.

 

[pauljathome]

While they partly talk about the right things (Paladins embrace a deity specific code, they oppose what their deity opposes) they then completely screw it up by deciding that Paladins must be Lawful and even Evil paladins apparently get to Smite Evil

Why the heck can't a Chaotic Good Deity have Holy Warriors? Feh.

Mechanically, meh.

 

[triqui]

Could this be like Pathfinder, where they give the PC a certain number of "Stamina Points" to power certain abilities? (I'm thinking of Pathfinder's Rage Points in particular, and I think they do something similar with other classes. If I'm misrepresenting how PF works, I apologize in advance!)

Some other classes have similar expendable resources. Monks have "ki", Samurais have "resolve", and Gunslingers have "grit". I think it's a great way to represent game mechanics.

Mike Mearls' Iron Heroes also work that way

 

[Ahnehnois]

A cleric is an ordained member of a church, trained as a warrior and a scholar. He is granted divine spells by the deity (or deities) whom he serves (or by the deity's servants).
...
A cleric who serves a deity of nature most likely belongs to a less formal and rigid church, but ultimately still serves a deity and that deity's goals. A druid might acknowledge a nature deity, but her powers are still granted through her connection with nature.

A cleric is not necessarily any of those things. Nothing requires a cleric to join a social organization or be trained or ordained in any way. That's sort of like saying that all wizards came from wizard colleges-not true at all. In fact, I would guess nature-y clericss likely to spend a lot of time alone in the wild. Clerics sometimes are warriors and/or scholars, but again this is not universal at all. Clerics do not necessarily get their spells from a divine entity; the 3e cleric at least clearly states that its powers may derive from worshipping a principle (like nature) as well as an entity.

IMC, clerics do have to get spells from a god and druids are different, but that's not in the rulebooks.

A druid is a protector of the natural world, trained by other druids outside of a formal, organized religion. Her spells are granted to her by her deep connection with nature itself. The trees, sun, and moon are her deities.

Druids are outside of a formal organized religion? What's their secret language for? What about druid circles? Sounds analagous to a conventional religious structure to me.

***

All of which is tangential to the point. Paladins are a class because of legacy, not because they have a clearly defined niche different from the fighter or cleric. As are most recognizable D&D classes outside the core four.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I dunno...

I don't automatically have a problem with a paladin class that is bigger than the LG Chivalrous Holy Warrior archetype, as long as that archetype can fit in the class. There's a sort of Occam's Razor thing going on -- why design 9 (or in this case, 3) different classes when you can design 1 that is flexible enough to apply to the rest?

I'm cool with the smiting enemies and the divine blessings and whatnot.

I think my doubts stem from a deeper level -- the idea that the classic "paladin" might work better as a theme or a prestige class or something, rather than a base class.

If I was going to force it to be a base class, I don't think it'd be much different than what WotC spelled out.

I'm also a little weirded out by the mechanics drops. The Holy Avenger is an assumed part of paladin design? A "gut feeling something is wrong"? Spent stamina?

They could all be fine, but without context, I dunno.

 

[hafrogman]

A cleric is not necessarily any of those things. Nothing requires a cleric to join a social organization or be trained or ordained in any way. ... Clerics do not necessarily get their spells from a divine entity; the 3e cleric at least clearly states that its powers may derive from worshipping a principle (like nature) as well as an entity.

This is the difficultly with using D&D history to try and define a class. I have an edition that specifically states the clerics are all part of an order, and specifically DON'T get their powers from a divine power and instead worship a cause or great purpose.

All of which is tangential to the point. Paladins are a class because of legacy, not because they have a clearly defined niche different from the fighter or cleric. As are most recognizable D&D classes outside the core four.

And this is where I feel the crux of the issue lies. If paladin has to be a class because of legacy issues, then it needs to be a full class, as broad and all-encompassing as possible.

 

[mlund]

I think the restriction to Lawful alignments makes perfect sense if the defining characteristic of the Paladin is the selfless devotion to his code. That code could require respect for the lives and dignity of other people. On the other hand, that code might treat all unbelievers as sub-human infidels that must be converted, subjugated, or brutally murdered. What matters in the framework of the paladin is that the code comes first. It comes ahead of profit, romance, or fear.

I like that they pointed out smiting isn't alignment-restricted. If someone's an infidel or apostate in your eyes you can smite them.

I'm glad that the "detect" mechanic is like a spider-sense rather than an evil radar. I hope that it's actually not purely the ability to detect evil, but the ability to detect the general presence of profound good and/or evil in an area. IE - "this is a sacred place to the gods of good" or "the very air is defiled, thick with the aura of the demonic and profane."

I like the idea of Turn Undead working against Outsiders. I actually think the Paladin might be better off if it only worked against extra-planar creatures like Angels, Devils, and Demons.

My big concern, however, is that the Paladin's niche between a melee cleric and a fighter may be too narrow to justify it as a class rather than a background / theme combination on the Fighter or the Cleric. I mean, what about a Fighter with the background of "Templar" or a Cleric with a theme of "War Priest?"

It seems like the critical parts of the Paladin:
- Code of Honor
- Fearless
- Heavy Arms and Armor
- Divine Favor

Could easily be cobbled onto either class. Give each one the code, smiting, and fearlessness. Give the Cleric access to Heavy Armor and Martial Weapons. Give the Fighter access to minor Divine Magic. Done.

I seriously think there either just needs to be a Background or Theme package called "Paladin" that has the prerequisite of "Fighter or Cleric Class" (low risk, moderate reward as development goes) or the Paladin needs a solid niche of unique abilities and characteristics that progress up through each level without stepping on anyone's toes (high risk, moderate reward for developers).

The AD&D Paladin's design was awful (too front-loaded, too mount-centric). The 3rd Edition Paladin's design was also awful (less diverse fighter with worse buffs than a CoDzilla). The 4th Edition Paladin's played better, but the mechanical descriptions were mind-numbing (basically you get a pittance of holy zapping damage whenever you ignore the Paladin, woo-hoo).

- Marty Lund

 

[Minigiant]

I'm... okay with this version of a paladin. I prefer a more showey angelic paladin but a beefed up 3e paladin is alright. The older versions of the paladin were barely a class. Basically just a way to get full combat ability with some spells. Going back to that is not my preference.

 

[Stormonu]

When I think of paladins, the classic archetypes are the likes of Lancelot, Gawain and Roland.

However, when considering more modern examples, and the attitudes and actions (not neccesarily abilities), I come up with this list:

Luke Skywalker
The T800 Terminator from T2/T3
Batman
Superman
"Blondie"/Man With No Name from Good, Bad and the Ugly/Fistful of Dollars
Flash Gordon
Optimus Prime
The Bride from Kill Bill 1/2
Snake-Eyes from GI Joe

As long as the design space allows us to develop characters like this, plus the classic archtypes, I'll be happy.