Paladins in 3.5, why?

[reapersaurus]

So the paladin is the holy champion of good. But then the evil and neutral guys are like "man, I wish I could have a champion of evil/neutrality to further our causes, but damn, I have to wait for six levels before I can have a champion. I wish I knew why."

This statement indicates a lack of understanding of the difference(s) between Good & Evil.

plink plink

 

[Imperialus]

If you are really desparate to play a paladin of a diferent alignment, talk to your DM. In my campaign there is a LN ruler/diety who has a core class avelable to his worshipers known as Ijudicars who have many ability's similar to a paladin except the belive that upholding order and law is more important than anything else. They have a LN code much like the paladins and they share variants on many of their abilities. They are basically played like jackbooted enforcers who travel around with a book of laws in one hand and a sword in the other. Sorta like the Judges in Judge Dread. They are really all that keeps the entire society from falling into compleate anarchy.

In the campaign I am in as a player however I play a out and out LG Paladin of Pelor. He specializes in demon hunting, but is also an acomplished statesman and diplomat though he can be a bit pig headed if he disagrees with you. There was even one occasion where he had a major crisis of faith and just about took on the Holy Liberator prestige class after some rather violent negotiations with the imperial army, but after discussing the matter with the head of his order it was determined that due to circumstances byond his control he was forced to violate his oaths to save his friends and himself who had been framed by a demon. Personally I like the paladins just the way they are.

 

[Deadguy]

I just wanted to muddy the waters further by adding that reading through this thread reminded me of some of the Ranger discussions. No, not the 'Ranger was shafted' ones, but the ones where people define what they want from a Ranger class. It turns out that different people have very different ideas about what a Ranger is.

So too, it seems, with the Paladin class. Is he (she) a Called Warrior of God? Or the ultimate Chivalrous Knight? Or a Crusader for Justice? Or a Holy Inquisitor? The class seems to need to fit a considerable number of archetypes. In a way, that's a good sign - a sign that the class benefits from being core. But at the same time, the class is written from a limited perspective, and written in such a way that it is very much a question of DM opinion about how much 'give' there is in the class to let it play some of these archetypes.

In my heart I know it will stay - it is on of the most fiercely fought over sacred cows of D&D. But with my head I recognise that a more generalised 'Champion' class is useful, with a specific example made of the Paladin, the Champion of Lawful Good. In that sense it would be a little like the 2e move from Magic-User and Illusionist to Mage and Specialist (and yes, I know that neither 2e nor 3e have properly addressed the question of flavour for specialist wizards).

At the same time, showing a Prestige Class build of a Paladin would be a useful tool for the DMG. Since we all have the example of the Paladin-as-core-class, it makes it easier to explain how the Paladin can be built as a sample Prestige Class, with the reasoning and limitations explained. It might help get the Prestige Class philosophy deeper into people's minds.

As usual, my answer turns out to be 'well all sides have some merits to their arguments...' but, hey, what can you do?

 

[Corinth]

Misdirection
Illusion (Glamer)
Level: Brd 2, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One creature or object, up to a 10-ft. cube in size
Duration: 1 hour/level
Saving Throw: Will negates (object)
Spell Resistance: No
By means of this spell, the character misdirects the information from divination spells that reveal auras. On casting the spell, the character chooses another object within range. For the duration of the spell, the subject of misdirection is detected as if it were the other object. Detection spells provide information based on the second object rather than on the actual target of the detection unless the caster of the detection succeeds at his save.
This spell does not affect other types of divination.

This allows an evil being or object to mask its alignment, but not necessarily force an innocent to detect as evil. A careful reading of the spell's description would require that the masking object be an evil-aligned magical item, and such things are not easy to find at present. (This may change with v3.5 and the introduction of the align weapon spell.) That said, I stand corrected.

There are also at least two other circumstances under which a non-evil creature could register as evil:

A Lawful Neutral Cleric of a Lawful Evil Deity or a Chaotic Neutral Cleric of a Chaotic Evil Deity will detect as evil.

A non-evil undead - even one of those freaky good liches from FR - will detect as evil.

detect evil works off the alignment of the cleric, not of the cleric's god, so the neutral clerics of evil gods would not detect as evil.

And aside from that, it's perfectly possible for someone to be of evil alignment, having never commited any crime deserving of death.

Paladins need not concern themselves with any law other than that of their patron; divine law--the very law that calls paladins and empowers them--supercedes all mortal law. This is why paladins are terrifying.

 

[Hypersmurf]

detect evil works off the alignment of the cleric, not of the cleric's god, so the neutral clerics of evil gods would not detect as evil.

This is fun!

[color=white]
Aura Strength: An aura’s evil power and strength depend on the 
type of evil creature or object that the character is detecting and 
its HD, caster level, or (in the case of a cleric) class level.

Creature/Object	Evil Power
---------------	----------
Evil creature 	HD / 5
[color=yellow]Undead creature[/color] HD / 2
Evil elemental 	HD / 2
Evil magic item 
or spell 	Caster level / 2
Evil outsider 	HD
[color=yellow]Cleric of an 
evil deity[/color] 	Level
[/color]

-Hyp.

 

[Agback]

[BJust to make it clear there seems to be X positions.

• 
  No paladin class, core or prestige
  Paladin core only
  Paladin prestige only
  Paladin core, optional prestige
  Holy champion core
  Holy champion prestige

[/B]

That's only VI positions, not X. And you left out mine.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Kaleon Moonshae]

a few notes

OK, first off, I have gone back and forth about making the paladin a PrC and losing the restrictions both equally. The problem I think a lot of people have with Paladins is the fact that most people just flat out don't play them right. It takes a certain sense of maturity, objectivity and compassion to play a paladin. I see people talk on here about holy warrior this and holy warrior that and kill this evil thing and kill that evil thing. We are forgetting I think one very important role of the paladin in fantasy and history... conversion. The paladin was almost always willing to give quarter and allow recension (spelling?) for past crimes. Lawful-good deity does not mean 'kill everything without trying to redeem it deity.' We talk about it being ok to kill so and so because we are 'champions of law' and they are evil. This seems a tad immature to me. The paladin is not a killing machine, he is the ideal man for others to look up to.

Now, for the reason I went off on this tangeant. I support the idea of a psudo-PrC paladin because I want me players to 'prove' to me that they can live up to the ideals of the paladin instead of just choosing it and going around 'smiting evil' I like the idea of having the player play *any* other class for a level or two and then taking a feat at third level to become a paladin. I am sorry, even looking at historical concepts like Gawain, Percival, Joan and Charlemainge (four of the founding ideas of the paladin) they were more than just first level characters when they began *evidensing* devine powers. Be it fighter (Gawain and Percival were both squires, you didn't get to be a knight of the round without being a knight...and knight had prerequisits, go back and look at the characters again... purity and innocence in these cases usually meant *virginity* and *devotion* not lack of experience), be it rogue (Joan, who was *very* good with words and influencing people long before she took up the sword) or fighter (Charle. was trained from birth to fight, yes he was called at an early age, but his 'wonderous abilities on the battlefield' did not come to happen until well into his career as a fighter). Also, young by our way of thinking isn't young for their's... 12 years old is young to us, but it was not unheard of for a 12 year old to be a soldier in the army in medieval times, rare maybe, but not unheard of because they had to grow up *fast* in the old world.

--------

Now, because no one else had done it, here is the list of many bard concepts:

1. musician
2. performance artist
3. poet
4. scribe
5. politician
6. negotiator
7. face
8. spy
9. illusionist
10. pickpocket
11. con-artist
12. skald
14. banner carrier for the military
15. fop
16. rake
17. swashbuckler
18. highwayman
19. teacher
20. sensei
21. wisewoman
22. king's hound
23. policeman
24. reveler
25. fireworks performer
26. private investigator
27. seeker of lost lore
28. magic item chronicler
29. spin-doctor
30. tombraider
31. librarian

..... and i can go on. The bard is *the* jack-of-all-trades and so can be almost *anything* you want him to be... restrictive? hardly. Each of those concepts have a varying degrees of difference and none of them are even multiclassed bards. Remember 'perform' can be anything done for an audience... fromt writing, speaking, cut-downs, juggling, singing, and the list goes on. A voice, even without singing, can be music... never heard spoken word? a really good spindoctor's work for a mayor? All of those things can easily be used for bardic 'music'. Bardic knowledge can lead to any number of concepts where you either chronicle knowledge, locate lost knowledge, search for forbidden knowledge, liberate 'lost items' or just keep a library. The bard's magic ability (especially the illusions) can help with spies, negotiators, fireworks, and even 'midevial newscasters' via remote image... can we say a couple mind linked bards, one in the courtroom 'sending images' and one outside recieving them and making illusory replicas so spectators can follow 'trials of the century'?

I know this was about paladins but i couldn't resist the challenge.

thanks
Kal

 

[heimdall]

I would prefer the paladin to stay a core class. Playing a paladin can be very difficult, especially when you're sticking by your code and the rest of the party wishes you wouldn't. Being a paladin means sometimes making a sacrifice that's completely selfless, though as a player you want to be selfish and put your character in minimal danger, if any at all. Hence the class features such as the saving throw bonus and immunity to disease. I've played paladins from 1st level with men and women who were called by their gods at the same time everyone else started adventuring. If you make it a prestige class, this option goes totally by the way-side.

However, I can see the argument that this means neutrals and evils don't have a champion. In a lot of ways, druids are the champions for neutral, but let's face it, they aren't the warriors that paladins are. Neutral needs something... an issue I'm dealing with by trying to come up with a logical concept for a core class in my own campaigns.

As far as evil is concerned, there is a solution. I'm not a big fan of the Blackguard PrC because it does come so late. I understand there needs to be a prestige class for the character who has turned to evil after some experience, but I also see a need for that foul, despicable character at low levels. Hence I've updated the anti-paladin from Dragon 39 for each edition of the rules. Yes, I've even allowed players to play one when I've run an evil campaign. They are usually the first characters to die ("friendly" fire) because who trusts an anti-paladin? The answer: no one.

 

[Celtavian]

First of all, what more do we need, if the majority of the players of the product want it this way?

Second, let's remember that the concept of the holy warrior has always been around in fantasy, even from the tales of Lancelot and before.

There is an archetype, and that very archetype is as early as the Maiden Jehanne: Joan of Arc. This is the archetype of the "called warrior," the warrior that has been called by their deity to go forth and accomplish a specific mission. These are not necessarily spellcasters, but they are usually considered tougher than ordinary beings, and exceptionally lucky in some way. Depending on who you ask, this type extends through Chronicles of Narnia in the form of Aslan, and even into the Lord of the Rings.

However, these people were not just called later in life; they were often called in their youth, at a time roughly equating to first level. Taing this option away invalidates a very good roleplaying experience, that of the called warrior.

DO I believe they should open the class? Probably so. In a pantheistic society, there is more than just Lawful Good to aspire to. Each god should indeed have a holy warrior option for their champions. The Forgotten Realms design team solved this with the Champion five level prestige class, but it is still not the optimal solution, in my opinion.

This is my view as well. I like the Paladin as is, but I wouldn't mind seeing different types of holy warriors for gods of different alignments.

An optimal way to do this might be to keep quite a few core abilities, and then have a special Paladin/Holy warrior section for each god that outlines the one or two additional special abilities for being a Paladin of that particular god. I don't think such a change would be all that hard to implement.

 

[Agback]

And aside from that, it's perfectly possible for someone to be of evil alignment, having never commited any crime deserving of death.

This point is so important that it is worth stating again.

And another point of similar importance is that Good implies respect for life and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Slaughtering evildoers is sometimes necessary, but always regrettable.

The upshot is that last time I was playing a paladin he pretty much stopped using his 'Detect Evil' class ability. It only made him depressed to see how many people were evil, and didn't help him work out how to do good.

Regards,


Agback