Paladins - likes and dislikes?

[TheLe]

It just occured to me - instead of giving the Paladin Turn Undead, perhaps he can get some sort of Smite Undead ability instead. Or maybe some sort of Anti-Undead Aura.

~Le

 

[FireLance]

It just occured to me - instead of giving the Paladin Turn Undead, perhaps he can get some sort of Smite Undead ability instead. Or maybe some sort of Anti-Undead Aura.

Like the Hunter of the Dead's (Complete Warrior) Smite Undead, or the Sacred Exorcist's (Complete Divine) Consecrated Presence?

 

[Infernal Teddy]

There were some nice articles on the concept of "one true way" and paladins over the years in Dragon.

One I remember in particular talked about a Paladin based upon Christian Knights and another one based on Islamic Knights facing one another in battle during the Crusades.

Both are paladins, both follow the same God, share holy texts...and yet they could hate each other with deep and abiding passion and religious fervor as they meet in battle...

Or they could both be gentlemen and gentle men of God, avoiding conflict with each other whenever possible.

The point? That there really was no "one true way" to be a Paladin.

Unfortunately, that concept has yet to be widely disseminated.

I'm with you. I think Paladins should at least sometimes have to think about good vs. lawful, seeing as these two concepts don't always match up. LG isn't and can't always be possible to go through with. A paladin should be permitted to sometimes lean more towards good, and sometimes towards Lawful. Err to the side of Mercy, err to the side of Justice. Something like that. That's how it is in my campaigns, at least - but none of my players ever want to play a paladin...

Has anyone asked the Col. in on this discussion?

 

[Victim]

Dislikes:

The way spellcasting is set up. Paladins get many spells at higher spell levels than clerics since they're weaker casters. Paladins have a lower caster level and get spells later than clerics because they're weaker casters. Combine the two and you have seriously crippled core spellcasting. Supplemental pally spells help quite a bit, but that might be because those particular spells are broken.

Mandatory mount. It makes winged (half) Celestial paladins seem pretty stupid. Also, the mechanics for mount advancement and replacement are rather poor. On one hand, a 20th level paladin's mount has like 10 HD and thus kind of sucks. On the other hand, most replacement mounts, especially non core ones, are vastly better than standard horsies and thus are a big free power boost.

Remove Disease a few times per week is pretty lame.

I also don't like the mechanic for smite damage. It places way too much emphasis on finding damage multipliers. Sure, there should be synergy between class features (smite and mount), but in my experience, multipliers are a good way to break the system. Plus I'm not overly fond of mounted stuff to begin with. So I'd rather see Smite changed to some kind of bonus dice, with a buff to its damage to make up for the loss of multipliers. And maybe it should get some bonuses against undead or outsiders, like Holy Smite.

The Code of Conduct is rather nebulous, and having basically the entire class depend on the whim of the DM is rather unnerving. Also, the code tends to constrain the rest of the party almost as much as it does the pally, both in and OOC.

Divine Feats should probably be integrated into the basic design of the class.

People running out and smiting everything they see with detect evil.
-----------------------------------------------------

Likes:

Alignment restriction

The concept of the class and many abilities. Some of them just radiate awesome, and are built into the class from the start (unlike spells). Smite Evil! Having such a strong aura of personality that enemy spells just bounce off?!

The dependence on CHA and those abilities: half of smiting, Divine Grace, Lay on Hands.

Detect Evil.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Mandatory mount. It makes winged (half) Celestial paladins seem pretty stupid. Also, the mechanics for mount advancement and replacement are rather poor. On one hand, a 20th level paladin's mount has like 10 HD and thus kind of sucks. On the other hand, most replacement mounts, especially non core ones, are vastly better than standard horsies and thus are a big free power boost.

I will agree that the mandatory mount is probably a bad idea because abilities whose potency is so campaign dependent should be taken as a feat or an optional class feat.

I think the mount is rather strong for lower levels (6HD at 5th level -- fights better than most PCs!), but on the weak side (12 HD) at high levels. But taking Leadership and getting a Cohort Special Mount largely solves that second issue.

In principle, your winged Half-Celestial should choose an advanced mount that also has wings. But LA does hurt you here -- a ~6HD griffon is not going to be useful in a level 12+ party. We also need some feats like Natural Bond to allow you an opportunity to reparit the gulf cause by the LA. Leadership might be good enough.

I agree that advanced mounts (and animal companions) are bizarrely potent compared to the normal class boosted standard animals.

Remove Disease a few times per week is pretty lame.

Yup. Probably should sub this for something more appropriate. My DM let my Paladin sub Magic Circle vs. Evil. I would advocate Mark of Justice as a flavorful and fun alternative.

I also don't like the mechanic for smite damage. It places way too much emphasis on finding damage multipliers. Sure, there should be synergy between class features (smite and mount), but in my experience, multipliers are a good way to break the system. Plus I'm not overly fond of mounted stuff to begin with. So I'd rather see Smite changed to some kind of bonus dice, with a buff to its damage to make up for the loss of multipliers. And maybe it should get some bonuses against undead or outsiders, like Holy Smite.

Hmm. Some good points. But what I like about the as is system is there is synergy with Bless Weapon. I would like more of the Paladin abilities to feel like an integrated whole.

You would seem to be thinking in terms of a revamping of Favored Enemy and giving some of the benefits to the Paladin for a restricted list. I can see merit to that approach.

Divine Feats should probably be integrated into the basic design of the class.

Yes. A missed opportunity to make the class mechanics more seamless IMO.

 

[Infernal Teddy]

The Code of Conduct is rather nebulous, and having basically the entire class depend on the whim of the DM is rather unnerving. Also, the code tends to constrain the rest of the party almost as much as it does the pally, both in and OOC.

In my game, if anyone were to come up to me and say "I'll play a Paladin", I'd sit down with the Player in question, and work out a basic code of conduct for that character and religion.

Of cause, no one has wanted to play a paladin before, so...

 

[heirodule]

I think their detect evil should be an obscene bonus to sense motive.

Granted. But then there should also be a detect evil that works on items and "demons behind the wood door" as that's one of my 'likes' for the Paladin.

Paul

 

[messy]

like-
"knight in shining armor" concept
aura of courage
challenge of assigning ablity scores, since most are useful

dislike-
disease immunity. make them immune to ALL diseases, magical or not (this goes for monks also).
cure disease x/week is too hard to keep track of. just make it 1/day with no increase. then again, Mad Mac made a good suggestion that it just be on the paladin's spell list.
i also agree with the suggestion that detect evil be replaced with a bonus to sense motive
code of conduct is too restrictive. it makes paladins very inflexible and prone to paranoia about losing their abilities due to making the wrong decision.
the fact that it is a base class. i think paladin (and monk) should be prestige classes. you can't be a blackguard at first level, so why can you be a paladin at first level?
multiclassing restriction. i don't think these should exist for any class.

no opinion on the pokemount.

messy

 

[riprock]

I like the idea of Paladins. (In my settings, they are grim, determined crusaders who fight an overall greater battle they know they can never win.) The metatheme focus for Paladin characters in my games run along the "how much are you willing to sacrifice in the name of the greater good" line.

I also never seem to tire of "fall from grace" stories involving Paladins (and I think that Paladins make the most interesting vampires.) Don't know what it is- I just can't get enough.

I guess it isn't a major spoiler if I tell you all that the computer game, Vampire: the Masquerade -- Redemption is about a vampire.

The interesting part is that the vampire starts out as a very devout Christian warrior. "Lo, I smite the demons of Hell because the Church is just!" He gets turned into a vampire and the voice acting is good enough to convince me that the character really *feels* something about it. (The script steals blatantly from Shakespeare, but that's a minor annoyance.)

The writer throws in some serious ethical questions -- e.g. is it more humane to allow a vampire to commit suicide, or to force him to remain undead?

It seriously *is* a story of falling from grace and trying to re-discover some kind of honor/grace/ethics/humanism/etc.

I like the idea of warriors who are motivated by high-minded ethics/religion. But I *don't* play paladins.

I like the idea of heroes who are more like prophets or socially disadvantaged folks. I like playing outcasts who are not trusted by most folks.

If people see a paladin in a D&D world, they think, "Well, barring extremely convincing illusions and tricks, it's a real paladin, therefore I can trust him. I can drop a bag of gold in his stronghold and he won't steal it or lend it out without my explicit permission."

I have trouble playing a good character with that kind of reputation. I'd like to think that the heroes of The 13th Warrior and Seven Samurai are good, but they're not the universally trusted paragons of fair play. Heck, even the heroes of High Noon and Deadwood can't count on being trusted and supported by the general public.

I have trouble playing that kind of hero. I can do the Batman-style "good deeds in secret," but I can't do the Superman style "I do good deeds, and then smile for the newspaper photos, shaking the hands of the orphans I just saved."

The deeper problem is that while I like to think that my characters are morally just, I have some problems qualifying as "good" in the strictest, D&D sense of the word.

 

[Infernal Teddy]

I think Paladin-quality "Good" is too rigid, too absolute for anyone, be ita character in a RPG or a person in real life to truely uphold for life.