Paladins - likes and dislikes?

[Aeric]

I like the concept of a holy warrior/crusader.

I like the saving throw bonuses.

I like the ability to turn undead and the spell list.

I like the bonded mount, but I dislike the 3.5 "pokemount." I recognize that in most games, mounts are simply a mode of transportation from one place to another, and at higher levels, aren't needed at all (Teleport, Gate, etc.). I've seen plenty of options for the paladin that replace the bonded mount (extra smiting seems the most prevalent). Maybe a celestial companion on par with the blackguard's fiendish companion? It could be a mount, or it could be a hawk or a wardog or even a minor spirit such as a Lantern Archon.

I dislike how everything is based on Charisma.

I dislike the drama surrounding the paladin and his CoC. Thankfully, I have never played in a group where it existed (and I play a lot of paladins).

I dislike how they are the weakest of the three warrior base classes (fighter, ranger, and paladin). The ranger may have a smaller HD, but he has TWF to make up for it. With the proper feats (TW Defense, etc.) in addition to the free TWF feats, the ranger can be a real melee powerhouse. Not so much with the paladin. I would like to see more options for the paladin to channel divine energy into melee power. Maybe some free feats from a list including divine metamagic feats such as Divine Shield.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

What if the paladin's ability to detect evil at will was changed to an incremental bonus to sense motive?

Personally, I don't mind detect evil, and it's not difficult to break Paladins of overeliance upon it. (Simple demographics. Humans don't lean toward Neutrality, so 1/3rd of the population is some kind of Evil.)

On the other hand, I like the idea of making them Warmage-style casters. Strip down their class spell list... and make sure detect evil stays.

What if the paladin's aura of courage also bestowed the bonuses from protection from evil at half-strength (if that is possible), gave a large bonus to resisting mental contol (but not complete protection), and didn't hedge out anything?

That's something I've been considering. The Blackguard gains Sneak Attack at higher levels. Since I use Paladin as a PrC... what about pre-selected Marshal Auras? Or some similar Aura abilities.

 

[Dykstrav]

What I like about the paladin:

1) There should be a base class in D&D that represents an elite champion of good. Mythology, folklore, and literature (especially fantasy literature) is replete with the idea that the forces of good are fewer in number, but of higher quality and moral worth than the forces of evil. The paladin is a strong nod that D&D is supposed to be a game about heroes.
2) Paladins are generally well-liked in the campaign setting. Unless they are traveling in obviously evil lands such as the Empire of Iuz, paladins can expect a warm reception wherever they go. Paladins bring hope and comfort to the masses of the campaign world that can't be adventurers.
3) Paladins make great leaders. Their strong passion for good and high Charisma scores makes them ideal for this role.
4) The paladin's class abilities are focused on making him a mailed fist against evil. Smite evil helps wail on almost anything the paladin is likely to fight. Detect evil allows him to be sure that he doesn't waste his smites. Divine grace lets him shrug off the effects of virutally anything that requires a saving throw.
5) It's satisfying to play a paladin. Sure, you have Diplomacy as a class skill, but you're empowered and inclined to crack some evil-doer skulls. Parties that have to fight evil critters will likely appreciate having you around.

What I do not like about the paladin:

1) The paladin doesn't really excel at anything. He's a good front-line fighter against specific types of enemies: things like evil dragons, liches, et cetera. He can make a turn undead check or two and cast a few spells, but there are other classes that can do these things better. These traits conspire to make him feel like a second-string character when he shouldn't be stepping on the cleric's toes.
2) I REALLY don't like the paladin's mount, especially the 3.5 version. It works in a Romance/fairy tale type of game, but how often do D&D characters really engage in mounted combat? I've been replacing this class feature since 1E. Currently I let the paladin select two feats (one has to be a divine feat and one has to be drawn from the fighter list of bonus feats) when he reaches 5th level instead of getting the bonded mount. Players really seem to jump at getting more feats over a mount.
3) Most players seem to think paladins are tea-drinking sticks-in-the-mud. Paladins are lawful good, not lawful stupid. "Acting with honor" doesn't mean that you can't set up an ambush or flank an enemy. "Respecting legitimate authority" doesn't mean that you can't fight the king of a lawful evil nation. "Helping those in need" doesn't mean that the DM should endanger helpless peasants every time he wants to get the ball rolling on an adventure. Does anyone really think that a paladin is breaking his code of conduct if he's on the way to fight a dragon and he won't stop to help a little girl find her lost kitten? The code of conduct is too vague, it needs more specifics.
4) The paladin doesn't get enough skill points in my opinion. The paladin is supposed to be a cultured warrior. He should at least get Perform as a class skill so he can serenade his beloved and dance with her at the royal ball.
5) The paladin is still culture-specific. The class is based on the fairy tale/Romance idea of the knight and it shows. As written, the paladin still feels like an Arthurian type of character. Even the bard and druid have been made generic and still work well in a Celtic-flavored campaign. I really think the paladin would appeal to alot more players if he was more an 'elite champion of good' rather than a 'knight in shining armor.'

 

[Endur]

I think Paladins are great.

The paladin's code is fine.

The problem people have with the Paladin's code isn't a problem with the code.

Their problem is with "lawful characters."

Many players prefer to play chaotic or neutral types and should not be in a party with lawful characters.

Paladins are just a class that has already defined what lawful means. Other lawful characters can be somewhat more vague on what lawful means.

But you can certainly see a lawful character of any class following a code similar to the paladin's code.

 

[Lord Ipplepop]

What I like about the 3.x Paladin... any race can be a warrior for their main deity.

What I don't like:
It's too easy to become a Paladin. Any fool with a 9 ANYTHING can be a Paladin and get the benefits (not too powerful, but benefits)
Too many people think a Paladin is still only 2 dimensional.
The Protection from Evil sharing was taken away.