Paladins: Why are they balanced?

[mhacdebhandia]

I just wanted to address this issue: if the paladin has mechanical drawbacks associated to the code, he should get mechanical advantages for having the code.

I don't consider the paladin class to have any mechanical drawbacks, even considering the possibility of losing access to class abilities.

 

[Endur]

With that kind of money, I think a commoner could be a problem!!

Not really. The Sword is only +2 in the hand of a commoner.

 

[rgard]

Another idea would be to move paladin up to a PrC and not a base class. While I don't mind the pally being a base class, I can certainly see the reasons for doing so.

<SNIP>

There is a PrC Paladin in UA.

 

[SteveC]

I don't consider the paladin class to have any mechanical drawbacks, even considering the possibility of losing access to class abilities.

Um, okay. So what kind of effect is losing all of your class abilities, then? In other words, if that's not it, what's a mechanical drawback?

--Steve

 

[shilsen]

Um, okay. So what kind of effect is losing all of your class abilities, then? In other words, if that's not it, what's a mechanical drawback?

Having a racial -2 to some stat or a class having low HD is a mechanical drawback, because it's a mechanic which is always present. Losing your paladin class abilities is something which might happen, based on your actions, but not a certainty. Barbarians lose their rage ability if they become lawful. Does that count as a mechanical drawback and mean barbarians need to be stronger than other classes? Not in my book.

 

[Himoura]

You could always change the pally class. Calling it Holy warrior in training, or Someguy that will learn to be a Pally when he gets high enough, make it a base 20 lvl class, then make the pally class a PrC.

Start the Holy warrior in training class with some abilities that are sort of god of choicely based, weapon focus in gods favorite weapon etc. Then the Pally class could have pre-reqs like 5 or 6 bab, weapon focus in gods favorite weapon. This also opens up the chance that a fighter who RPly joins a religious order can then also take up the Paladin PrC.

What do y'all think?

 

[SteveC]

Having a racial -2 to some stat or a class having low HD is a mechanical drawback, because it's a mechanic which is always present. Losing your paladin class abilities is something which might happen, based on your actions, but not a certainty. Barbarians lose their rage ability if they become lawful. Does that count as a mechanical drawback and mean barbarians need to be stronger than other classes? Not in my book.

Sure, I would call the barbarian's loss of rage if they become lawful a mechanical drawback. It's a minor one, but it's a drawback nonetheless. You can't play a paladin/barbarian with it, after all...

But seriously: if you create a class that is exactly like a paladin or a barbarian but didn't have those restrictions, would they be just as balanced? I would say no. Now I think that a barbarian is a pretty balanced character even with that minor restriction.

Suppose someone wanted to play a paladin, but said, "hey, I'm not too cool on this whole 'losing my character abilities thing.' How about we do away with it, but leave the class otherwise unchanged?" Do you have any mechanical reason for denying this request, or is is all flavor?

In my case, I wouldn't allow it, but I would also give the paladin something to compensate for the restriction: most likely it would be status and authority within the kingdom, but in my opinion, they should have something for it.

--Steve

 

[Andor]

Having a racial -2 to some stat or a class having low HD is a mechanical drawback, because it's a mechanic which is always present. Losing your paladin class abilities is something which might happen, based on your actions, but not a certainty. Barbarians lose their rage ability if they become lawful. Does that count as a mechanical drawback and mean barbarians need to be stronger than other classes? Not in my book.

There is an important distinction however. There is no RAW way for that Barbarian to become lawful with the sole exception that if he was chaotic and put on a cursed whatsit of opposite alignment. The Paladin can do it by going drinking with Belkar. Or any number of other easy options.

The risk of losing Paladinhood is always present and must influence everything the Paladin does. The Barbarian only sweats it if he's chaotic and trying on untested magic items. Those really strike you as equally minor disadvantages?

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Um, okay. So what kind of effect is losing all of your class abilities, then? In other words, if that's not it, what's a mechanical drawback?

It's a mechanical penalty for the character's inappropriate actions.

It doesn't come into play unless you cause it to happen - unlike an ability score penalty, or the druid's inability to use metal armour, or the wizard's need for time to prepare her spells in the morning, the paladin never loses her class abilities unless she chooses to give them up by acting in a fashion contrary to her code.

A penalty you can easily avoid by acting in a fashion appropriate to your character's class concept is not a drawback to the class. It's a concept reinforcement tool.

But seriously: if you create a class that is exactly like a paladin or a barbarian but didn't have those restrictions, would they be just as balanced? I would say no.

I would say yes. Flavour restrictions aren't restrictions at all.

I mean, seriously - what is it about being a lawful barbarian that's more powerful? You can use lawful-aligned magic and weapons - oh, but now chaotic-aligned magic and weapons are a problem. Big deal.

When it comes to the paladin class, the code of behaviour only exists in order to reinforce the character archetype, the concept of the class, because such a goal is considered worthwhile in and of itself, not because the paladin class is so powerful that it needs to be restricted to a certain type of character.

 

[SteveC]

It's a mechanical penalty for the character's inappropriate actions.

It doesn't come into play unless you cause it to happen - unlike an ability score penalty, or the druid's inability to use metal armour, or the wizard's need for time to prepare her spells in the morning, the paladin never loses her class abilities unless she chooses to give them up by acting in a fashion contrary to her code.

A penalty you can easily avoid by acting in a fashion appropriate to your character's class concept is not a drawback to the class. It's a concept reinforcement tool.

That's a highly pedantic point, but it's also one that I completely disagree with: if your character does X, bad thing Y happens to him. If bad thing Y is a social or roleplaying restriction, I'd agree with you. Since what happens is that you mechanically lose all of your class abilities, I'd call it more than a penalty.

I would say yes. Flavour restrictions aren't restrictions at all.

Except that this flavor restriction makes you lose all of your class abilities. However, if this also means that a player can choose to play a paladin in your game and not have a code, I suppose that would make sense.

I mean, seriously - what is it about being a lawful barbarian that's more powerful? You can use lawful-aligned magic and weapons - oh, but now chaotic-aligned magic and weapons are a problem. Big deal.

You're right: I think it's a silly rule, but it remains as a mechanical penalty. Yes, it's an extremely minor restriction, but it's still a restriction with mechanics behind it.

When it comes to the paladin class, the code of behaviour only exists in order to reinforce the character archetype, the concept of the class, because such a goal is considered worthwhile in and of itself, not because the paladin class is so powerful that it needs to be restricted to a certain type of character.

Well, if there weren't so many threads about conflict in a campaign because of a paladin being there, I'd agree with you. As it is, if we would just take the idea that the paladin's code was (to paraphrase Pirates of the Caribbean) was more of a guideline, I'd say that nothing further needs to be said or done. As it is, we balance mechanics with mechanics, so the paladin should get something for adhering to the code. In a campaign I would run, this would be a social advantage based on their position in the society, not something like an extra feat or class abilities.

Just let me add here that I'm not saying that "Paladin's got the shaft!" I'm more saying that the only way to balance mechanics is with other mechanics.

--Steve