Smite as the signature move of Paladins.

[tuxgeo]

I'm not going to debate whether the new edition needs a paladin or not, but I will tell you flat out....its going to get one.

WOTC is going to make a paladin class. Too many people want it, and they are going to make it happen.

I have been quietly lobbying (by suggesting once or twice) for having the Paladin be included in whichever optional module contains the rules for Alignment, so people who want the Pally have to include Alignment as well, and vice versa.

 

[Rogue Agent]

Gygax did not agree with you on the Paladin. In OD&D you had Fighting men, Clerics, & Magic Users. Then in the Greyhawk supplement, He added Paladins & Thieves classes.

This is something of a distortion, however. The paladin wasn't presented as a distinct class in Supplement I: A paladin was just a specific flavor of the Fighter class, with special abilities that could only be unlocked if you had a sufficiently high Charisma and swore to never perform chaotic acts.

The entire concept of "if you roll really high on your ability scores, then your character gets even MORE awesome stuff" started dying out decades ago. And once that happened, the paladin was kinda doomed to an ever more vestigial existence.

IOW: The paladin was originally conceived of as "just like a fighter, but with a bunch of extra cool stuff". Once you ditch the idea that some classes should just flat-out be better than other classes, the paladin really stops working on a conceptual level.

The most logical course of action might be to finish the loop back to the beginning and let either the fighter or the cleric takes its stuff.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

This is something of a distortion, however. The paladin wasn't presented as a distinct class in Supplement I: A paladin was just a specific flavor of the Fighter class, with special abilities that could only be unlocked if you had a sufficiently high Charisma and swore to never perform chaotic acts.

The entire concept of "if you roll really high on your ability scores, then your character gets even MORE awesome stuff" started dying out decades ago. And once that happened, the paladin was kinda doomed to an ever more vestigial existence.

IOW: The paladin was originally conceived of as "just like a fighter, but with a bunch of extra cool stuff". Once you ditch the idea that some classes should just flat-out be better than other classes, the paladin really stops working on a conceptual level.

The most logical course of action might be to finish the loop back to the beginning and let either the fighter or the cleric takes its stuff.

Or we could finish the loop back by making the Paladin a class for those who roll their ability scores really well. Paladin and the Ranger should be classes that make the ordinary fighter look like a bum.

Not having my second favorite class (after Wizard another hissy fit causing class) would be really bad for my 5e enjoyment. On the other hand, if background and theme means I never have to hear the word multiclass again, it might be worth it.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I have been quietly lobbying (by suggesting once or twice) for having the Paladin be included in whichever optional module contains the rules for Alignment, so people who want the Pally have to include Alignment as well, and vice versa.

Never gonna happen - a vocal half of the paladin players don't want alignment.

 

[1of3]

And just as a side note, I am always left wondering why the parable is "The Cleric & the Paladin" in these kinds of discussions/arguments. What about the Thief/Rogue who likes to be extra stabby/sneaky. Is he stealing the Assassin's stuff? Or is the Assassin taking the Rogue's stuff cuz he can be sneaky and deadly too? The Mage who (we now know) has an array of "at will" (which I equate with "spontaneous") spells on their belt...she's taking the Sorcerer's stuff? Play a "Sorcerer-y Mage" OR play a "Magey-Sorcerer"! That's the fun of making up your own characters n' concepts. [...]

I think the Paladin's problem in particular is with the origin story: A sorcerer coming into the power of the blood is very different from wizard graduating academy. Same with the rogue and the assassin: Sell your soul to the shadowfell, be an assassin. The paladin is conceptually between the fighter and the cleric. That wouldn't be so much a problem, if there was a clear origin story demarcating how someone got to be a paladin and not a cleric.

I agree with you that I usually used paladins as temporal nobility (i.e. knights) as opposed to... well... clerics. That approach was blocked, though, when they rolled out a Knight class.

I'm all for a paladin class, if a distinctive origin story can be found. Ranger probably has the same problem, especially since "I have a pet!" class features appear to be outsourced into themes.

 

[variant]

There will be a Paladin. It just won't be its own class.

The paladin class has already been announced.

 

[DogBackward]

The paladin class has already been announced.

Care to point me to it?

 

[Walking Dad]

Or we could finish the loop back by making the Paladin a class for those who roll their ability scores really well. Paladin and the Ranger should be classes that make the ordinary fighter look like a bum.

...

This would be a no go for me. Rolling better on character creation and getting a better class for it? No! This only works with a high rate of character death/replacement. And these are not the games I like. To much story holes needed to make it work, I like my campaigns.

Would be maybe an interesting option for Tomb of Horror and its likes enthusiasts.

 

[Zaphling]

Care to point me to it?

Here, [MENTION=50642]DogBackward[/MENTION].

the latest playtest report. We're good.
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Playtest: First Round Overview)

 

[shamsael]

Pertinent to the editions in which he contributed, yes. To Next? Not at all.

That would matter... if this were Fourth Edition. It's not. In the edition that we have so far, there is no need for the Paladin, as the Cleric fits the role just fine. There's nothing that a Paladin is supposed to be able to do that the Cleric can't do already.

I love the Paladin. And I'll play one... by playing a Cleric with the Knight Background and Guardian Theme. But there's no reason to waste space in the core book with a class that will essentially be a very slightly modified version of the Cleric.

Exactly what would you give the Paladin that the Cleric doesn't already have? Explain why they would need to be separate classes, other than "Because that's the way it was a long, long time ago."

Things a paladin should have that neither the Fighter nor the Cleric we've seen so far have:
Lay on Hands
Aura of Protection
Improved saves