Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tequila Sunrise" data-source="post: 6119766" data-attributes="member: 40398">I think because the paladin is the poster boy of these kind of restrictions, due to having the strictest and the narrowest. For example on the odd occasion I play in a pre-4e game, I might play a druid. Sure, the metal armor restriction is poorly thought-out, but it's easy to avoid. I might also play a cleric because, sure I have to follow the tenets of my god and stay within one alignment-step of him, but that leaves me with a lot of cleric options and a safe amount of freedom. So I can play a cleric of say, Heironeous, and know that even if the DM doesn't think I'm quite Lawful enough or quite Good enough I'll remain a cleric. Or I can play a cleric of any other god and alignment.Whereas I don't play pre-4e paladins because I'm arbitrarily restricted not only to one particular alignment, but to one specific brand of that alignment. And if I take one little step outside of that narrow archetype, I lose what makes me a paladin. Essentially, I have to play Galahad and if I don't play him right, I have to pay some holier-than-thou to put in a good word for me to Him. (Who is, ironically, under much less severe restrictions than I am!)So while I and many others don't care for any restrictions, the paladin is the one who gets discussed because he's the poster boy.PS: Like your sig, btw!</blockquote>