D&D 5E Teleport /fly /misty step the bane of cool dungeon design is RAW in 5E

[The Crimson Binome]

Why would an wood elf paladin, or a paladin from a desert setting be wearing heavy armor?

Why would a wood elf, or a warrior from a desert setting, be represented with with the Knight In Shining Armor class?

Paladins wear heavy armor, because they are Knights In Shining Armor. If the paladin class doesn't make sense to describe the character, then it's not a paladin.

 

[Mort]

Why would a wood elf, or a warrior from a desert setting, be represented with with the Knight In Shining Armor class?

Paladins wear heavy armor, because they are Knights In Shining Armor. If the paladin class doesn't make sense to describe the character, then it's not a paladin.

That's, the point. Paladins in 5e are holy warriors, but not necessarily knights in shining armor - this is a big departure from prior editions.

In 5e, a paladin of the god of assassins works as a rogue /paladin in light armor /no armor both as a concept and mechanically.


Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[Lanefan]

I love that fact that paladins have been decoupled from the knights in armor trope (at least mostly), and are instead holy warriors of various gods.

Then where has the knights in armour trope gone? 5e diesn't have Cavaliers (though I'd argue it should), nor Knight as a class, so Paladin is all that's left.

Why would an wood elf paladin or a paladin from a desert setting be wearing heavy armor?

For the wood elf, same reason as why a human would - it goes with being what you have chosen to be. For the desert setting I'd simply suggest that Paladins are uncommon there, for just this reason - over the years they've all been baked inside their armour.

Lanefan

 

[Mort]

Then where has the knights in armour trope gone?

Nowhere. The paladin class does the cavalier just fine, so does the fighter class. But now there are more options than just heavily armored horse rider.

5e diesn't have Cavaliers (though I'd argue it should), nor Knight as a class, so Paladin is all that's left.

Check out unearthed arcana: kits of old.

Fighter path of the cavalier.

For the wood elf, same reason as why a human would - it goes with being what you have chosen to be. For the desert setting I'd simply suggest that Paladins are uncommon there, for just this reason - over the years they've all been baked inside their armour.

Lanefan

I still think this is a relic of older editions. In 5e paladins can be knights in shining armor but they are not bound to it.

Maybe this deserves its own thread, it's a threadjack to this one.

To tie it together: I think leaning into the changes - embracing the character abilities and posing appropriate challenges that would result is the answer - most of the time.



Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

 

[CapnZapp]

5th edition is actually far more manageable than earlier editions in this regard.

For instance, I DM'd OotA up to 16th level. Not a single instance of Fly.

If everybody flies, yep, it disrupts low level play? But a single character flying? Not worth it, apparently...

(Though technically I guess a group Etherealness would count)

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Mephista]

Then where has the knights in armour trope gone? 5e diesn't have Cavaliers (though I'd argue it should), nor Knight as a class, so Paladin is all that's left.

Yes, it does. The Oath of Devotion is called the Cavaliers, and those are your steroetypical Knight In Shining Armor types. There are three other core book types (ancients, oathbreakers, avengers) that are different archetypes.

Now, I'm not going to get into the whole "nooo! only the LG types should be called a paladin" nonsense; want to do that at your table, more power to you. But people do need to realize that the core book Paladin has changed meaning from the past and includes more than just the old Holy Knight in Shining Armor type. Irregardless if its a bad name choice or not, its what has happened, and we have to deal with it.

For the wood elf, same reason as why a human would - it goes with being what you have chosen to be.

Not even close. A dex-based paladin with stealth bonuses is not going to be wearing heavy armor that's penalizing said stealth abilities.

 

[Alexemplar]

Breastplate doesn't confer any penalty on stealth and was a very common among cultures in warmer climates (Egyptians, Greeks, Persians, Macedonians, Indians etc).

It's only 1-2 less AC than Splint/Plate.

 

[Mephista]

That's medium armor - we're takling about heavy armor. There's a difference.

 

[Tony Vargas]

5th edition is actually far more manageable than earlier editions in this regard.

For instance, I DM'd OotA up to 16th level. Not a single instance of Fly.

Assuming we ignore the various oddball races with wings.
But, assuming that, Flight has been more or less limited over the editions. In 1e for instance, it had a fairly long, but still random, duration - and flying mounts has all sorts of fiddly rules and contrived incompatibilities. 3e, as so often seems to be the case in these comparisons, was the high-water mark, with the notorious flying/invisible casters raining destruction on the campaign. 4e flight was bumped to relatively high level and/or single-use & /very/ short duration (often a single move, or requiring a standard action to sustain, for instance). Post-Essentials HotFw introduced a winged race, like 5e has, albeit with an altitude limit of 1, so they couldn't hover around out of melee reach. 5e has returned flight to comparatively low level, normal function, and increased duration to 10 minutes, though, at least it still locks out the combination with invisibility thanks to concentration.

 

[Alexemplar]

That's medium armor - we're takling about heavy armor. There's a difference.

I'm suggesting the use of medium armor instead of heavy armor in this instance. As a Paladin, the character would be proficient in it and it'd be thematically/conceptually more appropriate.