The Prestige Fallacy

[El Mahdi]

Forget the mechanics for a second and think about this logically. VoP says you can have no magic weapons. Kensai says that your body parts become magic weapons. Tell me that there isn't a conflict of interest here.

I don't know, I don't see a problem. Mechanically they end up working the same as anyone else, but fluff-wise very differently. Not a problem IMO.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I don't know, I don't see a problem. Mechanically they end up working the same as anyone else, but fluff-wise very differently. Not a problem IMO.

Fluff matters and the intent of it should be taken into consideration whenever deciding how mechanics should function (or not). 3.5 is a simulationist system. Forcing two things that are contradictory to go together defeats the purpose of simulationism.

 

[pawsplay]

The blackguard thing I can kinda buy, but still, you have to have 5 ranks in Hide. So in order to become a fallen paladin-blackguard you have to go through this bizarre metagame hoop to realize your concept.

I suppose. Then again, you could just take a level of Rogue, befitting your new, fallen status, before going into Blackguard.

If you are making a high level Blackguard from scratch, sure, you can metagame it. So what? The blackguard class is a metagame concept. The paladin class is a metagame concept. "Why should I have to take a specific class to be a lawful good paladin whose conviction grants him supernatural powers?" So blackguards have to hide; it's good to know it takes more than twirling your mustache and dressing in basic black to get powers like that. It makes blackguards dishonorable, and it also compensates for high armor check penalties for wearing Evil Bad Guy Armor when you go sneaking past level 4 guards.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Oh, I have ZERO problem with alignment restrictions for Paladins. I just think there should be a wider variety of Holy Warriors than just that one, and appropriate alignment restrictions go hand in hand with that.

I think the word "paladin" has too much history associated with it and I cringe at the thought of a chaotic good paladin. I have no problem, however, with a chaotic good holy warrior with similar abilities. But paladins should remain lawful good, even if the justicar or somesuch is mechanically identical save alignment.

 

[El Mahdi]

Fluff matters and the intent of it should be taken into consideration whenever deciding how mechanics should function (or not). 3.5 is a simulationist system. Forcing two things that are contradictory to go together defeats the purpose of simulationism.

In this case, the Fluff matters to you, to others it doesn't seem to be a problem. That however, isn't to say either you or they, are wrong or right. Also, I'll agree that 3.5 can support a simulationist playstyle better than other editions and some other rules systems (and this is why I like it also), but a system in and of itself is no more simulationist, or narrative, or whatever, than any other system. Those are playstyle choices. Again, I'll admit that some editions or systems better support certain styles, but that doesn't mean they are restricted to those styles.

It seems that what you may be finding contradictory is that the fluff contradicts the mechanics. And that's a valid point. All I was saying, is that in the end, the mechanics work in a balanced way with other classes. Fluff matters to me also, but as I said, in this instance and in my opinion, I don't see a problem. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean there isn't a problem from your perspective.

 

[Psion]

Oh, I have ZERO problem with alignment restrictions for Paladins. I just think there should be a wider variety of Holy Warriors than just that one, and appropriate alignment restrictions go hand in hand with that.

Very good way to put it. There are deities of different alignments, so it follows they could grant powers to followers of appropriate alignment.

But the paladin's code is part of the concept of the paladin. You take away the image of a character who obeys certain strictures and believes in them--a characteristic of lawful good--you aren't talking about a paladin anymore.

That's part of the problem I've had with various attempts at "holy warrior" under WotC's watch, such as the Unearthed Arcana one. They are just an alignment stamp, there is no deeper concept.

I recall that one designer I knew, after seeing the first Dragon Compendium, submitted a proposal to write up the much more conceptual rich "Plethora of Paladins" article up for a second volume, should it materialize. He was turned down, citing that there was already UA.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I recall that one designer I knew, after seeing the first Dragon Compendium, submitted a proposal to write up the much more conceptual rich "Plethora of Paladins" article up for a second volume, should it materialize. He was turned down, citing that there was already UA.

Hm, there were some alt.paladins in Dragon magazine. . . 310? Maybe 312 as well. What did you think of those?


Just for the record, I like things along the lines of the Prestige Paladin and Bard (from Unearthed Arcana). But some proper versions [of Prestige Paladin] for each alignment should be available, really. . .

 

[Runestar]

Forget the mechanics for a second and think about this logically. VoP says you can have no magic weapons. Kensai says that your body parts become magic weapons. Tell me that there isn't a conflict of interest here.

There isn't.

The real intent of VOP, IMO, is simply that you give up your current allotment of magic gear in exchange for the benefits of said VOP feat. This means that effectively, VOP is just an alternate means of accessing magic gear. There are a whole lot of strict roleplaying requirements attached to it, but honestly, the feat would still work even if you scrapped them.

For instance, I use this rationale when deciding that VOP scales by ECL, rather than HD, since you get wealth according to your ECL.

Kensai simply allow you to simulate the equivalent of magic gear through other means. It is a class feature, nothing more. It merely follows the rules for magic weapon crafting for convenience's sake. I wouldn't no sooner ban it than I would ban a soulknife's mindblade from working with VOP.

 

[Psion]

Hm, there were some alt.paladins in Dragon magazine. . . 310? Maybe 312 as well. What did you think of those?

Better than UA, not as good as Book of the Righteous & Holy Warrior's Handbook.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Forget the mechanics for a second and think about this logically. VoP says you can have no magic weapons. Kensai says that your body parts become magic weapons. Tell me that there isn't a conflict of interest here.

Ok, I will forget the mechanics for a second. Kensai's signature weapon reads: "The character focuses a part of his life energy on the weapon, making it more effective in his hands and his hands alone."

VoP causes you to treat a weapon you wield (even a stick off the ground) as better than it should be (and eventually good-aligned). In both cases, said weapon would not be as good in anyone else's hands, you are imparting your essence into the weapon. Seems to me that fluff-wise Kensai and VoP are a perfect match.

Back to mechanics!
The only weapon a VoP Kensai could use as a signature weapon is an unarmed strike or natural weapon (otherwise it has to be masterwork, which VoP doesn't allow), neither of which can EVER be used by any one else, so even if the signature weapon enhancement end results worked identically to a normal magic weapon, it would still only benefit when used by the VoP Kensai character, and no one else.

Back to Fluff!
Only a LG Exalted character could be a VoP Kensai, and it seems completely reasonable to be an exalted lawful character having the self-discipline and loyalty to a lord to both choose voluntary poverty and take an oath of service.