Jerrid Al-Kundo
First Post
Assuming, of course, that those PClasses are being used in the campaign in question.
If not, then the niche may be wide open.
If not, then the niche may be wide open.
The (quintessential) paladin prestige class
- Thread starter Sonofapreacherman
- Start date
Sonofapreacherman
Explorer
Sorry for being negligent folks. My IP address was on the blink for 2 days. Let me post a quick couple of things.
-----
apsuman.
The lay on hands ability does not heal 2 Hit Points per level, but rather your Charisma bonus per level. A significant difference to be sure.
-----
stranger.
You are most assuredly correct. Percival was considered a fool. I don't want to deny his existence either. Presidents like him are what caused me start designing a "righteous peasant hero" prestige class. Such a prestige class would have all the central abilities of the paladin prestige class, plus a few unique abilities and skills of their own.
-----
The two prestige classes are "meant" to foil each other. Thus I made it so. Not only for that reason, but also to encourage role-playing (forcing characters to "earn" this prestige class) in all the ways that I have already stated.
-----
By even bringing up the hospitaller, you have already justified my claim that you do not speak for role-players. You are still counting abilities by reading a few of the same ability names and drawing false and fast conclusions. Try actually reading the introductory paragraphs to identify the difference between these two prestige classes. If you have already, read it again.
Beside that, the hospitaller is fraught with contradictions. The chart doesn't list any spells per day, but the ability description does. The spells per day ability description claims that the hospitaller class *does not* gain the turn undead ability, but the chart *does*.
-----
apsuman.
The lay on hands ability does not heal 2 Hit Points per level, but rather your Charisma bonus per level. A significant difference to be sure.
-----
stranger.
You are most assuredly correct. Percival was considered a fool. I don't want to deny his existence either. Presidents like him are what caused me start designing a "righteous peasant hero" prestige class. Such a prestige class would have all the central abilities of the paladin prestige class, plus a few unique abilities and skills of their own.
-----
You state the obvious. That is exactly what I set out to do. So really, mission accomplished.animesuperman[/i] [B]You have a problem with role-playing in your group said:
The two prestige classes are "meant" to foil each other. Thus I made it so. Not only for that reason, but also to encourage role-playing (forcing characters to "earn" this prestige class) in all the ways that I have already stated.
-----
I really don't see your point. Everybody wants ideal stats, but don't always get them, so they learn how to get by. The paladin prestige class needs three above average attributes, namely Strength, Wisdom, and Charisma. Many classes need three strong scores. By your own examples, it's not uncommon. And despite your repeated instance to the contrary, my proof has already demonstrated that potential paladins only need "slightly above average" (12) Intelligence.
Please go back and read my quote again. You actually featured it in your last reply, but with the same misunderstanding that prompted me to respond in the first place.
Oh my lord! Al, listen to yourself. I am not claiming that historical leaders cannot have low Intelligence. I am talking about paladins! Not dictators or presidents. My god, dictators or presidents can be the most incompetent people in the world. I am talking about paladins. Try not to derail the thread with irrelevant examples please.
By even bringing up the hospitaller, you have already justified my claim that you do not speak for role-players. You are still counting abilities by reading a few of the same ability names and drawing false and fast conclusions. Try actually reading the introductory paragraphs to identify the difference between these two prestige classes. If you have already, read it again.
Beside that, the hospitaller is fraught with contradictions. The chart doesn't list any spells per day, but the ability description does. The spells per day ability description claims that the hospitaller class *does not* gain the turn undead ability, but the chart *does*.
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
This is not true.
First your potential paladins need a 13 intelligence for expertise and improved disarm. They may obtain this through a stat increase but that doesn't change the fact that they need a 13 int.
Second, your paladin prestige class needs 5 above average stats not 3. It needs Strength, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. A 13 (or even a 12) int is above average. And any character whose abilities come in to play only on the front line of combat (and improved disarm, smite evil, etc won't come into play anywhere else) needs a con bonus in order to survive the amount of damage that melee foes like trolls, xorns, umber hulks, huge and greater elementals dish out.
Stat increases could be used to augment intelligence in order to qualify for the character class but that would only exacerbate the paladins problems of having a bunch of mediocre stats and not being good at what he's supposed to do. Effective use of stat increases (and you don't get many) almost always entails putting them into one stat which directly effects the character's abiltity to do what he does best. (Fighters increase strength or con, rogues increase dex, spellcasters increase their spellcasting attribute, etc). A character who starts out with marginal scores in his prime attributes (str, con, cha in this case) and then fails to increase them with his limited stat increases will increasingly fall behind the power curve and become more of a liability than an asset to his party.
I'm not sure what kind of system your players use to create characters but this prestige class is not viable for most point buy systems less than 32 points. At 32 points, it is still marginal (15 str, 14 con, cha, 12 wis, 14 int, 10 dex.) By 36 points, the character is looking much more viable and if you allow more points than that, any character class and concept can be made viable. Of course, the average set of rolls for 4d6 drop the lowest supposedly works out to about 28 points and usually includes a few low scores so I suspect that unless you use a very high point buy system this will not really be a viable class.
Also, it's worth noting that you haven't merely copied the blackguard. By substituting improved disarm and leadership for power attack, cleave, and sunder, you have given the paladin prerequisites that dilute his effectiveness whereas the blackguard's prerequisite feats are must have feats for any strength based fighter. Based upon these prerequisites, I would expect that, all other things being equal (equipment, level, and point buy or rolls for stats) a duel between a paladin and a blackguard would have the blackguard wipe the floor with the less melee-effective paladin until the paladin's cohort came to the rescue of his master and they double-teamed the blackguard. While this may actually be your intention, my impression is that it would be much more appropriate for the paladin to be holding his own with the blackguard. The blackguard should be the one who brings a friend to a one on one duel and dishonorably attempts to double team his foe. (After that, the paladins' friends would jump to his rescue).
Sonofapreacherman said:Al.
You are nitpicking the word foolish now. Foolish, stupid, idiotic, dim, dull. They all mean the same thing to me. A man or woman of low intellect would not lend itself to the respect that paladins are supposed to command.
As for Leadership, the feat has nothing to do with Intelligence. The only prerequisite for the Leadership feat is that characters must be 6th level or higher. So I don't know where you're going by pointing out that great charismatic leaders have not always been known for their intellect.
You tell me.
All points well raised, and I would offer 2 bits of my personal perspective on this...
1) A Paladin is a holy warrior for their deity... they are the #1 representative in the field for their deities wishes and expansion of influence (an aspect oft overlooked in favor of clerics doing so).. Paladins represent their deity in ALL aspects... maybe not the perfect aspect, but not a foolish (stupid, dumb, etc) aspect... This means that a Paladin not only has to be tough, strong, and charismatic, but wise and intelligent... why? Wisdom (to most people) equates to common sense and intelligence to being able to spot and know right from wrong, to be able to put a gray world in a black and white perspective (This is good for my deity, this is bad)... So a 13 Int requirement is not out of line as the Paladin MUST be able to remember everythig they have learned about their deity, the rules of conduct, the rules of any paladin order they may belong to etc... Leadership is also lending itself naturally to Paladins, they ARE leaders of men, they WILL lead their deities followers into battle (not just their own) they are the front line of ANY combat action for their deities interest... Paldins are not just the ideals (as mentioned in the original post) they LIVE them, they BREATH them, the EXPOUSE them to gain converts... but that's may take on them
2) This is MY house rule... I don't stick to the LG aspect, Paladins can be of any alignment, but MUST match their deities alignment.. it makes no sense (and never has) that a LG would choose to follow Loki (CN or CE depending on what you read)... there would be too much conflict between the deity and their 'chosen' leaders... Each deity has a set of guidelines for their Paladins (or chosen champions or whatever name you care to call them) and those requirements will vary anything/everything that a paladin is/can be... The Paladin (to me) represents that a deity has 'called' to a character to be their physical representative on the the >insert name< game world... to live out the deities ideals, to spread the word by deed and action that 'hey, this deity is cool' to the masses. ;p
Bt again, those are my thoughts, not yours.
Perhaps, but the point is that (as E_B has demonstrated) the paladin needs five strong ability scores, as you put it. Taking the default array, there is no way that the paladin can afford a 12 int (to start) without sacrificing a lot. The default paladin could sacrifice Strength, reducing his effectiveness in combat. He can sacrifice Constitution, again reducing his effectiveness in combat. He can sacrifice Wisdom, reducing his spellcasting abilities and making himself a 'fool'. He can sacrifice Charisma, hitting his leadership potential and abilities. Clearly, none of these four scenarios is desirable.
Your justification for the high Intelligence is that 'they can only get respected if they have high Int'. My examples are to demonstrate that this theory is incorrect. High Intelligence is NOT required to be 'inspirational'- the historical examples are proof of that fact.
My main objection to the Intelligence requirement, however, is that it seems that Intelligence is not the primary ability of the paladin (you yourself say that Strength, Wisdom and Charisma are). Yet none of these three are presented as a mandatory requirement, and Intelligence is. Surely a contradiction?
If the paladin and hospitaller really are conceptually different, and if the paladin really is unique in its 'niche', please highlight the differences. I don't think many people here (and not just myself) can draw a broad distinction. Granted, there may be cursory, superficial or minor differences, but a prestige class is meant to be different in its own right, rather than a weaker clone of the alternative.
As for ability strength, this is the continuation of the above point. I do not (as you unfoundedly assume) bolt for 'abilities'. Yet if two prestige classes, which are almost identical, are put to a normal set of players, no one will take the weaker class. For one, as Lily Inverse had shown, the stronger class better serves its deity- making it more in line with the concept. Let's be realistic: if class A is stronger than class B, and both classes are conceptually (near) identical and are charged with a 'divine mission' why would anyone choose class A. It is a bit like a modern army chooses to train its soldiers in *exactly* the same drills and methods, but with obsolete technology. No conceptual difference: but one major difference in effectiveness.
A good point, and perhaps even a sensible justification for a high Intelligence requirement. But yet you also offer similar justification for Wisdom, Charisma and the like- none of these are presented as a mandatory requirement. Why not? Further, I would disagree with this justification: surely these are best portrayed by Knowledge: Religion or similar rather than a blanket Int score?
Lily Inverse
First Post
Sonofapreacherman
Let me spell this out for you in no uncertain terms. I am going to try to sum up the entire argument against this prestiege class in a few paragraphs.
1) You have repeatedly stated, over and over, that Int should be a prerequisite of Paladinhood. However, this brings up the number of required "Good" stats to five. Not even the BEST published PrCs have these kinds of requirements. Furthermore, you have also set up this class so that the ONLY requirement is Intelligence. This means that a paladin can be either foolish, weak, sickly, or a bumpkin, but he MUST be fairly intelligent. I won't get into the numbers again, but unless you're running some kind of supermen campaign, I have only seen two characters who meet your requirement AND can put up even a halfway decent fight in eight years. And when you're stuck generating new characters every other week along with seven other people for a few years, that's saying something.
2) PrC's should offer at least as much as going the stragiht-up route. Your Paladin does not. It makes absolutely no sense to become a Paladin even if you are already the type of person who acts like one. Indeed, your Intelligence argument is counterintuitive in the face of this fact, for it would take a remarkable lack of forethought to actually take a level of this class.
3) You created this class as an opposite to the Blackguard. The only problem is, as has been pointed out, the Blackguard's feats are useful for any STR-based fighter. The Paladin you have proposed has the Leadership feat, crippling him out of the starting gate by robbing him of a combat-based feat.
4) This point is actually my own. The Paladin, as a Core Class, is the master of mounted combat. Your PrC seems to have very little to reflect this, and again, robbed of a Combat based feat and two feat slots for non-mounted combat, you dilute this point, and the usefulness of a bonded mount, even further.
There is no reward and a very great cost to what you propose. Remember what you have to ask yourself when making a PrC:
What makes this class so good that everyone wants it?
and
Why is this class so horrible that no one will ever take it?
There are far too many points on the latter for anyone TO ever take it. Nobody would ever really want to be a paladin in this world, even the paladins. Thus, you will not have paladin PCs, or even anybody expressing the vaguest interest in becoming one. If no PCs would ever become a Paladin in a million years, it's safe to assume that very few qualified NPCs would join their ranks, either.
Let me spell this out for you in no uncertain terms. I am going to try to sum up the entire argument against this prestiege class in a few paragraphs.
1) You have repeatedly stated, over and over, that Int should be a prerequisite of Paladinhood. However, this brings up the number of required "Good" stats to five. Not even the BEST published PrCs have these kinds of requirements. Furthermore, you have also set up this class so that the ONLY requirement is Intelligence. This means that a paladin can be either foolish, weak, sickly, or a bumpkin, but he MUST be fairly intelligent. I won't get into the numbers again, but unless you're running some kind of supermen campaign, I have only seen two characters who meet your requirement AND can put up even a halfway decent fight in eight years. And when you're stuck generating new characters every other week along with seven other people for a few years, that's saying something.
2) PrC's should offer at least as much as going the stragiht-up route. Your Paladin does not. It makes absolutely no sense to become a Paladin even if you are already the type of person who acts like one. Indeed, your Intelligence argument is counterintuitive in the face of this fact, for it would take a remarkable lack of forethought to actually take a level of this class.
3) You created this class as an opposite to the Blackguard. The only problem is, as has been pointed out, the Blackguard's feats are useful for any STR-based fighter. The Paladin you have proposed has the Leadership feat, crippling him out of the starting gate by robbing him of a combat-based feat.
4) This point is actually my own. The Paladin, as a Core Class, is the master of mounted combat. Your PrC seems to have very little to reflect this, and again, robbed of a Combat based feat and two feat slots for non-mounted combat, you dilute this point, and the usefulness of a bonded mount, even further.
There is no reward and a very great cost to what you propose. Remember what you have to ask yourself when making a PrC:
What makes this class so good that everyone wants it?
and
Why is this class so horrible that no one will ever take it?
There are far too many points on the latter for anyone TO ever take it. Nobody would ever really want to be a paladin in this world, even the paladins. Thus, you will not have paladin PCs, or even anybody expressing the vaguest interest in becoming one. If no PCs would ever become a Paladin in a million years, it's safe to assume that very few qualified NPCs would join their ranks, either.
reapersaurus
Explorer
Listen, people.
Sonofapreacherman has been told repeatedly... in very clear, accurate and applicable gaming language why his PrC misses the boat.
He is unwilling, or incapable of seeing this.
My hypothesis is that he is truly a ROLE-PLAYER.
You know.
The type that doesn't need rules on a piece of paper and rolls on a die to determine what happens.
Rules just get in the way to him.
The 'special abilities' that he scoffs at are *gasp* the only thing that 3E has to differentiate a paladin from another class!
Listen, sonofa :
If you're not going to listen to ALL the great advice listed here, why don't you just make an anti-assassin PrC that uses healing instead of poison use or something?
(god, Epametheus line of "horribly uninspired" got me to laughing)
Now that I've vented a bit, sonofa, it SEEMs like you truly do have a good handle on what paladins should be like, and i actually agree with your first post (that most people don't have the faintest clue what playing a paladin is like).
Well, I DO know how to play a paladin.
I'd wager quite a few others in this thread do, as well.
And if you won't listen to all of us telling you that It's not good enough to SAY you're a paladin and that you are the "defender of the weak and slayer of evil"....you have to PROVE it by going out there, facing down evil and sending it to hell in a body bag.
OR deftly dealing with it by your force of personality (Diplomacy, etc).
My Point -----> By making your Paladin PRC, you have made the paladin LESS EFFECTIVE in doing what he is tasked to do by both his own personality and the diety or alignment he values.
you must give a paladin the proper tools with which to slay evil and protect his charges.
If you muck up his abilities and prereqs with stuff that makes him no better than a common fighter in combat thanb you have done a great disservice to the Paladin ideal, games-mechanic wise.
And if you are not concerned with games mechanics, and abilities, than why the hell are you making rules for something which is really just a role-playing issue?
Sonofapreacherman has been told repeatedly... in very clear, accurate and applicable gaming language why his PrC misses the boat.
He is unwilling, or incapable of seeing this.
My hypothesis is that he is truly a ROLE-PLAYER.
You know.
The type that doesn't need rules on a piece of paper and rolls on a die to determine what happens.
Rules just get in the way to him.
The 'special abilities' that he scoffs at are *gasp* the only thing that 3E has to differentiate a paladin from another class!
Listen, sonofa :
If you're not going to listen to ALL the great advice listed here, why don't you just make an anti-assassin PrC that uses healing instead of poison use or something?
(god, Epametheus line of "horribly uninspired" got me to laughing)
Now that I've vented a bit, sonofa, it SEEMs like you truly do have a good handle on what paladins should be like, and i actually agree with your first post (that most people don't have the faintest clue what playing a paladin is like).
Well, I DO know how to play a paladin.
I'd wager quite a few others in this thread do, as well.
And if you won't listen to all of us telling you that It's not good enough to SAY you're a paladin and that you are the "defender of the weak and slayer of evil"....you have to PROVE it by going out there, facing down evil and sending it to hell in a body bag.
OR deftly dealing with it by your force of personality (Diplomacy, etc).
My Point -----> By making your Paladin PRC, you have made the paladin LESS EFFECTIVE in doing what he is tasked to do by both his own personality and the diety or alignment he values.
you must give a paladin the proper tools with which to slay evil and protect his charges.
If you muck up his abilities and prereqs with stuff that makes him no better than a common fighter in combat thanb you have done a great disservice to the Paladin ideal, games-mechanic wise.
And if you are not concerned with games mechanics, and abilities, than why the hell are you making rules for something which is really just a role-playing issue?
Jerrid Al-Kundo
First Post
Kindly review his posts and find any statement from him that supports this.reapersaurus said:
Surprise. You find none.
What he has indicated is that his aims aren't after a singular focus of power and that obtaining the highest of modifiers aren't a concern.
Sorry you have such a hard time reading what he's written.
I'm also sorry you have such an easy time typing insultive falsehoods like truly a ROLE-PLAYER.
Great is subjective.
Every campaign and group has their own measure of what's powerful and what's fitting to a campaign.
That's the purpose of a House Rules board, last I checked.
Yes, advise was given, but so was his reasoning for doing things the way he did.
Which of these fell on deaf ears (or, being a message board, blind eyes)?
I don't see that. A PC multiclassing into Paladin wouldn't be as potent just from the spells.
Add in the (incorrect) view that this Paladin is limited to 10 levels; under the new Epic Rules, this isn't the case.
Another topic that's been brought up is the dependance of 4 Ability Scores; But isn't there another class that has a dependance on 6 Ability Scores? Yes, there is. The Psion.
If someone doesn't have the stats, they have their stat increases. If they don't want to pursue the stats with their increases, then, in SoaPM's campaign, this is a sign of a lack of dedication. It is part of the sacrifice and earning that a PClass is intended to represent.
Again, if you read back to my first posts, I wouldn't use this Paladin because it doesn't fit my campaign. But I can see it fitting his. It's fine for you and others not to like his take on the Paladin. It's not fine for you to tell him he's wrong for not doing it the way you or others would have.
Yet, reading this thread, it is indicated several times that he his.
Lily Inverse
First Post
This is all well and good, but what we have repeatedly tried to point out is that his Paladin gains less for his XP than being a multi-classed Fighter-Cleric. This is more than just not "obtaining the highest modifiers," this is actually a central concern of the entire class-level system, as well as its greatest flaw. Classes with great requirements should have equivalent rewards - this one doesn't. In effect, he wishes to penalize Paladins for their dedication.
Very true, but there IS a basic mathematical component to this. In standard mathematics, 3 is always greater than 1. If a PrC is notably weak by the obvious numerical advantages, it will likely show up in play unless there are other modifications that we aren't being told about.
Actually, yes, he is limited to ten paladin levels. Once you end a class' progression, you can pick up other ones or begin getting other benefits, but a 10th level paladin is the highest you will ever see, even under Epic Level rules. The above is based on what information I've seen about the EHB, anyway.
Totally wrong. Yes, if you want to play a Psion who is without focus in any one of the six disciplines, then you're going to need all 16s and up to really take advantage of it. However, more often you'll want to focus on two or three key disciplines. Two or three key stats, and you get to pick which ones they are. This Paladin MUST have a decent score in one stat to qualify, and in three or four others to be truly effective, while it is possible to play an effective Psion with only one high stat. Not a particularly diverse one, but still effective.
Most of what the rest of us have been trying to point out is that this class completely lacks any sense of game balance. It is not just "Slightly weak." Taking a few levels in this Paladin will drastically reduce the effectiveness of the character in all combat situations I think Sonofapreacherman believes this class will be on-par with a fighter of equivalent level. The majority are saying that he will not be and are trying to point out why. I would say these arguments are the ones falling of deaf ears. The requirements are simply far too harsh for the return reward.
Last edited:
reapersaurus: The post of a genius! You made me realise that SoaPM's logic is all totally flawed.
Firstly, he claims to be a roleplayer, and hence unconcerned by ability, game mechanic and the like.
Then, he proceeds to devise the game mechanical solution to a paladin.
SOAPM- I say this to you: if you are truly unconcerned with game mechanic, why is a Paladin Prestige Class needed at all? Why not simply be a lawful good fighter/cleric, call yourself a paladin and be done with it. If you are truly unconcerned with game mechanics (as you repeatedly claim), then why bother with them at all? Why, indeed, play DnD, which is a mechanic-heavy system?
Jerrid: A more calculated and sensible defence of the class, but flawed nevertheless.
I for one loathe childish ad-hominem insult, but is roleplayer really an insult?
Quite correct, but the consensus (or at least, vast majority) seems to be against the prestige class as written.
His reasoning, as we have repeatedly demonstrated (not merely asserted, as he did) was faulty. Yet he continued to labour his point: who really have the deaf eyes and blind eyes?
I am with Lily on this one: a psion only really needs one or two decent stats that he can go to town on- granted, to garner the full utility of the class six may be required, but for this paladin at least five are required to even make it vaguely effective. A psion can be effective with just two good stats; this paladin demands five.
Faulty logic. If I were to make a paladin prestige class, which had as the prerequisites Skill Focus in six different Craft skills (which would probably be as justifiable as Improved Disarm) and clearly inferior abilities, then I would be laughed off the boards. Harsh prerequisites and shoddy abilites cannot be justified by saying 'it is part of the sacrifice'. Besides, the paladin makes the sacrifice- but what does he receive in turn?
Perhaps, but one must ask why he posted it on the boards in the first place in that case. If he is not willing to listen to criticism, he should have just introduced his ill-advised class to his game without even bothering the rest of us.
Firstly, he claims to be a roleplayer, and hence unconcerned by ability, game mechanic and the like.
Then, he proceeds to devise the game mechanical solution to a paladin.
SOAPM- I say this to you: if you are truly unconcerned with game mechanic, why is a Paladin Prestige Class needed at all? Why not simply be a lawful good fighter/cleric, call yourself a paladin and be done with it. If you are truly unconcerned with game mechanics (as you repeatedly claim), then why bother with them at all? Why, indeed, play DnD, which is a mechanic-heavy system?
Jerrid: A more calculated and sensible defence of the class, but flawed nevertheless.
I for one loathe childish ad-hominem insult, but is roleplayer really an insult?
Quite correct, but the consensus (or at least, vast majority) seems to be against the prestige class as written.
His reasoning, as we have repeatedly demonstrated (not merely asserted, as he did) was faulty. Yet he continued to labour his point: who really have the deaf eyes and blind eyes?
I am with Lily on this one: a psion only really needs one or two decent stats that he can go to town on- granted, to garner the full utility of the class six may be required, but for this paladin at least five are required to even make it vaguely effective. A psion can be effective with just two good stats; this paladin demands five.
Faulty logic. If I were to make a paladin prestige class, which had as the prerequisites Skill Focus in six different Craft skills (which would probably be as justifiable as Improved Disarm) and clearly inferior abilities, then I would be laughed off the boards. Harsh prerequisites and shoddy abilites cannot be justified by saying 'it is part of the sacrifice'. Besides, the paladin makes the sacrifice- but what does he receive in turn?
Perhaps, but one must ask why he posted it on the boards in the first place in that case. If he is not willing to listen to criticism, he should have just introduced his ill-advised class to his game without even bothering the rest of us.
