Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lily Inverse" data-source="post: 269864" data-attributes="member: 4594">. . . re-read Leadership.  Nothing about dismissing your followers there.  Since it's intended to replace the Fighter trait from 1st and 2nd Editions, where they would simply "show up" once you achieved a certain level, I would be highly tempted to say the intention is for the character to be required to keep his followers and cohorts around continuously, or to make arrangements for them to be doing something if this isn't possible.  Moreover, if you allow him to dismiss and recruit followers at will, Leadership simply becomes a Munchkin's way of solving problems."What, we can't go into the castle through the front?  Okay, I'm going back to town and getting some followers for slaughtering!"All right, you completely (and I can only assume purposely) misinterpreted my meaning here.  I've already addressed that Leadership is clearly intended as a personal PC army, so you ARE keeping this people with you or keeping them continually employed in some capacity.  Why would the Paladin would move on? He shouldn't if there's still a chance of retribution!  But once he's done his job there, he must move on, because if he isn't then he's incredibly negligent. in his duties.  To "stay in place" in one of my games strips a Paladin of his Paladinhood, almost without fail.  The "But something else might happen here" argument doesn't cut it, because you've heard about some place something else that HAS happened and needs redress, and you're sitting on your laurels doing nothing about it.Actually, one, I have seen Paladins played properly at first level.  Two, I told you to do the math of a 25 point character.  Doesn't work, does it?  Mediocre Paladins are above average for you.  Extraordinary Paladins, the kind that make it into legends and history, can't exist, because there's no (demi) human extraordinary enough to set them on the path to greatness that way.  Maybe this shouldn't be a goal for every Paladin. . . but without SOME legendary Paladins, how would anybody have heard of them?  If nobody's heard of them, nobody will care when one shows up.  I'll continue on this point later.Yes, but what you propose is essentially having his own private retainer.  See my points about Leadership, above.They are hardly self-serving.  They are superficially similiar to Gallants from the old Bard's handbook, but with several key differences.  For Paladins, they behave in a flighty manner. However, they hold firmly to the approaches of justice and order, thus you wont' find any Paladins of Firehair diving out the window as the husband approaches.What they are NOT is leaders of men.  They are charged with a very specific task, and keeping an army around is simply counter to that.  Indeed, even allowing one to move through an area that he has been charged to defend would be a huge no-no.Also, you consider the Realms to be vastly overpowered?  Take a look at the FRCS again, and notice the NPC statistics.  With a few exceptions, there is almost a direct correlation between extraordinary stats . . . and extraordinarily high levels.  This is also true of most other published campaign settings, actually, the Realms just makes it more obvious.  Unless you're considering 13-16 to be nigh-superhuman, there simply are unlikely to be any 20th level Paladins in your campaign world, for this very reason.  I have NEVER seen a published 20th level character with a stat less than a 12 in any handbook.  The higher stats help you to survive the dangerous lower levels, then you replace that with SKILL later.Actually, this probably already occured to you, but the "quintessential" Paladin is still human, despite being open to all races now.  Look who ELSE can take this class combination.</blockquote>

Verification