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: 270694" data-attributes="member: 4594">This point is only valid in-game as long as nothing is occuring outside the Paladin's immediate vicinity, but within traveling distance.  Staying still in this instance, especially for a battle-focused Paladin, is worthy of requiring atonement.I provided them merely as an example of one Paladin type that would make little to no use of Leadership.  I was attempting to point out the Paladins aren't necessarily about leading armies  The Paladins of Firehair are just the most wildly divergent example I had at-hand, but there are others on that same page that, with some thought, are actually a bit more worthy of discussion.Azuth(Also Deneir, et al):  Paladins of the god of Mages tend to start as Paladins for a time, then devote themselves to the art of wizardry.  (According to previous additions) These characters often adventure to seek out ancient ruins, particularly from the time of Netheril, so that the knowledge within can be used by future generations.  (IMO, very odd group to be constantly prepared for a war, you'd think they'd want to attract as little attention as possible, what with all that research and spelunking they must do)Ilmater:  Paladins of the Broken God guard the weak and use their healing powers on those that need them.  They are not shy about fighting evil, but they would rather pause to heal someone who is about to die than sacrifice that life in order to persue fleeing evildoers.  Almost pascifistic.  Very unlikely to attract a retinue of following warriors going everywhere.  While you might be able to make a case for a group of healer-type characters, but this is still counter to the image of the leader of armies that SoaPM seems to be trying to inspire.Leadership may be powerful, but I would argue it's just not always appropriate enough to be forced down a prospective Paladin's throat.  The three examples I've provided all fit into the description given for Paladins in the PHB, and yet not one of them is really "Leader" material. in the sense that SoaPM seems to be talking about.  To sum up all the arguments I've seen against this class:The statistic requirements are far too high (SoaPM STILL hasn't shown how to make a viable Paladin using average stats), and thus de-emphasizes those key stats.Just copied from the Blackguard, a horribly uninspired approach (True, but not necessarily a bad thing.The Leadership feat is spurious and further excludes many members of the archtypical Paladin from actually taking the class.  I think I've demonstrated that well enough by providing these examples taken directly from an official source.  Even if you don't use the campaign setting itself, all three ARE, in fact, perfectly viable interpretations of the "standard" Paladin.On the whole, this strikes me as a very twisted view of the Paladin itself.  If we look back, the class has never recieved a retinue of followers (unless they did in first edition), and yet now SoaPM insists that it's only natural that they have one.  The Paladin class has also never had an Intelligence requirement, yet SoaPM believes that they must be of superior intelligence.  Not "above average" but so rare that one is unlikely to find anyone quite this good in anything less than a large town.  Not only a disregard for creativity in moderate re-interpretations of what's in the book, but a disregard for history as well.  As anything other than a Paladin, this class would have much more approval from me.</blockquote>

Verification