D&D 4E What will the paladin represent in 4e?

[Tequila Sunrise]

Apparently 4e is going to have non-LG paladins (of Asmodeus?). This might imply that all gods can have paladins, or just that the blackguard has become a core class variant of the paladin. This is not an evolution that I like much, and this post explains my views on the variants of paladin that we've seen so far.

I feel the opposite. If 4e eliminates all those silly class-based alignment restrictions, I just might buy it. In my mind, paladins are essentially fighter-cleric combos so I've never liked the LG requirement.

 

[hong]

To my mind, a champion of a god is basically a cleric. After all, a D&D cleric wears plate armour, uses a mace, and casts flamestrike to smite down his foes. That sounds pretty championy.

 

[The Human Target]

I'd like to see Champion of a cause.

Paladins in the previous editions are all too specific for base PC classes to me.

 

[Gothic_Demon]

I always saw the Paladin as the pure Knight-Errant, whose word could be trusted and who could lead people through dark times. Paladins in my game have never been devoted to a cause or to a God, but rather to doing right and good and bringing justice to those beyond normal reach.

The Paladin protects the good and innocent and punishes the wicked.

 

[Danzauker]

...
the paladin doesn't follow the code because of the deity. Rather, he follows the deity because of the code.
...

This is IMHO one of the best ways to describe the difference between a Cleric and a Paladin I've read in quite some time.

 

[Sundragon2012]

I have to go with deity centered because paladins are archetypally related to the mythic Joan of Arc and Charlesmagne's (sp?) Paladins, King Arthur and his knights, who were devoutly Christian (in regards to Arthur, the legend is far older than the Malory material upon which D&D's knightly paladins are based and pagan in nature). These folks were warriors of God, and were lawful because they were devoted to the cause of God and the Church which were both decidedly lawful (using D&D's simplistic alignment system).

Paladin types put god before all and the ethos of the god they choose is lawful therefore they are lawful. Putting ethos before deity is putting the carriage before the horse. Plus, I always thought is was dumb (and never use it IMC) that clerics and paladins can get their power from mere belief and devotion to an ideal. I didn't realize that merely believing in something can grant magical powers. There must be a lot of little boys who can slay dragons and little girls who are actually fairy princesses in D&D....because little kids truly believe they can be anything.

I have to write to Mike Mearls and ask him to include rules on "The Power of Belief" in 4e.



Sundragon

 

[fuindordm]

I have to go with deity centered because paladins are archetypally related to the mythic Joan of Arc and Charlesmagne's (sp?) Paladins, King Arthur and his knights, who were devoutly Christian (in regards to Arthur, the legend is far older than the Malory material upon which D&D's knightly paladins are based and pagan in nature). These folks were warriors of God, and were lawful because they were devoted to the cause of God and the Church which were both decidedly lawful (using D&D's simplistic alignment system).

Yes, but there's a crucial difference: those figures had only one God to choose from. In a monotheistic campaign, the distinction between paladin of a deity and paladin of a moral code vanishes.

In a polytheistic campaign, every deity would have their own order of paladins (in which case they don't feel as special, and it's hard to justify why they aren't just clerics), each with its own moral code.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

I think making paladins the champions of causes could work very nicely, and give them some distinctiveness from clerics (who, in turn, should IMO be beholden to a deity or a pantheon).

 

[FireLance]

I still like my paladins to be LG, so to me, a paladin's devotion should primarily be to his code, then to his cause (as long as it does not conflict with his first devotion), and then to his deity (as long as it does not conflict with either his first or his second devotion ). Of course, you get a problem when the default assumption is that paladins are empowered by their deities, and he is commanded to do something in the name of his god that conflicts with either his code or his cause. This may be good or bad, depending on your play style.

Tying different paladin powers to code, cause and god may be an interesting idea. I'm not sure if this will happen in 4e, though.

 

[Drowbane]

I'm hoping that "paladin" will be a talent tree for Clerics.