Why aren't paladins liked?

[kanithardm]

The only thing that seems to be really useful to the group as a whole is the paladin's detect evil ability. But from what I've read on this board, many DMs hate this ability, and most Players don't really care or give it a second thought.

I hate PCs with this ability, because when they use detect evil i start to glow?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I just hope Paladins will be tolerated more in the future. As someone said it's not just them that can piss the rest of the group off the Rogue can too when he insists on robbing everybody/thing blind and gets the rest of the party involved as a result of his actions.

Funny thing is, though, rogues don't have to do that. The only rogues I've ever seen do that are kender. Paladins, on the other hand, are virtually required to piss the group off.

If people ACTUALLY played alignment once in a while instead of just putting lip service and then acting in whatever way they feel like, then you would see paladins get a lot more popular.

Alignment is often seen as a straightjacket. There are more than nine ways people can behave, after all. That might make paladins more popular, but make the game worse for everyone else.

 

[Darmanicus]

I would think that a party of at least nominally heroic adventurers would like the idea of having a paladin in their group -- the epitomy of heroic classes. They are usually trustworthy and dedicated. They are literally fearless and devoted.

My party seems happy enough with me playing a Paladin, (this is the first time I have btw). I am trustworthy and dedicated to the party which, IMO and regards to the latter, is very important, and with regards to the former, is part of being a Paladin.

But in all my years of playing and DMing D&D, and in reading various forums on D&D, I've never seen anyone actually happy to have a paladin in the group. Usually the big class that everyone wants in their group is a cleric.

People who are not happy for a Paladin to be in the group I would assume do not wish to play especially good and heroic characters. Paladins quite happily fill the fighter slot so I don't see a problem there. Of course everyone wants a Cleric in the party because he's the healer.

The only thing that seems to be really useful to the group as a whole is the paladin's detect evil ability. But from what I've read on this board, many DMs hate this ability, and most Players don't really care or give it a second thought.

The only useful thing to the group - Detect Evil? Are you frickin' mad man? What's so big about it? Any old Cleric can use this at 1st! Has anyone read the description of this properly? If you detect an aura that is overwhelming to the character, (this usually being the case with regards to most BBEG's), he'll be stunned for a round. I can see why DM's get really naked at that one......NOT!!!

Using a computer game as an example, paladins in Diablo II have abilities that boost everyone's powers. A group of adventurers in that game gain a lot of tangible benefits from having a paladin in the group. Allies of a paladin in that game deal more damage, can regenerate, etc.

It's not a good idea to compare computer games to D&D......it's just not.

But in D&D, the closest thing to a party boost the paladin gives is the aura of courage that gives +4 against fear effects to those within 10' of the paladin. Not really a great boon.

Like the Fighter does a great job in that respect!? A Paladin is not a party buffer, he's a frickin' holy warrior. He does have certain spells that can help a party later on in his career though. The point you are trying to make here, frankly, is irrelevant because a Paladin is a Fighter foremost. Btw, Aura of Courage is VERY handy, (I suppose however if the party is never likely to face fear causing effects it's not but you could then say that about anything!).

So, does the paladin class actually bring anything to a group that is worthwhile? When organizing a new group of adventurers, someone always mentions the need for someone to play a cleric. But too often there are groans of annoyance when someone mentions wanting to play a paladin.

The Paladin brings many things to a party.....

1. His mount - another fighter.
2. Smiting Evil - great against evil...obviously.
3. Minor spellcasting.
4. He's a Fighter with GOOD saves.

Why isn't the paladin at the top of the list of classes to consider with a group of adventurers?

Probably because that in a party of 4 which is the default the Fighter slot is usually better filled with a, yup you guessed it, a Fighter!

Quasqueton

I suppose I'd better answer the original post and not just argue with others on tangents.....please see the above.......

 

[Darmanicus]

Funny thing is, though, rogues don't have to do that. The only rogues I've ever seen do that are kender. Paladins, on the other hand, are virtually required to piss the group off.

How so? Shouldn't a Cleric then do the same then if he's played properly? Course he should. Of course you're not gonna say that to the Cleric though because in your eyes he's more useful.

Alignment is often seen as a straightjacket. There are more than nine ways people can behave, after all. That might make paladins more popular, but make the game worse for everyone else.

I just don't see a problem with them!

 

[Hussar]

Alignment is often seen as a straightjacket. There are more than nine ways people can behave, after all. That might make paladins more popular, but make the game worse for everyone else.

WHile that is certainly true, as I said before, alignment should at the very least attempt to accurately describe a character's moral and ethical outlook. A character which consistently ignores his alignment in favor of particular actions should not be that alignment. For example, a CG rogue who steals all the time to line his own pockets is NOT good. At best he's CN, and possibly CE. Stealing is considered a morally evil act generally, particularly when the motivation is simple greed.

While, yes, characters generally can get away with straying from their alignment from time to time, it should be a major thing for the character and something he or she feels very bad about afterwards. Just as a moral person who lapses and does something evil feels guilty. Consistently ignoring your alignment should result in an alignment change.