Why aren't paladins liked?

[Dark Jezter]

- Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Any character claiming to have to be lawful and good in one of my campaigns is in for a rude awakening about the sorts of not-very-good-at-all that can be can per perpetrated in the name of the law, as well as the sorts of good intentions that try to get around proper procedure. (Not to point fingers, but just look at the president of the USA...)

We can vote for a flawed US President, but we cannot perceive the existence of a flawed paladin.

 

[kirinke]

well.
paladins are supposed to be the epitomy of their faith. that is, they are good and follow the spirit of their faith's tenants. Now that code my vary between deities. IE: different dieties, different codes. I would probably allow a paladin to be from any good aligned deity. after all, they're really just the chosen warriors of said deity.

Most paladins should be played 'down'. that is not holier than tho, because that would put off most potential converts. They should be subtle. know what i mean george?

 

[Ogre Mage]

Why we don't like paladins

1. Too many I have seen played as having a longsword shoved up their @$$. They are stereotypically RPed worse than perhaps any other class.

2. The paladin and rogue will constantly be in conflict and between the two, the paladin's role is more easily filled by another class.

3. Lack of incentive to pursue the class to high levels. The class is front loaded.

4. Their moral code is a high standard very few could live up to and very many fail.

5. A good aligned, battle-oriented cleric can do the paladin's job plus have full spellcasting progression.

 

[Nifft]

I lurve Paladins. They have to be a core class, IMHO, because so much of D&D is based around archtypes that they embody. (Same goes for Ranger, IMHO.)

-- N

 

[SkidAce]

Two thoughts....

1. My third character was a 1st edition paladin. She was just a farmgirl until her deity (Heimdall) said "go forth in my name". So she grabbed her grandfather's leather armor and old boar spear and went forth. She certainly pissed off a lot of knight in shining armor types in the church of Heimdall. They almost lost their faith in shock at the leatherclad girl with her farmers ways. You see, she was lawful (her god said go) and she was good. But she was very humble and country common sensed.

2. In the posts above there seems to be a flavor of..."the paladin will make me adjust the way I play". And if I was playing a undead hating wizard type, and the cleric wanted to have skeleton minions...wouldn't someone still have to adapt? Or what if I want to work a business deal with the merchant, and the rogue wants to rob him? A compromise must be reached. Same with paladins...IMHO.

 

[Lu Wei Fong]

Well, it seems to me that the problem most people are having with paladins is their "holier than thou" attitude. I can see how that would be annoying, but I think that people who play their paladins like that are playing them wrong. Arrogance and "holier than thou" attitudes are not really the attitudes of good characters. This is a world were good and evil are very real forces (not just confined to ethical debate), and where they each have devoted champions. Paladins are supposed to embody good, the lawful part just represents a personal code of honor, strength of character and integrity. Someone who is truly good would be quite the opposite of arrogant, they would be humble and understanding. Their doctrines would teach harmony, forgiveness, and compassion, not aloofness and religious ethnocentrism. If your paladin wants to convert others to goodness, they will know that actions speak louder than words, act accordingly, and hope that others take notice, they will not corner you in a bar and sneer at you for keeping the extra change the bar-keep accidentally gave you. People who preach and harp are probably just fighters who have been knighted or any other number of people with skewed ideas of righteousness. Remember, paladins don't talk the talk, they walk the walk.

 

[Green Knight]

It's just that I've seen too many Paladins played in this manner.

The problem isn't solely with the players. A while back, a couple friends of mine were trying to get a Dragonlance game together. We were gonna start at 2nd-level, so I said I'd be a Rogue/Paladin. But then the DM got on my case, saying that you couldn't be a Paladin and still use Sneak Attack. Game never happened, but it was pretty apparent that that DM thought the one and only way to play a Paladin was as Lawful Stupid.

To bad the Book of Exalted Deeds hadn't come out by then. Not only does that book NOT say anything about Paladins not being able to use Sneak Attack/Move Silently/Hide, etc, but it has an NPC Rogue/Paladin in it.

 

[Selvarin]

I think it's because the arrogance sort of overwhelms any other characteristics... nobody likes people who are excessively righteous!

-blarg

My take on the matter is that too many people have the (negative) view that paladins are supposed to be either arrogrant or the Dudley Do-Right type. So, when they choose to play a paladin they push that as their character's defiing aspect. This also ties into the notion of Lawful Good as being 'Awful Good' by some. Besides that, many are played as proselytizing (sp?) zealots. Those who have faith can just as easily choose the 'lead by example' path, to make a subtler point about the way to handle things.

Personally, I believe in allowing paladins to be either NG or LG. Not only does this give someone playing a paladin more flexibility but it takes away one component of certainty that others have about them. Since a NG paladin would be more interested in the ultimate good vs. a more ordered good, their code of conduct (or at least its interpretation of the same code of condut) will be slightly different.

 

[ajanders]

So, with all this baggage for the paladin, what does he bring to the party as a benefit that the cleric or fighter don't do better? Heck, even with the drawback to multiclassing a spellcaster, a LG fighter/cleric would seem more beneficial to a party than a straight paladin.

What game aspects of the class should a twink/powergamer play up?

Quasqueton

Mounted combat, if it fits the campaign.
After that, I submit neither a twink nor a powergamer would play a paladin, because the code prevents them from getting all the treasure they want.
But you can do very well by picking a single style of fighting and sticking to it like glue: in fact, you must do this, because you don't have the feats to be a jack of all trades. That's style, not weapon -- weapon focus is a very bad idea for a paladin: if it turns out your weapon focus is a bad choice, you can't recover.
Go with strength-based combat feats: Power Attack/Cleave/Great Cleave.

 

[WayneLigon]

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

Because people never could get around the idea of Lawful Good being anything other than a stone around their neck, and the early advice and strictures listings on a paladin were nothing short of ludicrous. The commonest way to portray them was as a combo of Galahad and Superman, with an ultra-strong dash of Puritanism and a level of arrogant priggish self-righteousness that would make John Calvin and Cotton Mather blush. No wonder no-one ever wanted to even be near one.

Rubbish. As soon as such nonsense stops being produced and beleived, you'll see more paladins being played. 3E has been pretty darn successful in this by getting people to look at the class in a new light.