Why aren't paladins liked?

[Mark]

I don't really see clerics as "the bosses" of paladins.

Yup. More like colleagues, in most cases.

 

[Quasqueton]

Wow, my longest and oldest still active [revived] thread

Here's something to consider re: gods and paladins. By the book, paladins are not required to have a god patron. They aren't even required to have religion at all.

Quasqueton

 

[Brennin Magalus]

I don't really see clerics as "the bosses" of paladins.

Paladin to Cleric: "You're not the boss of me!"

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Wouldn't the bulk of priests in an organized faith be laymen best embodied by the expert class?

Skills: knowledge (religion), concentration, farming/scribe/carpentry, sense motive, another knowledge, diplomacy.

 

[NeoDarke]

I have an idea. How about aiding both of the Shadowbane Classes from the Complete Adventurer into your game? That way when whoever starts to go on about Paladin's can't do this/be that. You have 'em run into one of them and just sit back and watch the madness start .

 

[Darmanicus]

The paladin is game wise too torn between being a fighter and being a cleric with neither the combat ability of a fighter nor the healing ability of a cleric. Please note below.

It requires either very good rolls or high point buy to have a very effective paladin.

Want to cast spells? Have a high wisdom. Or buy a periapt of wisdom, (they also cap out at 4th and 14 wisdom is not particularly high).

Want to get some bonus to hit from Smite? Have a high charisma. Or buy a cloak of charisma, (also ANY bonus to hit is handy).

Want to actually be able to do some damage in combat? Need a high strength, and other combat related stats per normal fighters. Or buy a belt of giant strength and take power attack, (pretty standard for most fighter types).

About the only thing that's a stat dump for them is intelligence and 3.5, that's a bad move. Not true, I dumped Dexterity over Intelligence and have not overly suffered at all; who needs it when you have Mithral Full Plate of Speed +1, an Animated Tower Shield +1, Divine Might and Buffs?

Still, I enjoyed Brother Kane, High Shadowbane Inquisitor of Helm in the last campaign I played in.

Personally I think that Paladins can quite adequately fill the roll of Fighter, ESPECIALLY against evil opponents. I'll admit that I have taken the Fist of Raziel PrC which is very nifty for Paladins however it's not the be all and end all of my character with regards to killing the bad guys. I'll say again.....Fighter BAB, Fighter HD = Fighter.

Divine Grace = X x Iron Will, Great Fortitude and Lightning Reflexes feats. A Paladin will consistently make saving throws where everyone else fails.

I disagree that they get anywhere near the role of Cleric but as someone mentioned, their Lay On Hands is an excellent one shot heal self whilst the Cleric tends to others.

Going back to my Fighter point, just in case you want to argue the point that they get tons more combat related feats, the Paladin gets his mount which grows to be a tough critter and if you're clever, you'll generally try for something other than a horse!

Immunity to fear and diesease, fear especially, are awesome abilities and have saved my groups hides on several occasions, (especially since I lend allies a bonus to fear).

Back to the point though, I really don't see the problem with Paladins as a class whatsoever unless you happen to be playing with a group where it will really come into effect ie. a group of evils: this is just common sense. At the beginning of any campaign something like this should be discussed and if a Paladin is just not going to fit in then it shouldn't be allowed otherwise your just asking for trouble.

Ok, meant to finiss this rant several hours ago but a mate decided to pop by and several beers later meant that any continuation on this was impossible......

Paladins rock, nuff said.

 

[Darmanicus]

a cleric is bound by no such oath, even if they are of the same alignment.

Bull, a cleric and paladin are bound by the same oath if they worship the same power however the paladin is more likely to use a sword.

Please consult, once again, your community supporting, paying, colleagues.

 

[Hussar]

Y'know, I didn't even look at the post dates on this thread. Ah well, a good paly discussion is always fun.

Particle Man wrote:

But I would argue that this means, not that paladins should be held to lower standards, but that LG clerics should be held to higher standards.

That's it exactly. That is 100% my point. I've seen far too many people ignore the alignment of their character when they play. While alignment shouldn't be a straightjacket, that's true, it also shouldn't be simply a strange acronym on a piece of paper. ((LG? What the heck is lug?))

While I may have overstate the case for clerics being the boss of paladins, it is still quite probable that a church paladin is going to have to answer to the higher ups in the church, which, in turn, likely means clerics. A priest of Heironious is bound to the exact same actions as a Paladin of Heironious. It makes no sense for the cleric to be given more latitude than the paly.

On the North American Paladin idea - why not? A holy warrior protecting his tribe against evil humanoids that dominate the area. Sure, a barbarian may be more typical, but, with a decent backstory, there's no problem with a Paladin acting in that role either. His code remains largely the same, although his attitudes would be almost entirely different. But, that's a side issue anyway. My point was that paladins in no way are required to follow the proto Euro thing. If I want to design a Roman paladin, I should be able to.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Bull, a cleric and paladin are bound by the same oath if they worship the same power however the paladin is more likely to use a sword.

Please consult, once again, your community supporting, paying, colleagues.

While a DM may require your character to take an oath as a cleric, it is not a class requirment, meaning it is not listed in the player handbook. They have an obligation to act in the dieties best interest and Dogma, but they are not bound by an oath that they must swear to a god and if they fail in that oath, they don't lose those powers granted by them. They also don't their powers if they change their alignment.

The DM can of course require an oath and can revoke the power of a cleric at will simply saying that your God is mad at you, but it is not a game mechanic like it is for a paladin.

 

[Desdichado]

That's it exactly. That is 100% my point. I've seen far too many people ignore the alignment of their character when they play. While alignment shouldn't be a straightjacket, that's true, it also shouldn't be simply a strange acronym on a piece of paper. ((LG? What the heck is lug?))

I see far to few people ignore the alignment of their character when they play. Alignment is not proscriptive, nor does it tell you how to play your character. Even the PHB states as much.