Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 1955753" data-attributes="member: 2013">That is precisely what I mean.&nbsp; The &quot;perk&quot; of being immune to disease, the &quot;perk&quot; of being able to heal, you know all the &quot;class abilities&quot; that make the paladin a &quot;paladin&quot; and not a &quot;fighter/cleric.&quot;Because this character is not a paladin (IMO).&nbsp; I think you're starting backwards... you're starting by deciding, &quot;I will take a paladin&quot; and asking, &quot;what is his motivation and role-playing potential?&quot;&nbsp; What you should be doing is deciding, &quot;I will take a character with this motivation and role-playing potential&quot; and then asking, &quot;is he a paladin?&quot;Simply put, certain things will disqualify a character from certain career paths.&nbsp; The character with a 4 Intelligence and 17 Strength is, in effect, barred from pursuing the wizard's path because he simply cannot figure out how to cast spells.&nbsp; Similarly, a lawful alignment might preclude one from being a barbarian.&nbsp; A player whose &quot;background and motivation&quot; causes him to eschew the wilderness is not cut out to be a druid.What I'm doing is looking at an interesting, thought-provoking character, and asking myself, &quot;is he a paladin?&quot;&nbsp; No... in the very same way someone who is scared of the arcane and refuses to have anything to do with it is simply not a sorcerer.&nbsp; He may be a fascinating character to role-play, but he's no sorcerer.&nbsp; He's just not cut out for sorcery, because he would flat-out reject the tenets of the sorcerer class.I'm not sure yet how to directly address your point about &quot;holding 'paladin' as more important than 'smart, fascinating, thought-provoking character'&quot; - all I can do is point to the paragraphs above and say, &quot;it's not that I think you have to do X and Y to somehow 'qualify' for a class; rather, I think that your choice of X and Y in character concept 'disqualifies you' from certain classes.&quot;&nbsp; In other words, it's not that &quot;paladin&quot; is more important than &quot;smart, thought-provoking, fascinating character,&quot; but rather that the personality chosen for Sir Cedric removes &quot;paladin&quot; from the list of choices that can further define/round out his character.&nbsp; I will probably figure out exactly what I want to say at 2 am this morning, but hopefully my point comes across - it's not that &quot;paladin&quot; is some excruciating standard that &quot;character concept&quot; must be sacrificed to; rather, &quot;character concept&quot; is an excruciating standard to which the option to have the class of &quot;paladin&quot; must sometimes be sacrificed.The character is full of dramatic potential, and I love the character.&nbsp; I just don't see him as a paladin because of who he is.&nbsp; You can't make a character however you want and then haphazardly slap the &quot;paladin&quot; or &quot;wizard&quot; or &quot;fighter&quot; or &quot;bard&quot; or &quot;whatever&quot; class on him... because the combination is completely intellectually dissonant.&nbsp; If you're going to base a character on a concept, you need to make the character and THEN look at him and ask, &quot;what class describes him best?&quot;&nbsp; --The Sigil</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Sigil, post: 1955753, member: 2013"] That is precisely what I mean. The "perk" of being immune to disease, the "perk" of being able to heal, you know all the "class abilities" that make the paladin a "paladin" and not a "fighter/cleric." Because this character is not a paladin (IMO). I think you're starting backwards... you're starting by deciding, "I will take a paladin" and asking, "what is his motivation and role-playing potential?" What you [b]should[/b] be doing is deciding, "I will take a character with this motivation and role-playing potential" and [b]then[/b] asking, "is he a paladin?" Simply put, certain things will disqualify a character from certain career paths. The character with a 4 Intelligence and 17 Strength is, in effect, barred from pursuing the wizard's path because he simply cannot figure out how to cast spells. Similarly, a lawful alignment might preclude one from being a barbarian. A player whose "background and motivation" causes him to eschew the wilderness is not cut out to be a druid. What I'm doing is looking at an interesting, thought-provoking character, and asking myself, "is he a paladin?" No... in the very same way someone who is scared of the arcane and refuses to have anything to do with it is simply not a sorcerer. He may be a fascinating character to role-play, but he's no sorcerer. He's just not cut out for sorcery, because he would flat-out reject the tenets of the sorcerer class. I'm not sure yet how to directly address your point about "holding 'paladin' as more important than 'smart, fascinating, thought-provoking character'" - all I can do is point to the paragraphs above and say, "it's not that I think you have to do X and Y to somehow 'qualify' for a class; rather, I think that your choice of X and Y in character concept 'disqualifies you' from certain classes." In other words, it's not that "paladin" is more important than "smart, thought-provoking, fascinating character," but rather that the personality chosen for Sir Cedric removes "paladin" from the list of choices that can further define/round out his character. I will probably figure out exactly what I want to say at 2 am this morning, but hopefully my point comes across - it's not that "paladin" is some excruciating standard that "character concept" must be sacrificed to; rather, "character concept" is an excruciating standard to which the option to have the class of "paladin" must sometimes be sacrificed. The character is full of dramatic potential, and I love the character. I just don't see him as a paladin because of who he is. You can't make a character however you want and then haphazardly slap the "paladin" or "wizard" or "fighter" or "bard" or "whatever" class on him... because the combination is completely intellectually dissonant. If you're going to base a character on a concept, you need to make the character and THEN look at him and ask, "what class describes him best?" --The Sigil [/QUOTE]

Verification