Poll: Where all the (D&D) paladins at?

[Bara_no_Hime]

This is from a 3.5 perspective:

I avoid the paladin class since it fails quite a bit on a mechanical level and it's rare that a DM will let you fix a class when there are better alternatives out there. But I do like playing paladin like characters (Holy warriors with a certain code that they follow to the letter) and use either a cleric or a crusader for these characters.

You should give Pathfinder a try. (yes, I'm promoting Pathfinder again).

It fixes many of the problems from 3.5.

In addition to the smite discussion of my previous post, Paladins also get a full druid animal companion for their mount (if taken).

Also, Clerics got slightly nerfed on melee combat (lost Heavy Armor proficiency). Plus, a couple of their more powerful combat buff spells got powered down (Divine Power is much less insane).
In return, Channel Positive Energy allows Clerics to cast their spells for things other than healing.

 

[StBishop]

I rolled one once. It was shit.
I DM'd a game with one in on two occasions, one was frustrating because he was a stupid Pally (like 6 int) so had no self preservation, which extended to pissing off the party constantly.
The other time the player was dense and became a fallen paladin via necrophilia of his twin sister. We stopped inviting that guy. He actually left my house crying after the amount of shit we gave him.

So yeah, I don't like them. They were inferior to a Multiclass Fighter/Cleric in 3.5 anyway and are inferior to Clerics in 4th.[footnote]In my experience, because I CBF arguing on the internet.[/footnote]

 

[Mordekaien]

I played a paladin once, made him into something like inquisitor.
You can do a lot of evil just by believing you are doing good. My guy berated my friends character, who was an Half-orc (because, Orcs are evil so you must be too) made him sound stupid on some occasions and tried to be as unhelpful to him as much as he could. He was that kind of guy who would help some old poor peasants, only to discover they don't worship the same god as him so he dropped all the help he could do and refused to do anything else for them.
And he still believed he is the right one, upholding the good and being perfect example for all.
Man, he was awesome.

 

[Aircross]

Here's how I played 3.5 Paladin back in the days:

1. Detect Evil
2. Smite Evil
3. "Was he the bad guy we're looking for?"

Spoiler: Problem?

Just kidding. My friends and I actually home brewed our own paladin code that allowed the paladin be a little more flexible. If I remembered correctly the code allowed the paladin to be outside the law if the circumstances permitted.

Actually, the most fun you can have with playing a Paladin is to take up the Holy Liberator prestige class (Chaotic Good Paladin).

 

[Smiley Face]

A lot of it comes from my problems with the D&D alignment system - my ideas of right and wrong don't mesh with their divisions - my character alignment usually slouches into Neutral, but only because my actions, consistent within their own system, fall all over the damn place. If I were to have to follow Lawful Good to the letter, I would feel needlessly restricted in order to follow a mindlessly stupid code. No one wants that.

So you don't want to roleplay?

There was Check for Traps article on here a while back that talked about the alignment system in terms of real moral philosophy. It made me realize just how badly most people understand the alignments.

I'm fine with roleplaying, as long as I don't have to roleplay a PALADIN. I just find the elements of that roleplaying that are necessary to play a paladin make a character that I would personally despise to the point where I wouldn't enjoy the experience at all.

And I do understand the moral philosophy behind the alignments (I'm fairly certain) - however, they don't allow for a great deal of complexity. When I make a character, I often try and give them a code that's interesting, and it will often be difficult to group it into a single 'alignment', to the point where it's really quite futile. To have a character whose code didn't stray from the bounds mandated by Lawful Good would be a little frustrating, but what really seals the deal is the further imperatives that the Paladin code imposes.

 

[Zen Toombs]

OP

Hey, take a look at these things!

Paladins are a shitty, weak class, and they're jerks (who insist that you follow their alignment)!
Your players are doing everyone a favor by not playing a paladin

A weak class in D&D 3.5, admitted. They're champs in Pathfinder though. Also, Paladins are only jerks if the player is a jerk, the DM is a jerk, or you are a jerk. There is nothing in their code that forces them to party with all "Lawful Stick Up Their Butt" characters. The only thing they cannot do is party with, you know, EVIL PEOPLE. And in Pathfinder, they can even do that so long as it's for the greater good.

I am sometimes forced to be pally/cleric since somehow, despite all logical reasoning my friends refuse based on... they're Atheist... yeah, I kid you not. In a fantasy world where god/gods aren't a matter of faith but absolute, undeniable fact they refuse based on the fact in this world their faith is in no god so in a fantasy based setting they can't follow a god... I honestly wish I was making this idiocy up.

Haha... wait, wat?

If they want a healer with legs (as opposed to one on a stick) they do know that Bards and Druids can also make good healers, right? And once a D&D druid gets to fourth level spells, they can start healing like a champ - Summon Monster IV gets you a Unicorn, which has a slew of healing spells. And if you play Pathfinder, you have a metric ton of options for healing. And if you play 4th Ed (which you shouldn't) you don't need a healer at all!


Besides, wouldn't playing a character different from you be an interesting RP experience? I've played characters of all genders, backgrounds and personality types, and that's part of what makes RPing fun.

Anyways, I've totally played a Paladin before. One of them was a Warforged Paladin, and he was literally born yesterday.
Best.
Character.
EVER.

He was so much fun to play...

Side note: Anyone who plays a Paladin as a jerk is a jerk themselves. Well, or the person who forced them to be a jerk is a jerk, but still - jerkiness is around somewhere. There are always means to address the situation without forcing players to be mean to each other.

[Pathfinder is awesome and other stuff]

^^ I like this one. Will you be my friend? <3

 

[Skoldpadda]

I play a paladin in real life. I call myself Lord Skoldpaddus Xanadalor Of The Shining Star. I can't find a job.

 

[guitarsniper]

I don't play paladins, really. I tend more toward the fighter/cleric (or fighter/favored soul). I like the RP aspect of trying to play a paladin who's basically an Arthurian-style Knight of Good and stuff, but I don't really like the class mechanically, and you can do the same thing with a lot of other classes.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

There's little I dislike more than sitting down to a game where a player thinks D&D means they get to be evil and wreck shit and that's the paramount of actual acting. And if anyone else plans to roll anything besides their viewpoint is ruining the game.

There are few things I detest more than when said people get other people who feel insecure and powerless in real life to join the game and feel mighty punishing NPCs because they simply weren't the PCs.

And I outright hate when a GM makes you want to change or punishes you by ruining your character because you didn't follow the group.

It's role playing, people. Role playing. If you can't adjust your play style or dare I say it... acting ability to try to further the game without some hurdles, YOU are the ones who are ruining the game. The game isn't about your fantasy to be the baddest ass on the plane, it's about you made a character, others made a character, and there will be conflict. If you can't deal with conflict, it's not the freaking game for you.

I love being the Paladin because it's hard. Because I can't loot what I want, and I have to ask myself if I really want to sacrifice myself or try to find a way while adhering to my code to survive this encounter. As boring as people like to say Paladins are, your neutral evil/chaotic evil are the epitome of a one note character.

Paladins and lawful good players have to find the solution that saves the maximum amount of lives, keeps them alive, and not only achieves the objective, but does so in a way that doesn't conflict with their group AND appeases their code of honor and/or Deity. Do that game after game. It takes a lot of thinking and sometimes a lot of luck.

Neutral Evil/Chaotic Evil? "Why are you even asking me, just fireball everything in my path. I'm so clever and bad ass."

 

[Antitonic]

I'd also include a picture of Bernadette from Flipside, but I can't find a good image of her in the 30 seconds I was willing to spend on looking for one.

Spoiler

A paladin? Really? I'd have thought she'd count more as a Fencer or something similar. To be fair, I haven't caught up in a few chapters, so there could be some development I'm unaware of...

Her dream is to join the Knightly Order dedicated to upholding laws and doing good... so paladin.

The dex-based two-weapon fighting Paladin is a perfectly workable build. Twice the number of attacks means twice the number of times to deal your level in damage on a smite (again, assuming Pathfinder - I've been playing it for 5 years, so it's hard to assume anything else).

So yeah, Bern wants to be a knight, and she fights using the power of her awesome sexiness and a pair of swords. Oh, and she is very lawful, and very good, and dislikes magic (a paladin trope).

It's like Miko, for Order of the Stick - her class is paladin, but her style and theme (and job) are samurai.

I would've thought paladins were in service to a god, which is what threw me.

 

[Rednog]

I think it is because no one knows how to justify playing to outside of being a saint.
People are like oh man lawful good I have to take care of the sick and help old ladies cross the road.
People never take relevance into consideration. Imo, it is more fun/ less of a pain in the ass for the group if you have a guy who is playing a paladin who is a fanatic. Your enemies are an affront to your god their very existence is a sin and it is your paladin's duty to wipe them from the planet.

 

[Sam Warrior]

Played Baldurs gate 2 as a paladin he kicked some major arse. I would have played a paladin in my pathfinder game but the rest of of the party isnt particularly good and one maybe openly evil so we didn't think of was a good idea.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

I would've thought paladins were in service to a god, which is what threw me.

That's a common misconception. As I noted earlier in this thread (no fault for missing it - this thread has gotten rather text thick) the word Paladin refers to the Knights of Charlemagne - basically the french Knights of the Round Table. They were technically Christian, but no more so than any other noble.

And anyway, in D&D/Pathfinder, a Paladin CAN worship a deity, but does not have to - they can simply be servants of Good (and Law) in general. They can also "Worship and Alignment" - a point I made to the guy who's group hates paladins because they (the gaming group) are atheists.

It was also my reasoning why Paladins don't HAVE to have sticks up their asses, and can in fact use stealth, flanking tactics, and surprise attacks - because the Knights of the Round Table, the west's archetypical knights, use such tactics all the time.

**snip**

Done and done.

 

[Zeckt]

Paladins are like a cancer in d and d groups, forcing the whole group to be goody two shoes. I played one once and after 2-3 weeks I did my best to "sacrifice" him for the common good. Namely, make him die HORRIBLY so I could go back to playing a donkey riding thieving jerk.

 

[Antitonic]

I would've thought paladins were in service to a god, which is what threw me.

That's a common misconception. As I noted earlier in this thread (no fault for missing it - this thread has gotten rather text thick) the word Paladin refers to the Knights of Charlemagne - basically the french Knights of the Round Table. They were technically Christian, but no more so than any other noble.

And anyway, in D&D/Pathfinder, a Paladin CAN worship a deity, but does not have to - they can simply be servants of Good (and Law) in general. They can also "Worship and Alignment" - a point I made to the guy who's group hates paladins because they (the gaming group) are atheists.

It was also my reasoning why Paladins don't HAVE to have sticks up their asses, and can in fact use stealth, flanking tactics, and surprise attacks - because the Knights of the Round Table, the west's archetypical knights, use such tactics all the time.

I realise that it makes sense, but it doesn't feel right, you know? Maybe it's because I've read The Deed Of Paksenarrion potentially too many times. It's also why I could see that "evil" paladins could exist, even though the older rules don't really allow it.

Regardless, this topic has given me thought to play a paladin in my next game, so there's something at least.

 

[Dragonpit]

I played a Paladin only once or twice, but it's because I only just started with the whole thing. I'm still unsure about how I feel about them. That said, I'm having trouble sticking with the Lawful Good mindset because that alignment is an absolution in that you absolutely cannot do wrong, even for the right reasons. Makes it really hard to pull off. No taking stolen money from a noble and giving it to some starving wafer, or anything along those lines. It's especially problematic for someone trying to worship Bahamut since he absolutely demands Paladins in his service to be Lawful Good. Pain in the ass...

 

[ImperialSunlight]

I've never played DND, but Paladin (or any other similar class) is usually my favourite in RPGs. Assassin, theif, warrior, etc. are too cliche. Paladins often differ the most depending on the setting because they follow different gods and different beliefs, whereas a warrior in one world could be exactly the same as one in another. Additionally, a paladin's character is fundamentally tied to the world itself through allegiance to their gods, whereas another character would require membership in a knightly order or tribe in order to fit into the world organically.

I am sometimes forced to be pally/cleric since somehow, despite all logical reasoning my friends refuse based on... they're Atheist... yeah, I kid you not. In a fantasy world where god/gods aren't a matter of faith but absolute, undeniable fact they refuse based on the fact in this world their faith is in no god so in a fantasy based setting they can't follow a god... I honestly wish I was making this idiocy up.

...that ruins the entire point of role-playing, which is to take on the persona of the character in the game, regardless of your own beliefs and values... >.>
Silly people.