PDA

View Full Version : I would like to play Paladin but...



Akisa
2010-08-13, 09:38 PM
I like the flavor of paladin class, be it I want to play holy shiny knight or someone chosen by the gods to destroy evil. However the class leads a lot to be desired, the amount of different good ability scores it requires makes it hard to choose or squeeze in point buy. Then other classes just plain old fight evil better then Paladin. More often than not I would find myself playing Cleric (at least they don't have to worry about tripping over that evil rock and "fall"). However even playing cleric in this fashion also has its disadvantages (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0006.html). Then came Pathfinder...

It seems the class is actually useful, smite evil is no longer a one hit wonder that can be wasted (aside for being a target of non evil), healing abilities that are actually useful in battles and ability to have cheap magical weapons (weapon bond). However it seems I would have to play her in a pathfinder game which has its own flaws (cmd/cmb, power attack and other melee nerfs), not to mention actually finding a pathfinder game (face to face I mean). How hard is it to convince DMs to play a 3.5 game to use Pathfinder's Paladin?

Acero
2010-08-13, 09:40 PM
You could just mix Cleric and Fighter...

Terazul
2010-08-13, 09:41 PM
Or play a Crusader. It's like a paladin, but with more hitting things. Make your own code! Be whatever alignment you give a crap about! Smite things!

Snake-Aes
2010-08-13, 09:42 PM
You could just be a Cleric

There. As far as power goes for divine "by teh gods" types go, clerics are the go-to, Archivists being a notch above but not with the "holy warrior" feel.

Thiyr
2010-08-13, 09:46 PM
To actually attempt to answer the OP, it ultimately depends on the playgroup. Does your DM think that paladins in 3.5 were a well-made class with no major issues? Probably not then. Are you open to homebrew fixes? Shouldn't be too hard. Are you going to pitch it as "I want to be better" (no) or "Paladins are kinda bad, and I don't want to be stuck as a cleric, and this is a remake of the paladin that makes it work a bit better" (more likely)?

Gavinfoxx
2010-08-13, 09:54 PM
Crusader! Totally Crusader!

Boci
2010-08-13, 10:01 PM
Serenty changes any Paladin ability dependant on Cha to Wis and battle blessing allows you to cast spells as a swift action. These greatly improve the power of the class, as does Sword of the Arcane Order (its rating ranging from good to awsome, depdning on how it interacts with BB). But i would still recomend the crusader instead.
As for falling, that depends on how much you trust your DM.

devinkowalczyk
2010-08-13, 10:41 PM
Fighter mixed with Exalted Deeds?

Boci
2010-08-13, 10:43 PM
Fighter mixed with Exalted Deeds?

How is that going to solve the problems faced by someone playing a paladin?

Lhurgyof
2010-08-13, 10:59 PM
Depends how optimized the group is... If they're none too optimized/havent discovered class teirs, then there shouldn't be a power discrepancy between you guys.

W3bDragon
2010-08-13, 11:13 PM
How hard is it to convince DMs to play a 3.5 game to use Pathfinder's Paladin?

Well since you're asking how a DM would react, then I'll give you my 2 cp.

I would probably not be open to using the paladin from another system, even if it happens to be compatible, for a few reasons.

Most of my games are low to mid optimization, so power level isn't an issue.

If the optimization in the current game would make paladins look extremely weak, then there are other paladin-like classes that you could play. These range from Crusaders to Knights to Rangers to multiclass cleric-somethings.

Stating that stats are a reason won't swing it for me either, because you don't really need high stats in all of those, just decent ones. You could get decent ones in what you need with most point-buys.


I would be open to adjusting the paladin manually using the available ACFs, and if I have multiple players wanting to play paladins, so its a paladin themed campaign, then I'd be willing to houserule it some more.

Obviously, YMMV.

Gorgondantess
2010-08-13, 11:19 PM
Shameless self insertion, goooo! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160730):smallbiggrin:

Zaydos
2010-08-13, 11:33 PM
As a DM, and a DM's opinion: I'm not too familiar with pathfinder and I'd need to see Pathfinder paladin and see how much work it is to convert it, how powerful it is, etc. I'd possibly allow it or house rule some changes to paladin (Serenity as a bonus feat, Smite per encounter; I actually favor those in general) or just see it depends upon whose playing (a party with a fighter, a monk, a miniature's handbook healer, and a warlock is going to be a no deal; a party with 2 sorcerers, a cleric, and a wizard and it would be a different story; a party with a fully optimized set of sorcerers, cleric and wizard and it would be a very different story). If I already have a player playing an established paladin (for example in the game I'm running currently) then probably no dice.

Lysander
2010-08-13, 11:39 PM
You can also play a Favored Soul.

FlamingKobold
2010-08-14, 12:29 AM
Same as Gorgondantess. Se the sig :smallbiggrin:

Dr.Epic
2010-08-14, 12:34 AM
Or be a fighter and just be good and fight for a religious cause. You don't need the class paladin to act like a paladin.

Scarey Nerd
2010-08-14, 02:00 AM
You can also play a Favored Soul.

I agree with this. Favored souls do the whole "Holy Warrior" schtick well, and are more versatile than Paladins, which is what I gathered from the OP that you want?

Also, angel wings=good.

The Shadowmind
2010-08-14, 04:23 AM
Try a mix of cloister cleric(trading the two domains for travel and animal devotion)/generic warrior(grab Healing and Knowledge as the first two bonus feats it you didn't get them though flaws/level) then just go a with the better combat feats(since the generic warrior isn't limited to the fighter bonus list, but doesn't get the fighter only feats). The when the able to go into Divine crusader with the a Domain you like.

It requires a few house rules, such the removal of the multiclass exp penalty, allowing the Generic warrior class without making it generic classes only, and access to a god with those domains.
It is a little different that most suggestions.

Skaven
2010-08-14, 04:24 AM
I want to play a Paladin, unfortunately my DM thinks Paladins should be Lawful Stupid and holds Miko up as a shining example of Paladins. If you aint smiting people for pinching the barmaids butt for 'sin/violating a lady', you fall.

hamishspence
2010-08-14, 04:32 AM
Yurgh.

I much prefer paladins that at least make a nod to "respect for life"- even for their enemies, and don't consider themselves entitled to be judge jury and executioner most of the time.

Fight evil, yes, defend people who need defending, yes, but smiting should be reserved for seriously violent situations, not petty crime.

UnChosenOne
2010-08-14, 04:40 AM
Like others have said, just play a Favorite Soul or a Crusader. Both of them can be easily played as a Paladin styled Holy Champion of Goodness.

AslanCross
2010-08-14, 04:50 AM
I want to play a Paladin, unfortunately my DM thinks Paladins should be Lawful Stupid and holds Miko up as a shining example of Paladins. If you aint smiting people for pinching the barmaids butt for 'sin/violating a lady', you fall.

:smallsigh:

That's...quite depressing.

Anyway, OP, it's really up to your DM if he'll let you play one.

My suggested solutions:
1. Play a Cleric or Favored Soul, though I prefer the former.
2. Use one of the many homebrewed Paladins. The two I like are OneWinged4ngel's Rebalanced Paladin and Fax Celestis's mantle Paladin.
3. If your group allows Tome of Battle, play a Crusader. Same concept, more melee smiting, command ability and ally support, and no mechanical code (though you could roleplay as if you had one of course)

potatocubed
2010-08-14, 05:03 AM
From a GM's point of view, I would be wary of allowing a class built for another game into one I was running. (I would also far prefer to run Pathfinder than 3.5 though, so.) You might get further with a homebrew suggestion.

That said, I add my voice to the suggestions of crusader - pick LG as an alignment and get with the holy-warrioring, without any of the annoying code restrictions on your class abilities and ensuing derailment of the game into a quagmire of moral philosophy.

Ravens_cry
2010-08-14, 05:40 AM
I second the Pathfinder Paladin. I think they made some good, significant in the colloquial sense, changes that made it a lot more fun to play. Smite, even with the errata, actually helps, and they are less MAD. And the ability to decide where you want a mount, a frequently useless option in a dungeon, or a god empiowered magic weapon is fun.

Kaeso
2010-08-14, 10:49 AM
Why not take a few levels of cleric (maybe combined with some fighter levels) and take the paladin prestige class from unearthed arcana? That way you'll have a core paladin but with better spells.

nyarlathotep
2010-08-14, 11:36 AM
The pathfinder paladin is very good in its own way and makes it so that with great responsibility come great power rather than well, just being a sub par melee fighter.

Frosty
2010-08-14, 11:41 AM
I second the Pathfinder Paladin. I think they made some good, significant in the colloquial sense, changes that made it a lot more fun to play. Smite, even with the errata, actually helps, and they are less MAD. And the ability to decide where you want a mount, a frequently useless option in a dungeon, or a god empiowered magic weapon is fun.
Can you post the relevant PF Paladin errata here? I'd be interested to know.

gartius
2010-08-14, 12:57 PM
here is the link to see the pf pally in all its awesomeness

http://http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/basic-classes/paladin (pfsrd)

the only thing the table doesnt show is the progression of the channel positive energy-but is easy to work out

and yes i would also go for him over 3.5s paladin

sum up of details -casting for spells comes from charisma-less MAD
-no dead levels
-divine bond means you can choose between a companion or a bond to your weapon
-smite evils gets better -you can give it to your allies

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-14, 01:09 PM
This thread makes my head hurt.

To address the OP:

I don't know. Probably nobody here does. It depends completely on the DM's prior experiences with 3.5 D&D.

If they think the Paladin is the most powerful class in Core (some people really do), you're probably going to have a hard time having the PF pally approved -- it's pretty blatantly more powerful than the 3.5 pally.

If they think Paladin is one of the classes that really needs a boost, you're probably more likely to get it in.

And if the class isn't approved, you might try pretty much any of the options presented here.

true_shinken
2010-08-14, 02:32 PM
To all people presenting homebrew: you really think a DM that does not accept the Pathfinder Paladin would accept a homebrewed Paladin? O.o

potatocubed
2010-08-14, 02:53 PM
Actually, yes. A paladin from another game system is balanced against the classes in that other game system, whereas a homebrew creation is balanced against the game system you're running.

There are numerous elements which can skew this - PF classes are closer to the original 3.5 classes than, say, Conan d20 or Arcana Evolved classes, for example - but as a general rule of thumb homebrew will always have that 'designed for this system' edge.

true_shinken
2010-08-14, 03:06 PM
Actually, yes. A paladin from another game system is balanced against the classes in that other game system, whereas a homebrew creation is balanced against the game system you're running.

Except Pathfinder is supposed to be backwards compatible with 3.5 anyway. It's basically 'written by pros' versus 'written by non-pros'. It's not liek Pathfinder Paladin wouldn't fit in a 3.5 game anyway, so I really don't see your point.

Ravens_cry
2010-08-14, 03:26 PM
Can you post the relevant PF Paladin errata here? I'd be interested to know.
gartius already linked to it, but the Pathfinder SRD already has been updated with the errata, just so you know. Smite now works until you rest or your enemy takes a dirt nap. At the level of optimisation I play at, it provided a very nice damage bonus against all the evil outsiders we fought.

Edhelras
2010-08-14, 04:58 PM
It's a shame some DMs - or players - think Paladins must be like Miko and only that. One of the (innumerable) good things about OOTS is that it shows a lot of good ways to play a Paladin. In my opinion, Miko is in fact one of those good ways. I would love to have her in my group - provided the others in the group could see the fun of it as well. But personally, I would rather play an O-Chullish Paladin, or perhaps that one who rescues Delly Curtie in the inn in Luskan (in Salvatore's novel). My point is that there are really a lot of good ways to play a pally.

BUT - the notion that a Paladin may fall, and must adhere to a strict code, is in my opinion something of the whole point of the class. Or a big part of it. If you want to play as you wish, follow your own heart - pick a CG or CN character, there are lots of those. The Paladin class is, to me, constructed especially for those RPers who really like to force their character into those very strict limitations that come with the class and alignment. Those who love having to do something they don't like, or to not do something they want to do, just because of their alignment restrictions. Making real sacrifices, just because that's part of who you are.

I don't know why Paladins are viewed as a weak class - at least at low-to-middle levels their special qualities and immunities may be important, and may cause much fun. And the roleplaying opportunities are, in my mind, a very good compensation for any short-comings when compared to other classes. The only thing I could want to adjust was the Smite-per-day - I too think it might make sense with a once-per-encounter Smite, at least provided that the paladin got ample time to recuperate and focus between encounters.

Kelb_Panthera
2010-09-08, 05:13 PM
Have you considered the Prestige Paladin? Cleric 4/fighter 1 gets you in and at lvl 20 you've only lost 1 BAB and get 6th level cleric spells, and the entire paladin spell list. For that matter you can always meet the requirements with one level in cleric and between four and five levels in any other average to full BAB class.

Zaydos
2010-09-08, 05:24 PM
Except Pathfinder is supposed to be backwards compatible with 3.5 anyway. It's basically 'written by pros' versus 'written by non-pros'. It's not liek Pathfinder Paladin wouldn't fit in a 3.5 game anyway, so I really don't see your point.

Except a lot of people find Dragon Magazine, also "written by pros" (the same pros at that) as heavily unbalanced in several cases. Not saying Pathfinder is bad (I don't know nearly enough about it to have formed an opinion) but I must point out that Paizo doesn't necessarily have the best credibility. Personally I have several years worth of Dragon Magazine and love it, want to see it in use because some of it is just really, really cool, but even so I also noted that a lot of stuff in it ended up as just a free boost to power for several classes (often wizard and sorcerer) and so am wary about anything I find in Dragon Magazine. Being "written by pros" doesn't mean it's automatically better balanced. Being written and balanced for the system and not requiring reverse engineering (which Pathfinder paladin does do the changes in the skill system, and general power level of the game) does in fact influence things.

Personally I'd go about looking at a pathfinder paladin the same way I would a homebrewed one, except that I also have to convert things to use this one.

kyoryu
2010-09-08, 06:01 PM
I want to play a Paladin, unfortunately my DM thinks Paladins should be Lawful Stupid and holds Miko up as a shining example of Paladins. If you aint smiting people for pinching the barmaids butt for 'sin/violating a lady', you fall.

Ugh. My favorite example of paladin behavior is any of the Knights of the Cross in the Dresden Files. Butcher nailed Paladins.

I can pretty much guarantee that Sanya would happily slap Miko around for being an idiot.

Sir_Mopalot
2010-09-09, 12:28 AM
In my games (and when I play paladins) I use Gorgondantess' rebuild (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160730) of the class.

Philistine
2010-09-09, 01:03 AM
It's a shame some DMs - or players - think Paladins must be like Miko and only that. One of the (innumerable) good things about OOTS is that it shows a lot of good ways to play a Paladin. In my opinion, Miko is in fact one of those good ways. I would love to have her in my group - provided the others in the group could see the fun of it as well. But personally, I would rather play an O-Chullish Paladin, or perhaps that one who rescues Delly Curtie in the inn in Luskan (in Salvatore's novel). My point is that there are really a lot of good ways to play a pally.

BUT - the notion that a Paladin may fall, and must adhere to a strict code, is in my opinion something of the whole point of the class. Or a big part of it. If you want to play as you wish, follow your own heart - pick a CG or CN character, there are lots of those. The Paladin class is, to me, constructed especially for those RPers who really like to force their character into those very strict limitations that come with the class and alignment. Those who love having to do something they don't like, or to not do something they want to do, just because of their alignment restrictions. Making real sacrifices, just because that's part of who you are.

I don't know why Paladins are viewed as a weak class - at least at low-to-middle levels their special qualities and immunities may be important, and may cause much fun. And the roleplaying opportunities are, in my mind, a very good compensation for any short-comings when compared to other classes. The only thing I could want to adjust was the Smite-per-day - I too think it might make sense with a once-per-encounter Smite, at least provided that the paladin got ample time to recuperate and focus between encounters.

Role-playing opportunities come from - in no particular order - the player, the group, and the DM. Not from character class. If you want to role-play a character with a strict moral code, you can do that as a Paladin... or you can do it as a Crusader, or a Cleric, or a Fighter, or a Rogue, or Warlock, or whatever you want. The only "advantage" Paladins get in this department is that their Code, combined with D&D's laughably ill-defined morality system, explicitly gives DMs a "Screw You, Paladin" button to de-power a character whose player doesn't always agree with the DM's moral values.

Vemynal
2010-09-09, 02:10 AM
I once had this same exact issue, then someone told me:


Or play a Crusader. It's like a paladin, but with more hitting things. Make your own code! Be whatever alignment you give a crap about! Smite things!


Crusader! Totally Crusader!

Now I'm saying 'ditto'

The class is amazing, powerful (easily a tier 3 class compared to the paladin's tier 5), fun and more importantly its *thematically appropriate*

Yes we know someone tells you to play a cleric/fighter and pretend to be a paladin, but you want something a bit more...separate. Something defined as a paladin.

Read the classes description, read the paladin's description. The only difference if you can't "fall" unless you change your alignment from that of your diety or cause.

And you can play your own 'code of conduct' as you see fit.

You can find this class in Tome of Battle: Book of 9 Swords

(all of this also applies to: if you wanna play a samurai? go Warblade. If you wanna play a monk? "unarmed" sword sage)

Harris the Ford
2010-09-09, 04:06 AM
Cleric>Fist of Raziel>Justiciar is one of my favorite paladin-but-not builds.

Greenish
2010-09-09, 04:34 AM
(all of this also applies to: if you wanna play a samurai? go Warblade.What happened to the "*thematically appropriate*"? :smallamused:

JaxGaret
2010-09-09, 09:57 AM
As a DM, I would have absolutely no problem allowing a PF Paladin in a 3.5 game. It's not even as powerful as a Cleric, so I fail to see where the problem lies.

Dirty n Evil
2010-09-10, 02:50 AM
I'm putting myself in the position of the DM who is being asked to accept the Pathfinder Paladin while everyone else plays the standard 3.5 version of every class. Why would I allow it? The Pathfinder version of almost every class is superior to the 3.5, giving a clear edge to the one player who wants that particular version. Mind you, there's a very simple solution - everyone is allowed to play the Pathfinder version of their class. But I can see if I was super picky and was only willing to use 3.5 why I wouldn't buckle.

Just sharing a little devil's advocate, trying to see from the other's persons' point of view. :smallsmile:

JaronK
2010-09-10, 03:06 AM
Crusader definitely gets the job done, but another option is Cleric/PrC Paladin. You only need three levels of PrC Paladin plus the Holy Mount feat to get every single feature of the Paladin class (some using spells instead of spell likes, and you might want to persist Divine Power for the BAB) while still getting all the Cleric goodness. Plus you can use other thematic classes, such as Contemplative or Sacred Exorcist (depending on what sort of Paladin you want).

JaronK

Vemynal
2010-09-10, 03:46 AM
What happened to the "*thematically appropriate*"? :smallamused:

I was playing a Lawful Neutral Pixie 'Samurai'
(1CWSamurai/9Warblade/1Monk/5MasterofNine)

So my Warblade class being a Samurai was the least of my problems xD

Though the class ended up doing the job quite well, took a bastard sword as my katana and a short sword as my wakizashi (as listed with the CW Samurai)

The rest was really just up to me to roll play, which I had some great amusement doing (In the setting Pixies/faeries/etc all look like bugs and would have the same devotion to the Hive that you could find in Bushido)

Math_Mage
2010-09-10, 04:25 AM
I'm putting myself in the position of the DM who is being asked to accept the Pathfinder Paladin while everyone else plays the standard 3.5 version of every class. Why would I allow it? The Pathfinder version of almost every class is superior to the 3.5, giving a clear edge to the one player who wants that particular version. Mind you, there's a very simple solution - everyone is allowed to play the Pathfinder version of their class. But I can see if I was super picky and was only willing to use 3.5 why I wouldn't buckle.

Just sharing a little devil's advocate, trying to see from the other's persons' point of view. :smallsmile:

It's a matter of party balance more than system balance. A 3.5 Paladin would be far more out of whack in a party of, say, Beguiler-Dread Necro-Wildshape Ranger than a PF Paladin.

The clear edge goes to the guy who plays a 3.5 Wizard, not the guy who plays a PF Paladin. So what's unfair?

Greenish
2010-09-10, 08:25 AM
I was playing a Lawful Neutral Pixie 'Samurai'
(1CWSamurai/9Warblade/1Monk/5MasterofNine)

So my Warblade class being a Samurai was the least of my problems xD

Though the class ended up doing the job quite well, took a bastard sword as my katana and a short sword as my wakizashi (as listed with the CW Samurai)Oh, I do agree that Warblade makes for an excellent samurai, I was merely pointing out that the fluff is just about completely opposite. :smallwink:

And yeah, PF paladin with 3.5 tricks (SoTAO, Battle Blessing, SC spells, Devotion feats) has a strong claim for tier 4, if not for tier 3.

Haarkla
2010-09-10, 08:56 AM
How hard is it to convince DMs to play a 3.5 game to use Pathfinder's Paladin?
In my games (I DM) not very difficult at all.