Project Heretica - not just a Paladin retooling

[Lyndworm]

Maybe I'm just having a bad day, but something about the statement of "If you don't like one ability in a class, play a different class" rubs me the wrong way.

Did I give you that impression with my response? If so, then I think I owe you an apology.

I think that if you don't like one ability in a class, then you should work with your DM to change. That will always be my first response, because that's the point of P&P RPGs, I think. It's grown-up make-believe, which means pretty much anything goes.

While I understand you meant no offense, I do resent the implication that I'm not able to choose which class best represents my character concept, even if it might be a little flawed.

Again, if you're getting that implication from me then I owe you an apology. I am apparently not being very clear in my messages.

Is this part of your post in reference to Elfstone telling you to play a Fighter? If so, then I totally see where you're coming from. If not, then I'm deeply troubled that my posts could be so wildly misinterpreted.

So I disagree. It's a big deal to me.
When we're discussing the pair of magical wings that sprout from the character's back, or however you want to re-imagine the at-will flight, we're not discussing fluff. That is a mechanical aspect of the character class, much like the mount that has been removed. It implies that every Paladin will be able to fly at high levels, that it is a core part of the class that helps define it, and I'm on the side of the fence that says this design decision is a mistake.

I suppose that I must be on the other side of that fence, then. I don't see where allowing a blessed, but "mundane" warrior to channel his divine might into the ability to strike down the scions of unholy terror from the very skies is a bad thing.

If I was to, say, give all high-level rangers gills, or insist all sorcerers got dragonic wings due to their heritage, there would be people who complained about this.

I would likely be one of them, too. This is because I disagree with the idea of permanent physical changes to character (in most cases, anyway). If you were to allow the ranger to breathe underwater without forcing him to grow freakish fish parts, I would be OK with that.

As for the sorcerer... That one's a tricky subject with me anyway. In the PhB sorcerers are, indeed, draconic-descended people who rely on their heritage for power. As more and more books were published, however, they could draw their power from other sources, such as celestial, fey, and fiendish, (and I think even giants, once). Besides that, I never cared much for the fluffy aspects for pretty much anything, and never hesitate to adapt mechanics to fit my character, rather than adapt my character to fit fluff.

While I understand Paladins = Aion-esque Holy Avengers is a relatively commonly-enjoyed trope, the wings are a singular ability that jumps out at me to sum up everything that's wrong with this retooling: It only takes into account what the creator would like to play, and not caring about what other people would like to play.

There are so many things called Aion (and I'm so far removed from "common knowledge") that I'm not really sure what you're referencing with its usage. I can understand where you're coming from with the last bit, though, and to a certain degree I agree with you. This class is very obviously Oskar's Paladin and not Paladin, because he is biased and because (being based on his own imagination), anything he makes (and likes) will be suited more to his tastes than ours.

However, a class with enough customization to please everyone would be just about impossible. Rather than argue about why Oskar is wrong to make what he wants to make, why don't you tell me/him what you would've done? What, to you, is a paladin? What separates him from a very religious Fighter, or an extremely martial Cleric?

Before I get too far into this, let me point out that I like the Blackguard and have no arguments about it. I enjoyed the Healer, the Defender of Sealtiel, the Monk. But too much of the Paladin smacks of my biggest problem with Oskar's homebrews, which is, very simply, that he is all about aligning things to his singular archetype worldview by giving them more stuff. More firepower, more stealth, more awesome, more minmaxery, more levels, and so on. Trouble is, this doesn't always make for a better playing experience.

I can completely respect this view. I can't really refute it, either. That's a very nice statement.

When he talks about the paladin he even says, "Personally, I used the mount only once. It was nice, but I never felt like it contributed to my character. Couldn't summon it inside of a dungeon, forced me to charge, and required me to think about how to use it properly."
To me, this is a problem, and I'm unsure how any homebrewer can make broad painted statements like "I didn't build my character a certain way, so I'm not bothering to include the option in my supposed fix."
This is further set into stone with the line, "only useful if you were mounted on a pony with a drill for a weapon, shouting the finest praises to your deity in hopes you could land a crit."

Not to nitpick, but this isn't a Fix, it's a Retooling. There's a difference, but the lines can blur sometimes and I know I sound like a jerk for pointing it out so I'll just stop talking about it.

Anyhoo, to me it seems more like a clash of ideals than any wrong-doing on Oskar's part. When you hear "paladin" you don't see wings. When he hears "paladin" he doesn't see a mount. Just because the PhB did it/didn't do it that way doesn't mean it's any less of a valid class deserving the title of paladin.

At the end of the day, Paladin is a pretty open-and-shut class, with a very slim set of class features that define it. I've enjoyed a lot of the homebrews that give paladins alternatives, and expand a little bit on what they already have. But this is one of Oskar's projects that ultimately reads to me as 'Give it more dakka, add wings and sparkles.'
And that's just not an interpretation I like or agree with.

I disagree with your oversimplification of the class, but I can't disagree with the message I feel you're trying to express with it. You seem to have a very valid point, there.

The blackguard doesn't count as an 'ally?' to its undead minion? Consider a situation where the Blackguard only uses one undead follower. In this case, either the ability is worthless or it requires the undead to strike it's master for health. Either way, I'd call it flawed.

When an ally is struck, the blackguard's class feature releases the negative energy. When the blackguard himself is struck it does not. If the blackguard and a single skeleton are in combat with some other group, any creature that attacks the skeleton gets it by the negative energy (provided its within 30ft).





Not that I don't enjoy discussing this with you, but I think that I'm going to stop responding to posts similar to those we've been making, at least in this thread. I'd really, truly hate to see this thread get a warning/shutting just because you and I were debating the ethics of homebrewing in a third person's thread... That's not fair to Oskar.