Will the Real Holy Warrior Please Stand Up? [Class fix+1 PrC, 3.5, PEACH]

[Fable Wright]

I'm not dealing with rogues right now. I'm dealing with the paladin.\

Could you deal with the blackguard next?
seriously, though... these guys are killing them now...

Also, could you add a healing ability? Healing spells on the spell list, or at least the power to bestow other's wounds on them (aka, you heal your dying friend. Now you take all the damage you healed.).

[Gorgondantess]

Something I don't like: this is a purely offensive class by its features. No healing, no protection, just smashing into peoples' faces. When I think of Paladin, I think "Cecil Harvey" or such: warriors whose divine power is as much a shield to ward their allies as it is a sword with which to destroy their enemies.

First 3 levels: Just Templar, Unwavering devotion, and divine grace, are all defensive. It also gets plenty of healing spells on its spell list: stuff like lay on hands is redundant when you have prolific access to cure spells.

[Gorgondantess]

Could you deal with the blackguard next?
seriously, though... these guys are killing them now...

Probably not. I'm thinking of making an anarch, though... or maybe a TN paladin, as that's my favorite alignment.

Also, could you add a healing ability? Healing spells on the spell list, or at least the power to bestow other's wounds on them (aka, you heal your dying friend. Now you take all the damage you healed.).

They have healing spells on the spell list.

[Galileo]

First: Thank you so much for making Smite Evil a constant ability. Just for that, I love this fix.

Second: This Paladin has a mechanic that allows it to flip off the universe and take the third option? YES!

[Fable Wright]

... failed my spot check.

[Gorgondantess]

First: Thank you so much for making Smite Evil a constant ability. Just for that, I love this fix.

Daily smite evil is laaaaaaaaame.

Second: This Paladin has a mechanic that allows it to flip off the universe and take the third option? YES!

That was pretty much the intent: if your DM decides to screw you over, at least you can make something out of it.

[Mando Knight]

First 3 levels: Just Templar, Unwavering devotion, and divine grace, are all defensive. It also gets plenty of healing spells on its spell list: stuff like lay on hands is redundant when you have prolific access to cure spells.

Those are all self-defensive features. The spell list is also a poor replacement, since unlike Clerics they would actually have to prepare healing spells, and they get far fewer spells per day and known than the Cleric, meaning that they might be sorely tempted to sacrifice a healing spell for another buffing spell. A defensive feature would be like several of the 4e Paladin's powers, which force the enemy to attack the Paladin, either through punishing those that harm his allies, or by redirecting the attack onto himself (often then followed up with a counterattack).

[Eldrys]

I really like the class and think it is much more balanced than the PHB Paladin. Do you have any plans to introduce the paladin mount? that was probably my favorite feature of the old paladin.

[Strudel110]

I didn't understand the mount thing for the most part mounts are useless because of the places they can't go (most dungeons, small planar gates, indoors, etc.), assuming of course your mount is a horse. Smaller mounts especially stuff that can fly or spider climb is awesome but usually unbalanced.

[Ajadea]

Hmmm.....I was reading it, and it seems awesome so far. Much better than the WotC paladin.

I had some ideas for special abilities

Celestial Steed
As the WotC paladin's 5th level ability, maybe gaining the celestial template at some point.

Because I really like the concept of a knight in shining armor on a powerful steed, whether or not it's in any way practical. Being a special ability means not every paladin has to have a mount.

----

Take the Blow (yeah, feel free to rename)
As an immediate action, redirect an attack targeting a single adjacent ally. The attacker attacks as if targeting the target, but deals the damage to you instead.

Improved Take the Blow
Required: Take the Blow
As Take the Blow, except you may redirect all forms of damage from a single attack, and your target may be up to 10 feet away. Negative levels, level drain, ability drain, ability damage, insanity, etc. The paladin may make his own saving throw to resist these effects. You may not choose to redirect only part of the damage, you must take all the damage or none of it.

The paladin uses his own AC or the target's, whichever one is better in any given situation. For example, a paladin protecting a rogue could use his own normal AC and flat-footed AC, while using the rogue's touch AC. This applies only to the redirected attacks, not to any other attacks the paladin may suffer from this round.

In addition, the effect of the damage is lessened. Subtract half the paladin's Charisma score (round down) from the redirected hit point damage. The paladin is not subject to death by massive damage when redirecting damage.

Greater Take the Blow
Required: Improved Take the Blow
As Improved Take the Blow, except you may choose a single target within 20 feet and redirect all attacks (hit point, swallow whole, bull rush, insanity, whatever) that the target takes this round. You may not choose to redirect only some of the attacks, you must take all the damage or none of it. This choice cannot be changed mid-round.

The paladin uses his own AC and save bonuses or the target's, whichever one is better in any given situation. For example, a paladin protecting a rogue could use his own Fortitude and Will save bonuses, normal AC, and flat-footed AC, while using the rogue's Reflex save and touch AC. This applies only to the redirected attacks, not to any other attacks the paladin may suffer from this round.

In addition, the effects of the redirected damage is weakened. Redirected hit point damage is halved (round down), or subtract the Charisma score from the amount of damage dealt, whichever would be best in a case-by-case situation.

All level drain becomes only negative levels, ability drain becomes ability damage, and negative levels and ability damage have no effect. For an ongoing condition, such as insanity (but not death), the paladin may make a new save each round.

----
Well, personally, I've always viewed the paladin as a protector first, and a divine smiter second. The Take the Blow abilities let a paladin shine as a meat shield. Nothing's going to stop a dragon from trying to eat that paladin except the paladin. Nothing is ever going to eat the paladin's companions ever. Period.

[ZeroNumerous]

The alignment straitjacket aside, I have an issue with the code.

Paladins are empowered by a deity, and as divine spellcasters must be within one step of their deity's alignment.

So here's my problem: A paladin of Heironeous(LG) and a paladin of Pelor(NG) must both be lawful and honorable and act within the law. Both are strait-jacketed into specific actions, and both believe that all Evil creatures can be redeemed.

They absolutely must follow this code. Despite Pelor having an irrational hatred of the undead, or Pelor being a deity who is Neutral on Law-v-Chaos. Despite Heironeous stylizing himself as the arch-enemy of all Evil, or the Heironean Code saying nothing at all about obedience to mortal law.

So, why must my Paladin of Pelor or Paladin of Heironeous act within a code of conduct that is only partially true to either deity?

[Gorgondantess]

Those are all self-defensive features. The spell list is also a poor replacement, since unlike Clerics they would actually have to prepare healing spells, and they get far fewer spells per day and known than the Cleric, meaning that they might be sorely tempted to sacrifice a healing spell for another buffing spell. A defensive feature would be like several of the 4e Paladin's powers, which force the enemy to attack the Paladin, either through punishing those that harm his allies, or by redirecting the attack onto himself (often then followed up with a counterattack).

Actually, they don't have to prepare spells: I changed the paladin to a spontaneous caster. If you want healing, you can go right at it.

Anyways, that's a good point: I'll work on a special ability to satisfy those in your boat.

I really like the class and think it is much more balanced than the PHB Paladin. Do you have any plans to introduce the paladin mount? that was probably my favorite feature of the old paladin.

I'm considering making it a special ability, though it might be a tad too powerful. Personally, I never liked the special mount.

I didn't understand the mount thing for the most part mounts are useless because of the places they can't go (most dungeons, small planar gates, indoors, etc.), assuming of course your mount is a horse. Smaller mounts especially stuff that can fly or spider climb is awesome but usually unbalanced.

I concur.

Hmmm.....I was reading it, and it seems awesome so far. Much better than the WotC paladin.

Thanks!

I had some ideas for special abilities
*snip*

Interesting- like I said, I'm still considering making the mount a special ability. I might make something like take the blow... I'll have to look over it.

Well, personally, I've always viewed the paladin as a protector first, and a divine smiter second. The Take the Blow abilities let a paladin shine as a meat shield. Nothing's going to stop a dragon from trying to eat that paladin except the paladin. Nothing is ever going to eat the paladin's companions ever. Period.

@MandoKnight as well: Me, I've always seen the paladin as a templar. He smites evil, and he protects the innocent. Not his party members: the innocent, those who can't protect themselves. Kindof like PETA, but much, much more cool.

Still, yes, I'll include some special abilities to do that. I think I'll be looking at the Marshal and the Knight for inspiration.

[Strudel110]

The alignment straitjacket aside, I have an issue with the code.

Paladins are empowered by a deity, and as divine spellcasters must be within one step of their deity's alignment.

So here's my problem: A paladin of Heironeous(LG) and a paladin of Pelor(NG) must both be lawful and honorable and act within the law. Both are strait-jacketed into specific actions, and both believe that all Evil creatures can be redeemed.

They absolutely must follow this code. Despite Pelor having an irrational hatred of the undead, or Pelor being a deity who is Neutral on Law-v-Chaos. Despite Heironeous stylizing himself as the arch-enemy of all Evil, or the Heironean Code saying nothing at all about obedience to mortal law.

So, why must my Paladin of Pelor or Paladin of Heironeous act within a code of conduct that is only partially true to either deity?

Indeed. I think the code should change depending on the god.

[Gorgondantess]

The alignment straitjacket aside, I have an issue with the code.

Paladins are empowered by a deity, and as divine spellcasters must be within one step of their deity's alignment.

So here's my problem: A paladin of Heironeous(LG) and a paladin of Pelor(NG) must both be lawful and honorable and act within the law. Both are strait-jacketed into specific actions, and both believe that all Evil creatures can be redeemed.

They absolutely must follow this code. Despite Pelor having an irrational hatred of the undead, or Pelor being a deity who is Neutral on Law-v-Chaos. Despite Heironeous stylizing himself as the arch-enemy of all Evil, or the Heironean Code saying nothing at all about obedience to mortal law.

So, why must my Paladin of Pelor or Paladin of Heironeous act within a code of conduct that is only partially true to either deity?

Because this isn't The Paladin of Pelor Class, this is the Paladin Protector of the Innocent Class. If they want to worship Pelor, fine. They still need to follow the paladin's code- they're essentially going above and beyond the call of their deity. Paladins are divine warriors empowered by their own beliefs in purity and righteousness, not empowered by their deity: this is why their abilities are keyed off of charisma, not wisdom. If you want to play a character who gains power from their god, play a cleric. I'm making the paladin to fit my own idea of what the paladin's paradigm should be, and I respectfully disagree with yours.

[Ajadea]

All my paladins are atheist.

A paladin's purpose is to serve the causes of law and good, whether we're talking a crusading templar or a divine shield. Things like worship get in the way.

[Gorgondantess]

All my paladins are atheist.

A paladin's purpose is to serve the causes of law and good, whether we're talking a crusading templar or a divine shield. Things like worship get in the way.

That's pretty much what I'm going for with all this.

[Strudel110]

Because this isn't The Paladin of Pelor Class, this is the Paladin Protector of the Innocent Class. If they want to worship Pelor, fine. They still need to follow the paladin's code- they're essentially going above and beyond the call of their deity. Paladins are divine warriors empowered by their own beliefs in purity and righteousness, not empowered by their deity: this is why their abilities are keyed off of charisma, not wisdom. If you want to play a character who gains power from their god, play a cleric. I'm making the paladin to fit my own idea of what the paladin's paradigm should be, and I respectfully disagree with yours.

Ok well that does make sense when you put it that way.

[hamishspence]

Given that one of my favourite paladin scenes is in Tymora's Luck- where the paladin disobeys her deity- because she realizes that what he wants to do is evil- I agree with the idea of paladins as very much Code first, Deity second.

[taltamir]

this is very nice, I approve.
about tiers... tier 1 completely breaks the game in many ways, tier 2 breaks it in only a few ways... they basically get to say "no" to the DM's carefully plotted plot... raise the dead, teleport all over the place, disjunction the one ring, etc etc.
tier 3 are actually potentially more lethal in an unplanned fighter than higher tiers (especially if cheese is disallowed), but don't possess world and plot breaking powers. They are considered the highest tier level that should be played.

this seems to be tier 3 to me, and that is perfect.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boa...p?topic=1002.0

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite

Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potencially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.

Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges)

Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.

Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psionic Warrior

As far as killing things with sharp bits of metal, CODzilla is far from perfect, it simply doesn't have the feats... nor does it really need to kill things with sharp sticks because, hey, its a tier 1 character. telling reality to bend over is what it does.

[Gorgondantess]

this is very nice, I approve.
about tiers... tier 1 completely breaks the game in many ways, tier 2 breaks it in only a few ways... they basically get to say "no" to the DM's carefully plotted plot... raise the dead, teleport all over the place, disjunction the one ring, etc etc.
tier 3 are actually potentially more lethal in an unplanned fighter than higher tiers (especially if cheese is disallowed), but don't possess world and plot breaking powers. They are considered the highest tier level that should be played.

this seems to be tier 3 to me, and that is perfect.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boa...p?topic=1002.0


As far as killing things with sharp bits of metal, CODzilla is far from perfect, it simply doesn't have the feats... nor does it really need to kill things with sharp sticks because, hey, its a tier 1 character. telling reality to bend over is what it does.

I concur.
The reason I talk about clericzillas is the common argument that a cleric can do what a fighter or paladin can do, but better: my goal was to change that. I was really going for mid tier 3, though. So, let the clerics have their reality altering casting, but I don't want them to still be better at smiting evil than the paladin. I hope I've accomplished that.

Given that one of my favourite paladin scenes is in Tymora's Luck- where the paladin disobeys her deity- because she realizes that what he wants to do is evil- I agree with the idea of paladins as very much Code first, Deity second.

Exactly what I was going for. Whether a paladin follows a deity or not is largely irrelevant: their true religion is an ideal.

[Gorgondantess]

Added in a 3- special ability chain for defensive auras, and a special ability for a special mount. I particularly like the special mount one. Check it out.

[Kyuu Himura]

Awesome work, always loved the paladin, my first D&D character was a paladin and I would have loved to see this fix at that table that day.
That being said, there is this one issue with the paladin code that sooner or later will be brought either by a paladin player getting screwed or by a paladin hating DM wanting to screw paladins with his arbitrary interpretation of stuff.
Legitimate Authority:
According to some people, if the rightfull heir of the throne of a country/city where a paladin serves is, say, Lawful Evil, then the pladin would have to stfu and obey the li'l tyrant, or risk becoming chaotic (wtf is these people interpretation of lawful??). So Richard the Righteous, a paladin of unquestionable virtue would have to serve Prince Plotty McBadguy (thus falling, because at some point, Plotty is gonna make Rich kill a peasant) or disobey and thus stop being a paladin (because disobeying is chaotic and you're supposed to be lawful).
Now, I know that such a thinking line is a bunch of bull#$%&$, but then again, there are DM's that like bull#$%&&$. So I propose the following change: The paladin is expected to follow Legitimate authority, but when such authority is evil, he must see that it is replaced by Righteous Authority (yes, that creates Lawful revolutionaries, but it also eliminates stupid "serve authority and stfu" DMing)

Anyway, my 2 cp, hope it helps

[hamishspence]

There is the BoED approach- whether than paladin must disobey orders to do evil (and this does not make them any less lawful) but, at the same time, they won't generally overthrow a government just because it's corrupt- they will try and use less violent means. At least until violence becomes the only reasonable option.

You won't fall if Plotty McBadguy orders you to do something evil and you say "no way"- but until then, the paladin might do their best to steer the Evil guy away from evilness, rather than overthrow him the moment he comes to the throne.

Note that this version of the paladin says nothing about "may not associate with people who offend against his moral code"-so he;s not going to be penalized for remaining in Plotty McBadguy's service and trying to redeem him.

[Gorgondantess]

Awesome work, always loved the paladin, my first D&D character was a paladin and I would have loved to see this fix at that table that day.
That being said, there is this one issue with the paladin code that sooner or later will be brought either by a paladin player getting screwed or by a paladin hating DM wanting to screw paladins with his arbitrary interpretation of stuff.
Legitimate Authority:
According to some people, if the rightfull heir of the throne of a country/city where a paladin serves is, say, Lawful Evil, then the pladin would have to stfu and obey the li'l tyrant, or risk becoming chaotic (wtf is these people interpretation of lawful??). So Richard the Righteous, a paladin of unquestionable virtue would have to serve Prince Plotty McBadguy (thus falling, because at some point, Plotty is gonna make Rich kill a peasant) or disobey and thus stop being a paladin (because disobeying is chaotic and you're supposed to be lawful).
Now, I know that such a thinking line is a bunch of bull#$%&$, but then again, there are DM's that like bull#$%&&$. So I propose the following change: The paladin is expected to follow Legitimate authority, but when such authority is evil, he must see that it is replaced by Righteous Authority (yes, that creates Lawful revolutionaries, but it also eliminates stupid "serve authority and stfu" DMing)

Anyway, my 2 cp, hope it helps

Good point! I meant to include a clause that a paladin may disobey lawful authority if said authority is telling him to commit an evil act.

[Gorgondantess]

'Kay, the code is updated and hammered out... anything else it needs? Any more ideas/critique on special abilities?
Also, any requests for a paladin of a different alignment spectrum?

[AtS]

Here's a question.

Any paladin who ceases to be lawful good or knowingly violates this code of conduct is considered to have a charisma score of 1 until proper atonement is made.

Does this mean that the paladin's Charisma drops to 1, or is effectively 1? Are they incapacitated by even a single point of charisma damage? Or do they keep their charisma score, but for the purposes of the Paladin class abilities, their score is treated as if it were a 1?

Also, does this charisma drop (real or otherwise) affect the Paladin's multiclass abilities that might be based on charisma?


I have to say, I really like this class fix, and I'm probably going to have my DM take a look at it. If he lets me use it, I'll report back on how it fares.

[Gorgondantess]

Does this mean that the paladin's Charisma drops to 1, or is effectively 1? Are they incapacitated by even a single point of charisma damage? Or do they keep their charisma score, but for the purposes of the Paladin class abilities, their score is treated as if it were a 1?

It drops to 1, like a construct. An ego whip is fatal.

Also, does this charisma drop (real or otherwise) affect the Paladin's multiclass abilities that might be based on charisma?

Yep, so a sorcadin is equally screwed. It reflects the blow to the paladin's confidence: his entire being is built around an ideal, and he's lost it.

I have to say, I really like this class fix, and I'm probably going to have my DM take a look at it. If he lets me use it, I'll report back on how it fares.

Thanks! I'd appreciate that.

[Woodsman]

Well, this class is certainly an improvement to the standard paladin. HOWEVER, I do have a major disagreement.

"A paladin must stop his quest to apprehend a petty criminal."

That is just... what? I mean, that doesn't make sense to me. What if his quest is on a time limit and apprehending every criminal he sees prevents him from completing his quest?

And if he doesn't complete his quest, hypothetically, the world ends. Really, is that for the greater good? "Oh, yeah, I caught the criminal, but it didn't matter because the world ended."

See what I'm getting at?

[Gorgondantess]

Well, this class is certainly an improvement to the standard paladin. HOWEVER, I do have a major disagreement.

"A paladin must stop his quest to apprehend a petty criminal."

That is just... what? I mean, that doesn't make sense to me. What if his quest is on a time limit and apprehending every criminal he sees prevents him from completing his quest?

And if he doesn't complete his quest, hypothetically, the world ends. Really, is that for the greater good? "Oh, yeah, I caught the criminal, but it didn't matter because the world ended."

See what I'm getting at?

The point was, he needs to uphold righteousness wherever he goes... though, yeah, that was poorly worded. I'll remove that clause until I can find a better wording- I need it, and this may sound silly, but... to lack pragmatism. The paladin code is wholly idealist- practicality doesn't come into the equation.

[Woodsman]

The point was, he needs to uphold righteousness wherever he goes... though, yeah, that was poorly worded. I'll remove that clause until I can find a better wording- I need it, and this may sound silly, but... to lack pragmatism. The paladin code is wholly idealist- practicality doesn't come into the equation.

How about something like this:

"Given the choice between confronting two evils, the paladin must confront the one which would do the greatest harm if left unchecked. He must always act for the greater good, even if it very occasionally means letting a lesser evil go unchecked for a period of time."

Obviously, this is just a draft, typed in about two minutes, but it's a start.