D&D 3e/3.5e/d20The forum for conversations specifically related to the rules and procedures of Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition, 3.5 Edition, or any fantasy game using the d20 system or a variant thereof (commercially published or not).
Hey guys, I got a friend who is starting a campaign and as a change of pace I thought I'd play a paladin. I read through Dictum Mortuum's Paladin Handbook for some info and I noticed the feat Serenity from Dragon Compendium wasn't there. So Im asking if its a good feat choice to reduce some MADness that paladin carries with it. If it helps I plan on going into the Mystic Fire Knight substitution levels and most likely play a lesser Aasimar. Also what are some good prestige classes not mentioned in the paladin handbook that are paladin friendly?
Note 1: I really don't want people telling me to play a Crusader. I read it and it looks cool but their maneuvers and recovery is a bit of an annoyance.
Note 2: I have also read Sword of the Arcane Order feat and its really unclear on how it works and is mostly up to DM's choice on it.
I believe DM only doesn't include it because DM's guides generally stick to WotC-published 3.5 materials. There are a few exceptions where first-party materials don't support something (like the Hexblade's curse feats) or where the forums speak especially loudly about a certain combination (like Iajitsu Focus on the Factotum), but 3.0 and Dragon magazine stuff is normally deliberately omitted.
On advancement routes, it depends pretty heavily on what you're in Paladin to get:
If you want all the Paladin's abilities to advance - mounts, casting, smiting, as well as its early-level class features, your best options are straight Paladin or Triadic Knight. The advantage of Paladin is full class casting and ACF advancement (Mystic Fire Knight, Harmonious Knight or anything you might have swapped your mount out for). The advantage of Triadic Knight is a bunch of immunities while maintaining mount and smite advancement and pretty good casting. Also a weak gimmicky capstone that's not worth losing another CL for.
EDIT: Also bone knight, for even more immunities and an unusually pro-undead scthick, but only Cleric BA. The big bonus is stacking with Paladin of Tyranny for a mount while advancing accelerated casting like the Ur-Priest's.
If you only want Paladin for its early-level abilities (Divine Grace, Aura of Courage, Turning, or whatever ACFs you want to replace them), your build should be able to make pretty good use of most martial classes based on Wisdom or Charisma - builds based on gishing with Suel Arcanamach, Knight of the Weave, Chameleon or Warmind and/or throwing some levels into straight martial classes like Hellreaver, Wildrunner, Witchslayer, Shiba Disciple or Singh Rager can all work well, as long as everything stays keyed off the same attribute.
And if you're only in it for one aspect of the Paladin:
For Smiting: Ordained Champion and Fist of Raziel both do it better than straight Paladin.
For Mount: Paladin 5/Beastmaster 1/Halfling Outrider 10 out-mounts the Paladin. An Ashworm Dragoon dip might also be worthwhile for mounted burrowing.
For Casting specifically: Paladin's so conspicuously worse than Cleric that it's probably not worth your time.
Note 2: I have also read Sword of the Arcane Order feat and its really unclear on how it works and is mostly up to DM's choice on it.
SotAO actually needs a fine toothed Rules lawyer to understand, and it isnt actually as nearly quirky as it sounds.
You are preparing Spells, using your intelligence, in order to be cast from paladin spell slots. <Class> Spells actually has no RAW definition, and so you have to ask your DM 2 things when you take it:
1: Do you have to buy the spellbook?*
2: What does he define <Class> Spells as being. If we are not overlapping definitions, the term means "Spells cast from Spell Slots granted by the given class". this lets you battle bless a few good wizard spells, and isnt really broken considering how the feat works. the entire first sentence of SotAO actually doesnt need to be errata'd
PrCs are mostly for focusing on only one aspect of paladin
There are 2 Anti-Mad options for paladin: Dragonlance's Dynamic Priest or Dragon Compendium's Serenity. These feats are keyed to charisma-ifying and Wisdom-ifying the paladin. Serenity is a bit better at base as it doubles Wisdom to willsaves, while Dynamic priest only shifts spellcasting's Required attribute and bonus spells to charisma.
Dynamic priest is also better for Bardadin builds, as you cant migrate Bardic Music from charisma.
This selection of whether your primary attribute is Wisdom or Charisma should heavily influence your choice of race.
*If your DM says yes, then you need to take a flaw to get the Magical Training regional feat, so you do have a spellbook.
Definitely keep an eye towards taking the Divine Spirit ACF, as it unifies paladin's abilities, and has the best healing in 3.5 (Crusader has to waste valuable maneuver choices to get good healing, paladins throw out a gimmick)
I like Serenity. That feat, combined with a level of cleric and the Fist of Raziel or Silver Flame Exorcist allows for a build that is very paladin-y and is a few tiers above the standard paladin without making him cheesy or munchkinny.
You can go for a Paladin 6/Cleric 1/Fist o Raziel 10 or for a Paladin 5/Cleric 2/Fist of Raziel 10, or even a Paladin 3/Cleric 4/Fist of Raziel 10. You lose 4-7 caster levels and +1 to your basic attack bonus, but everything you do is based on Wisdom, even attack, if you add Intuitive Attack and Zen Archery.
The character is useful for the team and is good at what paladins are supposed to do better (killing evil supernatural creatures) without overshadowing anybody or stepping on anybody's toes:
He won't overshadow the fighter types, since he has a slightly lower basic attack bonus, won't use the best weapons and still depends in its non-maximized strength for damage (and lacks tricks like Rage, Frenzy, etc.).
He won't overshadow the spellscasting types, since he's four caster levels below them.
He will only overshadow the normal paladins.
Last edited by Clistenes : 11-16-2012 at 05:08 PM.
Why do you want to play a paladin? Is it the 'holy warrior' vibe you like? Is it a particular combination of class abilities? Does the name sound cool?
I'm fairly certain that a mechanically viable alternative exists which meets your criteria, if only we were informed what it is.
Why do you want to play a paladin? Is it the 'holy warrior' vibe you like? Is it a particular combination of class abilities? Does the name sound cool?
I'm fairly certain that a mechanically viable alternative exists which meets your criteria, if only we were informed what it is.
I think he specifically wants to play the paladin class itself.
__________________
Revan avatar by kaptainkrutch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrylius
That's how wizards beta test their new animals. If it survives Australia, it's a go. Which in hindsight explains a LOT about Australia.
I think he specifically wants to play the paladin class itself.
That, and the only alternate to paladin that "does" Holy Warrior in any way better then Paladin is Crusader. and that is only because Maneuvers have slightly better combat utility then the paladin spell list.
That, and the only alternate to paladin that "does" Holy Warrior in any way better then Paladin is Crusader. and that is only because Maneuvers have slightly better combat utility then the paladin spell list.
To be honest, Favored Soul does a better job of 'Holy Warrior' than Paladin does. There's also ClericZilla with an effective full BAB as well as 9's.
I think he specifically wants to play the paladin class itself.
BLASPHEMY! How dare he like a class because it is appealing to him! He should be playing a Necropolitan Wizard/5 Incantrix/10 Mindbender/1 Archmage/4 who has 21 contingencies and through massive amounts of DCS'ing has no banned schools of magic and is immune to everything short of a DvR which even then is only defeatable through heavy RAW abuse and in some extreme cases Rule 0 (which even STILL barely beats him)! HOW DARE HE I SAY!
A battle Priest is first and foremost a spellcaster. They fight for their god.
A holy warrior is first and foremost a combatant. they fight for the people.
Given that Clerics do not need a particular deity and can be run with little or no spellcasting in combat, and Paladins can be built with deity-specific options or overt and heavy magic use, I'm more than a little puzzled by this. That is, the classes are only very loosely tied to those particular parameters.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Water_Bear
That's RAW for you; 100% Rules-Legal, 110% silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamishspence
"Common sense" and "RAW" are not exactly on speaking terms
Anyone knows blue is for sarcas'ing in · Use of gray may indicate nitpicking · Green is sincerity · "Take 10 SAN damage from Dark Orchid"
I often hop into threads for just one thing
Thank you guys for the responses but yes I do want to play a holy warrior using the paladin class as a base. I have read that the Paladin has a good op ceiling and its the only class I've looked at but never tried. I've looked at Favoured Soul but I'm going more on melee than spells but the occasional spell will help (also battle blessing is awesome)
I agree with Toapat, that a holy warrior is first and foremost a combatant and that's really what I'm aim for. A possible build would be Paladin 6 (using Mystic Fire Knight sub levels)/Fist of Raziel 10 with 4 levels of Knight of the Raven or some other class as I'm not sure how long the campaign will go for.
RSS Feeds: 
A Paladin Inquiry
