Who is the Paladin?

Alright, since my other thread that tried to deal with this got derailed into one of the most pointless discussions ever, I'm going to try this again.

Is the Paladin a "Holy warrior"/"champion of a specific diety" type character who follows the principles of the God he serves   OR    is a Paladin someone who upholds justice and good. Always does the right thing and has swarn to destroy evil wherever it is found? He serves the forces of good and not necessarily any one specific good diety.   OR Is the Paladin both/the Paladin class can represent both ideas without the need for another class OR Should both of these concepts be represented with different classes.


Also anyone who mentions alignment shall be smited. Please just discuss the above without going into the alignment debate.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

I see the paladin as the "hands" of his deity. He follows the tenets of his faith, and works to fight against his deity's enemies. If he doesn't have a specific task at the moment, he would work for justice and good, lending aid where it's needed. He's the holy warrior.

In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.

Personally, I believe that the paladin is the person who believes so strongly in doing what is right that it manifests as tangible effects that harm evil and heal the innocent.  If there is a good deity in the setting, then those powers may or may not have been granted by said deity in order that good might have a powerful champion, but in any case the paladin does what is right because it is right and not because some nigh-omnipotent being told her to.

The thing with the really good deities, though, is that they don't really care if you do good in their name, as long as you're doing good.

Contrast with, say, a cleric who always seeks to promote the deity and its specific goals, rather than being devoted to the higher cause which that deity serves.  There's a lot of overlap in actions that they would take, but the motivation is different.

The metagame is not the game.


 Go with the cause of good part I suppose.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 Fear is the Mind Killer  

I see the paladin as the second part of the initial post.  Why do you ask?  How much sense would a Paladin of Vecna make if he/she is supposed to be Good/Lawful to be a Paladin?  I would support a variant of the paladin, the templar, as the warrior servant of their deity's will...
A paladin is a good deity's warlock.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

A paladin is a good deity's warlock.


lol My favorite so far.
Then, if a Paladin is a good deity's warlock...what is a neutral or evil deity's warlock...or don't they care to have one...
A paladin is a good deity's warlock.

lol My favorite so far.

I kind of like it myself. ;)

In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.

Then, if a Paladin is a good deity's warlock...what is a neutral or evil deity's warlock...or don't they care to have one...

Just call it a holy warrior of [Deity]?

In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.

I had a thread while ago that suggest paladins to be similiar to the warlock. Warlock make pacts with fiends while paladins make pacts with angels or something similiar. 

It's not hard to imagine a paladin had a call for justice and an angel came to answer him.
They both make a pact until the paladin is strong enough to make it on his own.

 
So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...
Then, if a Paladin is a good deity's warlock...what is a neutral or evil deity's warlock...or don't they care to have one...


I'd say we need a new class for them
A paladin is a good deity's warlock.

I like that, since my preferred warlock fluff is that demonic entities are prone to handing out fiery destruction powers to exceptionally cruel and violent people because, hey, you can never have enough suffering in the world.

The metagame is not the game.

So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...



No, I'd say in the case of a Paladin being a holy warrior for a good deity you would need another class to represent the neutral guys.


Anti-Paladins actually are the class for evil deities so that is already taken care of.

The exception being if you see Paladins being big enough to ecampass all of that. 
So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...



No, I'd say in the case of a Paladin being a holy warrior for a good deity you would need another class to represent the neutral guys.


Anti-Paladins actually are the class for evil deities so that is already taken care of.

The exception being if you see Paladins being big enough to ecampass all of that. 

That's what I think .  In the same way sorcerer branched off of wizard, this new class could branch off of paladin/cleric 
So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...


This is why I find the idea of Good only Paladins odd. How did Good deities get the monopoly on heavily armored holy warriors?
Misquoted there, as I must have misread the first time.  Thing about Blackguards/dark knights, is that they carry out evil as a Paladin carries out good.  I don't think either HAVE to be a servant of a specific deity.  Hense, my call for the new class...
This is why I find the idea of Good only Paladins odd. How did Good deities get the monopoly on heavily armored holy warriors?

Which is why I think of paladins as being good rather than devout.  If you want a heavily armored holy warrior, you have clerics and fighters and multi-class cleric/fighters.

The metagame is not the game.

Misquoted there, as I must have misread the first time.  Thing about Blackguards/dark knights, is that they carry out evil as a Paladin carries out good.  I don't think either HAVE to be a servant of a specific deity.  Hense, my call for the new class...


I agree with this. THis is also why I think there should be a new class.
So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...


This is why I find the idea of Good only Paladins odd. How did Good deities get the monopoly on heavily armored holy warriors?



My thoughts exactly...here's the thing, though.  Paladin has been traditionally Good/Lawful.  Their spells and abilities reflect that.  If there is a god of thieves, wouldn't you think their holy warrior would have some sneaky abilities?  Perhaps he could cast invisibility as a divine spell...
So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...



No, I'd say in the case of a Paladin being a holy warrior for a good deity you would need another class to represent the neutral guys.


Anti-Paladins actually are the class for evil deities so that is already taken care of.

The exception being if you see Paladins being big enough to ecampass all of that. 



I hate the idea of 3 classes all to do the same thing.

I'd much rather have the Paladin encompass holy warriors of all alignments.

Maybe if we must name it something else and make the 'Paladin' a particular scheme/technique of that class. 
So, a Paladin would be a holy warrior of a good deity.  But neutral and evil deities say, ah screw it, our devout fighters can just be fighters.  Let's not imbue them with special powers for carrying out our will...



No, I'd say in the case of a Paladin being a holy warrior for a good deity you would need another class to represent the neutral guys.


Anti-Paladins actually are the class for evil deities so that is already taken care of.

The exception being if you see Paladins being big enough to ecampass all of that. 



I hate the idea of 3 classes all to do the same thing.

I'd much rather have the Paladin encompass holy warriors of all alignments.

Maybe if we must name it something else and make the 'Paladin' a particular scheme/technique of that class. 


I don't think the classes would be doing the samething. I think there are very easy ways to make them totally different from one another and unique and interesting.
Misquoted there, as I must have misread the first time.  Thing about Blackguards/dark knights, is that they carry out evil as a Paladin carries out good.  I don't think either HAVE to be a servant of a specific deity.  Hense, my call for the new class...


I agree with this. THis is also why I think there should be a new class.


Why not just make both the Paladin class with two sub-builds builds for the extremes, the Blackguard for Evil and Champion for the Good?

Or anything so we're not going to end up with 4-5 classes that are all exactly the same, just with different alignment requirements?
Misquoted there, as I must have misread the first time.  Thing about Blackguards/dark knights, is that they carry out evil as a Paladin carries out good.  I don't think either HAVE to be a servant of a specific deity.  Hense, my call for the new class...


I agree with this. THis is also why I think there should be a new class.


Why not just make both the Paladin class with two sub-builds builds for the extremes, the Blackguard for Evil and Champion for the Good?

Or anything so we're not going to end up with 4-5 classes that are all exactly the same, just with different alignment requirements?


Why do they have to be exactly the same? or more importantly why would you make the same?

Lets look at the Paladin and the ANti-Paladin. The antil Paladin could get Inflict light wounds (or similar type spell) as an at will ability at first level while the Paladin would get lay on hands 1/day. The actual deity champion might then get somethign to help with combat at first level instead of either of those.
Misquoted there, as I must have misread the first time.  Thing about Blackguards/dark knights, is that they carry out evil as a Paladin carries out good.  I don't think either HAVE to be a servant of a specific deity.  Hense, my call for the new class...


I agree with this. THis is also why I think there should be a new class.


Why not just make both the Paladin class with two sub-builds builds for the extremes, the Blackguard for Evil and Champion for the Good?

Or anything so we're not going to end up with 4-5 classes that are all exactly the same, just with different alignment requirements?


Why do they have to be exactly the same? or more importantly why would you make the same?

Lets look at the Paladin and the ANti-Paladin. The antil Paladin could get Inflict light wounds (or similar type spell) as an at will ability at first level while the Paladin would get lay on hands 1/day. The actual deity champion might then get somethign to help with combat at first level instead of either of those.



Exactly.  Simply put, the fluff of a Paladin and the fluff of the blackguard don't really fit the champion of all deities.  Even those that the Paladin and Blackguard fit, could probably be expressed better

I have toyed aroudn the idea of a paladin having templates (a bit like pathfinder having the ability to swap out certain abilities for other ones) that modify the base class to suit your idea of a paladin rather than individual classes, however I think there is a whole lot of potential adding a new Holy Champion type class. Like a real Avatar of the gods. 
I have toyed aroudn the idea of a paladin having templates (a bit like pathfinder having the ability to swap out certain abilities for other ones) that modify the base class to suit your idea of a paladin rather than individual classes, however I think there is a whole lot of potential adding a new Holy Champion type class. Like a real Avatar of the gods. 


What is this Holy Champion class, and how does it relate to paladins?
Misquoted there, as I must have misread the first time.  Thing about Blackguards/dark knights, is that they carry out evil as a Paladin carries out good.  I don't think either HAVE to be a servant of a specific deity.  Hense, my call for the new class...


I agree with this. THis is also why I think there should be a new class.


Why not just make both the Paladin class with two sub-builds builds for the extremes, the Blackguard for Evil and Champion for the Good?

Or anything so we're not going to end up with 4-5 classes that are all exactly the same, just with different alignment requirements?


Why do they have to be exactly the same? or more importantly why would you make the same?

Lets look at the Paladin and the ANti-Paladin. The antil Paladin could get Inflict light wounds (or similar type spell) as an at will ability at first level while the Paladin would get lay on hands 1/day. The actual deity champion might then get somethign to help with combat at first level instead of either of those.


Or they could get a choice of Inflict Light Wounds or Lay on Hands at level 1, and not have any alignment restrictions period. ILW isn't an evil exclusive spell and LOH isn't a good exclusive spell, and there can be justifications for for either side taking the other(evil Paladin might take LOH because they're evil, but they realize assisting your team is still vital to surviving, and heals his allies when he can, while a good Paladin can take Inflict Light Wounds because despite being Good, they're going to punish bad guys with anything they can)
I think that the cleric with the war domain makes a pretty good paladin, but I like the idea of a paladin being linked to a single god...be it good/evil or lawful/chaotic and maybe have the restriction that the paladin must match their god's allignment?...it seems overkill to need an "anti-paladin" class to for the evil gods
There is a potential pitfall in trying to consolidate Paladin/Blackguard/Deity's Champion into a single class.  The descriptors of class features would likely have to be incredibly vague and devoid of fluff.  You couldn't use traditional images of the Paladin such as using holy light.  Here's another thing: if they are a "paladin" of a deity, who says you are going to be striking at good or evil?  You would be actually be striking at whoever opposes the will of your deity.  A "paladin" of Melora(god of the wilderness) might strike at the barons men who are tearing down a forest for building materials.  A "paladin" of sehanine would be interesting because she says that you should "keep to the shadows, avoiding the blazing light of zealous good and the utter darkness of evil".  I put Paladin in quotations because it doesn't fit that well in my opinion...

For this reason, I ask again is the Paladin a deity's champion? Or, does the Paladin encompass more on doing what is good and just and fighting evil, with the Blackguard being the antithesis of that?  If there were a Divine Champion/Templar class, might a Templar of a good/lawful deity be very different than a Paladin? This could be quite possible, and in the same way a Templar of an evil deity may be very different than a Blackguard.
There is a point where things are better seperated for the sake of identity.  This is a case of three or one.  Can it be captured in a single class effectively without sacrificing too much?  If not, its best seperated with different mechanics and fluff.  Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlock and Fighter/Warlord could be consolidated.  The question is, is it a good idea to do so and would we lose too much in the process? 
A paladin is one of the oath bound or nature bound channellers of transcendant heroic/divine might their auras streaming full of charisms aka divine boons and blessings that inspire and empower.  They are a Sampson and a CuCulaine and a Lancelot.

Most devote themselves becoming champions of causes both mortal and divine their natures and oaths are often extreme but not necessarily unconflicted and that extremity is where they find empowerment. For if they waiver from following their oaths/losing themselves they lose connection to their power.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Why does busting the "holy warrior" concept into three classes based on alignment make more sense than doing that for any other class? In particular, clerics have a tie with their deity that's at least comparably strong, and we don't feel the need to bust that into a bunch of different classes. Are clerics stuck with class features that are "incredibly vague and devoid of fluff"? I don't really think so; in most cases, they're far more closely tied with the setting than any other class.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
Well I like my answer, it ties in charisma fits more than just one "paladin" from myth and legend and could be attached in fact to many classes not just the fighter and if you do and create those charisms and associated oaths, well recreates the 1e paladin.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I have toyed aroudn the idea of a paladin having templates (a bit like pathfinder having the ability to swap out certain abilities for other ones) that modify the base class to suit your idea of a paladin rather than individual classes, however I think there is a whole lot of potential adding a new Holy Champion type class. Like a real Avatar of the gods. 


What is this Holy Champion class, and how does it relate to paladins?



In Essense The "Holy CHampion" class fills the role of being the champion of the gods. The Paladin fills the role of being the champion of good. The paladin basically isn't concerned with a particular deity he is concerend with destroying evil and upholding good. So the Holy Champion would in contrast be concerned with fighting for his god and upholding his gods ideas and so forth. 
Why does busting the "holy warrior" concept into three classes based on alignment make more sense than doing that for any other class? In particular, clerics have a tie with their deity that's at least comparably strong, and we don't feel the need to bust that into a bunch of different classes. Are clerics stuck with class features that are "incredibly vague and devoid of fluff"? I don't really think so; in most cases, they're far more closely tied with the setting than any other class.



Herein lies the issue. I don't see a Paladin having any particular ties to a specific diety. I don't see the Paladin as a "holy warrior" type class. So you aren't spliting the Paladin into three classes, you are making a class to fill the void of the game not having a more martial "holy warrior" type clas. 
The paladin basically isn't concerned with a particular deity he is concerend with destroying evil and upholding good.


Except for Evil Paladins. Because trying to destroy Evil would be kind of silly for them..well, if it's a different evil I guess.
Alright, since my other thread that tried to deal with this got derailed into one of the most pointless discussions ever, I'm going to try this again.

Is the Paladin a "Holy warrior"/"champion of a specific diety" type character who follows the principles of the God he serves   OR    is a Paladin someone who upholds justice and good. Always does the right thing and has swarn to destroy evil wherever it is found? He serves the forces of good and not necessarily any one specific good diety.   OR Is the Paladin both/the Paladin class can represent both ideas without the need for another class OR Should both of these concepts be represented with different classes.


Also anyone who mentions alignment shall be smited. Please just discuss the above without going into the alignment debate.


Don't look now, but you've just defined the alignment of your paladin.
Alright, since my other thread that tried to deal with this got derailed into one of the most pointless discussions ever, I'm going to try this again.

Is the Paladin a "Holy warrior"/"champion of a specific diety" type character who follows the principles of the God he serves   OR    is a Paladin someone who upholds justice and good. Always does the right thing and has swarn to destroy evil wherever it is found? He serves the forces of good and not necessarily any one specific good diety.   OR Is the Paladin both/the Paladin class can represent both ideas without the need for another class OR Should both of these concepts be represented with different classes.


Also anyone who mentions alignment shall be smited. Please just discuss the above without going into the alignment debate.


Don't look now, but you've just defined the alignment of your paladin.



Go read the last five pages of A different take on the alignment debate and you will get where I am coming from.
Alright, since my other thread that tried to deal with this got derailed into one of the most pointless discussions ever, I'm going to try this again.

Is the Paladin a "Holy warrior"/"champion of a specific diety" type character who follows the principles of the God he serves   OR    is a Paladin someone who upholds justice and good. Always does the right thing and has swarn to destroy evil wherever it is found? He serves the forces of good and not necessarily any one specific good diety.   OR Is the Paladin both/the Paladin class can represent both ideas without the need for another class OR Should both of these concepts be represented with different classes.


Also anyone who mentions alignment shall be smited. Please just discuss the above without going into the alignment debate.


Don't look now, but you've just defined the alignment of your paladin.



Go read the last five pages of A different take on the alignment debate and you will get where I am coming from.


Except he's right, you did define the alignment of Paladin while defining it. For example, why is a Chaotic Evil Paladin going  to uphold Good and Justice? Serving his god is one thing yes, but you cna still be evil without serving an evil deity.
That statement was necessary and also has nothing to do with the alignment system of the game.