3.5 CG Paladin

8 posts / 0 new
Last post
I'm thinking about calling it "Pentewyn," which is Welsh for "firebrand." Basically, I'm thinking that, besides Law/Chaos spells being switched: 1) Break Enchantment would be changed from Spell Level 4 to Level 1, so that it could be used more times per day and earlier. 2) Zone of Truth and Mark of Justice would be removed from the spell list, as CG deities don't feel that that kind of control creates the right idea of a world where people do what's right, not what stronger people tell them to do, as any Lawful Devil can do that. 3) They would have the option of "semi-spontaneously" casting spells instead of their prepared ones, but without the Epic "Spontaneous Spellcasting" feat, it would cost either 1 higher-level prepared spell, 2 same-level prepared spells, or 3 lower-level prepared spells. That way, they have the option of changing their minds in case of emergencies, instead of being bound by a decision made with obsolete information, but they still need to know what they are doing due to having fewer spells per day if they do this. 4) Anything in a Paladin based on CHA would be changed to INT, as CG deities wouldn't care as much about the person giving an argument for why something should be done, so much as whether there was actually a good reason to do it. 5) There wouldn't be the same multi-classing restrictions, as CG deities aren't as interested in a life of discipline to a specific path so much as evaluating things as they come to see what works (although they would still probably be weaker than somebody who focused more on one thing). Is this basically good, or do I need to work on it some more?
Dude, you seem new here, so let me just say:

Probably not worth it. You sound like you're largely talking about using the alignment system in a new(-ish?) way and making it work for you and your players (or, if you don't normally DM, fellow players).

The people here who have gotten the alignment system to work for their games are almost perfectly matched by the people who haven't. Some of the people here who don't like alignment feel like the people who do are trying to force them to use it when it hasn't worked for them, some of the supporters feel like the haters are trying to force them not to use it when it has worked for them, so most of us just try not to bring it up if we can avoid it. Rule of Cautious Editing and all that?

I mean, don't get me wrong, it sounds really interesting, but if you haven't lurked here a lot, just be advised that there can be a lot of flame wars here (especially over alignment) if people aren't careful. Maybe just going with the Holy Liberator class would be easier? Or taking this idea someplace smaller and calmer for safer feed-back? Like possibly 4chan (TVTrope hyperlink Schmuck Bait)?

Also, less importantly, did that really need to be a giant wall of text? Short paragraphs work a lot better on the computer, so couldn't each item have had a seperate line?

Founder - but not owner - of Just Say Yes!

Member of LGBT Gamers

Odds are, if 4-6 people can't figure out an answer you thought was obvious, you screwed up, not them. - JeffGroves
Which is why a DM should present problems to solve, not solutions to find. -FlatFoot
Why there should be the option to use alignment systems:
Show
If some people are heavily benefiting from the inclusion of alignment, then it would behoove those that AREN'T to listen up and pay attention to how those benefits are being created and enjoyed, no? -YagamiFire
But equally important would be for those who do enjoy those benefits to entertain the possibility that other people do not value those benefits equally or, possibly, do not see them as benefits in the first place. -wrecan (RIP)
That makes sense. However, it is not fair to continually attack those that benefit for being, somehow, deviant for deriving enjoyment from something that you cannot. Instead, alignment is continually attacked...it is demonized...and those that use it are lumped in with it.

 

I think there is more merit in a situation where someone says "This doesn't work! It's broken!" and the reply is "Actually it works fine for me. Have you considered your approach might be causing it?"

 

than a situation where someone says "I use this system and the way I use it works really well!" and the back and forth is "No! It is a broken bad system!" -YagamiFire

Sounds alright to me, aside from the Spontaneous spellcasting. That makes your CG paladin variant more powerful than normal, LG ones.

Drop the spontaneous casting, and this sounds like a good variant paladin. 
BS: I actually took this to dandwiki.com first, but it took almost 2 weeks to get my first constructive feedback and I haven't gotten any more since then, so I thought that I should also talk about this someplace bigger for more comprehensive feedback before I suggest it to my DM. And thanks for the warning PPP: I was hoping that the costs of "semi-spontaneous casting" would keep it from getting game-breaking, but did I not make it high enough?
There's already a CG paladin.  It's called a "paladin of freedom" and can be found on the SRD.
My main "complaints" with the PoF: it should have a different name, since the word "paladin" is derived from, and evokes the ideas of, the Knights of Charlemagne in real life and of King Arthur in fiction, it didn't sound right being applied to an outlaw like a CG would likely become (AnnandaleGaming also raises good points about why champions of evil, called Blackguards, should not be base classes like the "Paladins" of Slaughter or Tyranny); it sacrificed "death ward" from the spell list, which I personally didn't see a CG deity doing to it's followers simply to be "not lawful"; plus all of the other points adressed in my OP. Mostly, I was just thinking that there could be another option availible to players, like with any other class, homebrew or otherwise, that technically "could be replaced" with an existing SRD or UA class. Should there not be Sorcerers because there are "already" Wizards for spellcasting, and people shouldn't be able to choose between quantity and quality? Should there not be Rangers, because there are "already" Fighters for bonus feats, and people shouldn't be able to choose bewteen training against all enemies or a few specifically?
Should there not be Sorcerers because there are "already" Wizards for spellcasting, and people shouldn't be able to choose between quantity and quality? Should there not be Rangers, because there are "already" Fighters for bonus feats, and people shouldn't be able to choose bewteen training against all enemies or a few specifically?

I think that that is going a bit far: there really is a point where the combination of class features hasn't been changed enough to merit changing the name and taking the credit for doing so. While I think that your "pentewyn" is different enough from the Paladin, of either Justice or Freedom, to qualify as being more than just a different name for someone else's existing work, I think I can see where somebody would disagree.

Founder - but not owner - of Just Say Yes!

Member of LGBT Gamers

Odds are, if 4-6 people can't figure out an answer you thought was obvious, you screwed up, not them. - JeffGroves
Which is why a DM should present problems to solve, not solutions to find. -FlatFoot
Why there should be the option to use alignment systems:
Show
If some people are heavily benefiting from the inclusion of alignment, then it would behoove those that AREN'T to listen up and pay attention to how those benefits are being created and enjoyed, no? -YagamiFire
But equally important would be for those who do enjoy those benefits to entertain the possibility that other people do not value those benefits equally or, possibly, do not see them as benefits in the first place. -wrecan (RIP)
That makes sense. However, it is not fair to continually attack those that benefit for being, somehow, deviant for deriving enjoyment from something that you cannot. Instead, alignment is continually attacked...it is demonized...and those that use it are lumped in with it.

 

I think there is more merit in a situation where someone says "This doesn't work! It's broken!" and the reply is "Actually it works fine for me. Have you considered your approach might be causing it?"

 

than a situation where someone says "I use this system and the way I use it works really well!" and the back and forth is "No! It is a broken bad system!" -YagamiFire

It sounds ike you ar using 2nd/3rd ed alignment like I do.
I agree with the spontanious casting comment earlier, and I think that perhaps you should consider the multiclassing issue. Dedication is kinda the core idea behind the paladin. Once you give up the path.. there is no going back. I mean cleric, erwatev, but not Paladin / Champion / Ultimate. Redoing the spells list and setting it to INT would do.. Imho 
Following your 'liberty' angle maybe taking smite out and giving them some sort or shield other ability? List of mounts.. ( per setting ) seems atonement would be a decent spell for this class actually - ya know - a leveler head prevails in the light of rationality. Funny 'chaos' and 'rationality' hehe, but I see where you are going with this - I think. The order found in the complexity of chaos - epitomized - by this 'outlaw' champion.

:: You can find me on online in one of the 8 dark corners of the internet ::

Sign In to post comments