They could have rebadged it "Holy Warrior" and rebadged the Oath of Devotion as "Paladin," but...people expect a class called "Paladin" now. And they don't like being told their character has to be religious or good (although apparently it is perfectly fine to have certain class features available only via a pact with a demon, or by being descended from a dragon).

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1059335They could have rebadged it "Holy Warrior" and rebadged the Oath of Devotion as "Paladin," but...people expect a class called "Paladin" now. And they don't like being told their character has to be religious or good (although apparently it is perfectly fine to have certain class features available only via a pact with a demon, or by being descended from a dragon).

That just wants me to have a Paladin's patron turn out to be Demogorgon.  "What?  Why so surprised?  I'm chaotic and evil.  You make people hate the law and goodness.  It's a match made in heaven.  See what I did there?  Chaotic and evil dude!"

They made a game which is significantly easier to make it your own without messing anything up. You want Paladins to be only humans (or maybe dwarves) of LG alignment? No problem, the class will function perfectly fine with those DM decisions for their campaign. Nothing else will need to be tweaked to accommodate that set up. This is a feature, not a bug. Also, Paladins kick ass in this game. Seriously, they do exceptionally well, and not just in combat.

You're used to 3e, which tried to have a rule for every scenario. This version is much closer in feel to 1e, where the DM has a lot more options over how the world works, without the rules creaking much over those decisions.  Want to eliminate feats or instead add a bunch more? No problem, game works fine. Want to eliminate multiclassing or limit it? No problem, game works fine. No magic shops in your game or lots of magic items? No problem, game works fine. Want just the original four OD&D classes of Wizard, Fighting Man, Cleric and Thief? No problem, game works fine. Want monsters that do or do not follow the player character build mechanics? No problem, game works fine.

So plug in your Lawful Good Human-Only model onto the Paladin. No problem, game will work fine. Meanwhile that college kid can play his Venger elf anti-paladin in his campaign, and it will also work fine.

Quote from: Mistwell;1059340They made a game which is significantly easier to make it your own without messing anything up. You want Paladins to be only humans (or maybe dwarves) of LG alignment? No problem, the class will function perfectly fine with those DM decisions for their campaign. Nothing else will need to be tweaked to accommodate that set up. This is a feature, not a bug. Also, Paladins kick ass in this game. Seriously, they do exceptionally well, and not just in combat.

You're used to 3e, which tried to have a rule for every scenario. This version is much closer in feel to 1e, where the DM has a lot more options over how the world works, without the rules creaking much over those decisions.  Want to eliminate feats or instead add a bunch more? No problem, game works fine. Want to eliminate multiclassing or limit it? No problem, game works fine. No magic shops in your game or lots of magic items? No problem, game works fine. Want just the original four OD&D classes of Wizard, Fighting Man, Cleric and Thief? No problem, game works fine. Want monsters that do or do not follow the player character build mechanics? No problem, game works fine.

So plug in your Lawful Good Human-Only model onto the Paladin. No problem, game will work fine. Meanwhile that college kid can play his Venger elf anti-paladin in his campaign, and it will also work fine.

Greetings!

Hey Mistwell! Damn, that's pretty tight. I like that, Mistwell. It makes things clearer to me. Very cool, sir. Indeed, I'm still labouring under the long spell of playing 3E. I'm used to a rule for every damned thing. LOL.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1059325Greetings!

LOL! HAHAHA! Oh my god, S'mon! The "Alpha Ape!" Beautiful! Sounds like your class is fun--I like Law, perhaps not surprisingly. I once read that 50% of Lawyers start out with a degree in *History*. LOL. Your class also sounds a bit...disturbing. Where the hell do these kids come from? I mean, how are they in a Law class, even at 18 years old? What kind of school are you teaching at buddy? LOL. I remember when I was in a high-level Political Science class, dealing with *International Law*--everyone in the class were all well-dressed and very well behaved. The kids weren't 18, I admit. A little older, say 20 or 21. Sounds like British society has gone to hell, too. I'm *shocked* S'mon! LOL. I thought Britain would have the ettiquette and decorum thing down, you know?

The 21 year olds (third year classes) and Postgraduates are almost always fine, it's some of the high school kids who are trouble. But like I said, most of them are actually good kids who turn into good students, initially they're just a bit feral and not used to sitting down and paying attention. There are some cultural/ethnic aspects also which I'm not going to go into.

Quote from: S'mon;1059354The 21 year olds (third year classes) and Postgraduates are almost always fine, it's some of the high school kids who are trouble. But like I said, most of them are actually good kids who turn into good students, initially they're just a bit feral and not used to sitting down and paying attention. There are some cultural/ethnic aspects also which I'm not going to go into.

Greetings!

S'mon, that's awesome that you teach Law, brother! I'm glad that you straighten the feral kids out! Oh, by the way--send me a PM about the "cultural/ethnic aspects." I want the TRUTH!! lol. Seriously though. I like to learn about what's really happening over there.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: rawma;1059275It's lonely defending AL on this site, but not lonely at the gaming table so I can bear it. Carry on, haters.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Quote from: rawma;1059275It's lonely defending AL on this site, but not lonely at the gaming table so I can bear it. Carry on, haters.

Quote from: tenbones;1059535via Imgflip Meme Generator

AL is Adventurers League; beyond forbidding alignments that will almost certainly cause grief, it doesn't really have much to say about alignment.

So why this comment on alignment as if it were a response to me?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1059222Opening the door to different types of Paladins doesn't really bother me.  It used to, I admit, but now...  Eh, there are 5e Oaths that more or less make more sense if they ARE Lawful Good.

Agreed. At first it felt a little odd. But then on thinking of it, it made sense. People have been ignoring Paladin alignmet since AD&D hit the shelves, possibly before that. Its been discussed in Dragon way back and ever since. All the stories of effectively "insert alignment here" Paladins who did whatever, usually while claiming to be good! Others just ignoring alignment completely. Sometimes a DM would step in, but more oft seems not.

So making every class open alignment was a good idea. And allows more freedom to play in a style that fits a concept. Even if sometimes those concepts seem a little... off to us.

Quote from: Omega;1059581Agreed. At first it felt a little odd. But then on thinking of it, it made sense. People have been ignoring Paladin alignmet since AD&D hit the shelves, possibly before that. Its been discussed in Dragon way back and ever since. All the stories of effectively "insert alignment here" Paladins who did whatever, usually while claiming to be good! Others just ignoring alignment completely. Sometimes a DM would step in, but more oft seems not.

So making every class open alignment was a good idea. And allows more freedom to play in a style that fits a concept. Even if sometimes those concepts seem a little... off to us.

I have to amend my statement a little bit.  Chaotic Paladins I have a hard time understanding.  Paladins is a life of discipline and requires following a code as written, which goes against everything a Chaotic character stands for in their outlook to life.  So Chaotic Paladins are not something I can wrap my brain around.

Assuming, of course, you ascribe to the 3-5e Alignment descriptions.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1059601I have to amend my statement a little bit.  Chaotic Paladins I have a hard time understanding.  Paladins is a life of discipline and requires following a code as written, which goes against everything a Chaotic character stands for in their outlook to life.  So Chaotic Paladins are not something I can wrap my brain around.

Assuming, of course, you ascribe to the 3-5e Alignment descriptions.

I think it works if you recall that Chaos in 3-5e includes the concept of personal freedom and that one can declare their alignment with that concept of personal freedom while being disciplined themselves (i.e. "I choose to follow this discipline, but it is up to each individual whether this path is best for them.").

Chaotic Good in particular is basically moral libertarianism; the idea that the best society is one where everyone is free to pursue their own interests so long as it does not infringe on others' own lives and freedoms. A Paladin of that philosophy would basically strive to free people from any burden of laws that infringes upon their freedoms, particularly their freedom to choose good.

You could also simplify the code of the Chaotic Good Paladin to "As it harms none, do as thou will."

Chaotic Neutral and Evil kind of blur together in regard to a freedom-based code though since once you discard the "As it harms none" part you're just arguing the degree to which you're personally comfortable with trampling on those weaker than yourself rather than any sort of moral distinction of a possible code.

It is also worth remembering too that the first edition of D&D to do away with alignment restrictions on Paladins also simplefied the alignments to Lawful Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil and Chaotic Evil. As such the Chaotic Good and Neutral Good positions were shifted to "what produces good ends irrespective of laws" while Lawful Good was "law and order is the best way to bring the most good to the most people."

As such the only truly chaotic paladin in that edition would be the chaotic evil unholy champion whose code would basically amount to "BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!" and who's god doesn't care for or reward any degree of discipline, only death and carnage.

Quote from: rawma;1059576AL is Adventurers League; beyond forbidding alignments that will almost certainly cause grief, it doesn't really have much to say about alignment.

So why this comment on alignment as if it were a response to me?

Because I thought you were talking about Alignment. And I thought it was funny. /shrug.



But that said - I think Adventurers League is far more silly than Alignment.

As far as Paladins go. I don't use Alignment. I want Paladins to be crusading militant badasses for the ethos of their deity. It's that simple. It doesn't matter to me what the Paladin is "alignmentwise" as long as they're furthering the ethos and cause of their deity when it matters. This puts the onus on the deity themselves on what they demand of their followers that they directly invest their power in.

I don't believe Clerics or Paladins get their powerz just because they took a class. To me that's just the mechanics of those PC having been chosen or called by the deity in question to be a vessel through which the gods enact their will.

This allows for Paladins of all alignments doing what Paladins should be doing: fighting, crusading, helping, harming, for their deity's cause. Not for the player's rationalization of their alignment.

I'm with Shark. For me paladin means a strict code of doing good/right (I dont use alignment), and zealous devotion to a justice type deity only. If you want to play a religious zealous warrior of some other kind, that's a cleric yo. 5e paladins are particularly galling in that they are also OP.

Quote from: Psikerlord;10596675e paladins are particularly galling in that they are also OP.

Playing one, it felt better than a Fighter, but not as good as a Barbarian, unless you know you only have one fight that day.

My main issue was that it was all about the spell slots, burning for damage, and felt boring to play, whereas I love playing the 5e Barbarian.