PDA

View Full Version : Alternative Paladin Concepts



RCJak44
2013-02-02, 03:24 PM
Hello, dear forumites,

I'm a long time reader of the forums here at GitP, but a first time poster. It seems like many on the forums here are informed and courteous when it comes to questions and discussions, so I thought I'd try a recent brainstorm at this venue.

I'll be participating in an upcoming Pathfinder game, but the question transcends systems, in a way. I was looking for means to translate the paladin into a much more innocuous character than the very ecclesiastical, clerical versions so often portrayed. The idea of a much more parochial, poor individual that is nonetheless, through his humility, virtue and over-all goodiness, worthy of receiving his deity's grace and uses these gifts for purposes that are overall, very paladin-y but in unexpected ways or places.

I'm not looking for a way to totally transplant the class outside of a traditional good-scheme, or divorce him from his church or deity; indeed, the character will probably be a very devout, albeit poor member of a church or temple. I just was wondering if any had dabbled with this more common-man type paladin that wasn't dressed in the flashy armor and decked from head to heel in holy regalia type concept. Has anyone tried this, thought on this? How have you seen paladins roleplayed beyond the evangelizer, the stoic good guy or the holier than thou types? Would it be better to go for simply a more 'mundane' class, like rogue or fighter for this blessed yeoman type character? What manner of concepts beyond the very traditional, sword-board and spotless armor type paladins have you come across?

Other forums often have a good deal of either paladin hate or a very strict interpretation of what a paladin must be when I pose the question, so I thought it might be more fruitful to ask here what thoughts you may have.

OzzyKP
2013-02-02, 03:42 PM
Everything you're talking about is purely role playing/flavor stuff. There is nothing about the character itself besides tradition (and anti-Paladin sentiment) that says a Paladin has to be a stuffy, inflexible, holy crusader. Play it how you want.

A poor, humble, holy paladin sounds just fine to me. But why Paladin instead of Cleric?

Yora
2013-02-02, 03:42 PM
The only good character in Neverwinter Nights 2 was a paladin who left his post in the temple and joined rangers hunting marauding orcs in the wilderness, where he became one of their leaders. He was kind of a leader of the common people, helping them to create a strong defense against the orcs.
That's something that could very well work in most context.

I once played a fighter/priest of Kelemvor together with another player who played a paladin of Kelemvor. They were really a lot more hard-ass undead hunters. They would speak up when they see bullies or thugs harrassing people in town, but the betterment of society really wasn't on their priority list. They would help people in emergencies, but they were on a permanent mission, which was patrolling for and destroying dangerous undead.

The biggest problem with paladins in D&D is, that they can't really do anything a cleric/fighter couldn't do better. In all other games I've seen, fighter/priest hybrid characters simply weren't possible, so the paladin took that job.
I usually fail to see having paladins at all.

Slipperychicken
2013-02-02, 06:31 PM
Paladins don't have to be part of a religious organization. And their moral code isn't as restrictive as our western values often lead us to think: they can party, drink, be irritable (not lying carries some heavy social implications), gamble, and engage in deviant sex acts. Someone once posted a short story illustrating this idea.

Paladins of many stripes are quite possible. It sometimes makes me want to play a "cool guy" Paladin who stands up for what's right, but doesn't have the stick so far up his bum.

ZeroGear
2013-02-02, 07:46 PM
Go with how you feel him. Quite honestly, as long as you don't break the vows you should be good. While the typical "I shall smite thee with my mighty blade" types are the majority (as far as playing a paladin goes) they are not exclusive. That whole idea is generally based on the actual knights portrayed in myth and fable, as those stories were heavily influenced by the church and longswords were the weapon of choice in those days.
However, put another way, there were many other examples of people who might be referred to as a 'paladin':
St. Jeanne d'Arc is a wonderful example, as she started out as a humble peasant girl, was blessed by god, and fought for France in the name of her lord. While zealous on the battlefield, she probably wasn't always decked out in fancy gear, at least not in the beginning.
Similarly, in D&D, Elves have their own sub-class that is essentially a for-weilding paladin who focusses on ranged combat while the Dwarf alternate specializes in hammers.
In many later incarnations, some of the gunslingers of the wild west could also qualify as 'paladin' characters, replacing armor with the sheriff star and rawhide and a sword with a sixshooter and lasso. Granted, they didn't always belong to the church, but they stood for law and goodness most of the time.

What it boils down to is that it is a character you like playing. There is nothing in the rules against playing a humble, traveling Paladin who uses is bare fists to bring justice to those who harm the innocent.

ArcturusV
2013-02-02, 08:05 PM
Well, none of what you're asking about is really THAT weird. There's even some precedent for it in the past DnD Editions.

One of the books I used to have... but eventually walked away during a store game session and someone with sticky fingers... was the old 2nd edition book "The Paladin's Handbook". Of which there was about... 120 pages if I remember of pure paladin only goodness?

But relevant to this conversation was the chapter on "Kits". Kits were something in the old "The ______'s Handbook" series of character modules which gave rules for altering the base character class in various ways, introducing new rules and mechanics. Sort of the spiritual ancestor to things like the Alternate Class Features and Substitution Levels in 3.5, though usually a lot more comprehensive.

One that I still remember out of all the kits was the "Expatriate" kit. Which was someone who was in a Knightly Order, or a Religious Order, but kicked out for some reason. And instead he continues his mission against evil, and generally had the "protect the people" schtick a little more than smiting.

So it's not entirely out of left field. I suppose if you could find a copy of the book somewhere it might be interesting reading, though probably has nothing that you'd be able to use in your game. Least mechanically.

LibraryOgre
2013-02-02, 08:13 PM
I've also always liked the idea of a Paladin who is more akin to Cadfael than to Hugh Beringar... a man of reason and purpose, still handy with weapons though largely a pacifist himself. Devoted to his deity, devoted to doing good, and devoted to protecting people when justice would fall too harshly on them.

Yora
2013-02-02, 08:27 PM
One that I still remember out of all the kits was the "Expatriate" kit. Which was someone who was in a Knightly Order, or a Religious Order, but kicked out for some reason. And instead he continues his mission against evil, and generally had the "protect the people" schtick a little more than smiting.
Which can happen in decentralized religions quite easily. Once you start preaching or practicing things that is not what the mainstream of your sect is teaching, they might ask you to no longer use their name and form your own branch, so people still know what they are getting from each branch or sect.
Doesn't have to mean your old co-clerics are actively objecting against your new standpoint or regard you as a heretic or apostate. They just revoke your status as an official representative of the Rising Phoenix Sun Cult, who speaks and acts on behalf of the High Priest.

I've also always liked the idea of a Paladin who is more akin to Cadfael than to Hugh Beringar... a man of reason and purpose, still handy with weapons though largely a pacifist himself.
Solid Snake. :smallbiggrin:
From his approach to conflict and his conviction to do what needs to be done and no one else can, he fits the Paladin mindset quite well. He is still a sneaky vigilante who uses sabotage and spying. And really quite grumpy.

Cerlis
2013-02-03, 06:45 PM
The only good character in Neverwinter Nights 2 was a paladin who left his post in the temple and joined rangers hunting marauding orcs in the wilderness, where he became one of their leaders. He was kind of a leader of the common people, helping them to create a strong defense against the orcs.
That's something that could very well work in most context.

I once played a fighter/priest of Kelemvor together with another player who played a paladin of Kelemvor. They were really a lot more hard-ass undead hunters. They would speak up when they see bullies or thugs harrassing people in town, but the betterment of society really wasn't on their priority list. They would help people in emergencies, but they were on a permanent mission, which was patrolling for and destroying dangerous undead.

The biggest problem with paladins in D&D is, that they can't really do anything a cleric/fighter couldn't do better. In all other games I've seen, fighter/priest hybrid characters simply weren't possible, so the paladin took that job.
I usually fail to see having paladins at all.

I think the same can be said for alot of other classes (ranger= Druid/Rogue or Druid/fighter; Bard= Fighter/rogue/cleric). In fact the existence of the paladin is justified in the writers mind retroactively by the advent of most every other main class introduced after core. Essentially most of the main classes in 3.5 are "lets make this prestige class into a main class". Sure a fighter can fight better than a paladin. Sure a cleric can cast better, but a paladin mixes both. Just like a duskblade mixes offensive casting and melee, or a beguilder mixes Skills with non-damaging casting, a swashbuckler is essentially a main class Duelist. a Scout is a ranger/rogue.

There is a reason that almost every form of alternate magic introduced has some version of paladin. There are psychic paladins, and incarnum paladins....well that might be it.
-----------------

as for the OP, I assumed that that was the best form of paladin. I think there are two problems. One that when paladins are depicted in their glory they are usually lvl 5-20. People ignore the fact that they have the same starting gold as a fighter, and most of that goes into their armor they where lucky enough to inherent or work for. The second thing is people(players) have the habit of either hating the paladin's very existence or go with it and really ham it up. In fact, though i don't troll the forum as much as others usually when i see someone posting about the paladin they are going to try they are taking it to Liberachi levels.

Just go to the 3.5 book and look up paladin. IMO that paladin chick looks very unassuming and non special. Sure her epic level depictions look classy enough, but hardly a shining paladin (looks like she is wearing leather scale mail)

Sir Augusta
2013-02-03, 07:33 PM
I remember an older thread asking about unique ways to play a paladin. Both of these ideas were put forth by other forum members, and they were quite good.

The first idea was a paladin who was centered around death. This paladin would go around administering proper funeral and burial rights. He or she would be especially focused on fighting undead, but interesting quests could involve making sure certain rights were properly administered after a battle, or administering said rights to a powerful undead to allow it to pass on.

The second concept was an ambassador of types, a paladin dedicated to peacefully resolving conflicts. However, they would not be afraid of fighting if the situation required it.

Both of these could easily have humble origins, and they would be a refreshing change from standard paladins with interesting role playing opportunities. I hope this was helpful in some way.

Yora
2013-02-03, 08:01 PM
Sure a fighter can fight better than a paladin. Sure a cleric can cast better, but a paladin mixes both.
Not sure about 2nd Edition, but in 3rd he does both worse than a fighter/cleric.

But that's not really the main issue. The bigger problem is, that the class doesn't even have a real concept except "a lawful good fighter with some clerics spells and Lay on Hand". A ranger is specialized in hunting foes in the wilds, a bard is a collector of knowledge, and even a barbarian is a warrior who focuses on primal strength instead of sophisticated swordplay and equipment.
But a paladin always is a cleric with a higher attack bonus and less spells. He looks the same, he does the same things, he has the same cultural background, he has the same position in society. Give some clerics of Helm, St. Cuthbert, or Torm a sword in the hand a put a paladin next to them, and there is nothing that would allow any onlooker to tell which one it is. Except that one of them might seem to cast a stilled cure light wounds two times per day.

ArcturusV
2013-02-04, 01:36 AM
Well, in Second he ends up better than a Fighter/Cleric. As only non-humans could be a Fighter/Cleric (And only some of them), and those non-humans were level capped. And the difference in XP per Level rates for Clerics and Fighters all conspired against them.

In 3rd? Not so much. For all the obvious reasons we all know.

In 4th? A Paladin still ends up better than a Fighter/Cleric hybrid due to specialization instead of halfassing two different roles.

In 5th? Can't wait to see how it ends up.

Killer Angel
2013-02-04, 03:05 AM
Would it be better to go for simply a more 'mundane' class, like rogue or fighter for this blessed yeoman type character?

Sure you can! Here's a rogue very paladinish (one of my PCs, spoilered for lenght).

I've always been proud of my Father: Thorvald the Just, Judge of the Salty Sea and protector of the city of Memnon, Armed Servant of the Law in the name of St. Cuthbert.
"Our Country is Home to Heroes" ... so tells the first verse of an old ballad, and my father said that I had what it takes to do great things. In racing, I was always among the best: running, weight lifting, wrestling ... I was strong, agile and intelligent.
Then came the outbreak of Purple Whisper, so named because the breath is a gasp, and when your lips start to release purple bubbles of blood, then you know that nothing can save you.
My father laid his hands, and he used all his arts to combat the disease, and the day I got sick, he did not bother because I was strong and others had a more immediate need.
In the morning, after having visited, He said with a sympathetic smile (but firm) "Today, you can still wait," and so, as I became weaker and weaker, my father was curing our fellow countrymen.
In the end it was all over, but the disease had marked me: no more games, I would have difficulty beating a child in an arm wrestle, and I will always have a pale visage.
But this year, thanks to my father, no one died of Whisper in our city, and the day on which stood the most evil, he saved the miller's daughter (with whom I later lost my virginity), and then I defy anyone to say that was not accomplished the will of the Saint.
If my strength and my appearance, had left battered by the test, my talent and my skills remained intact (the Whisper does not affect the joints), so I could put them at the service of the Saint.
My father had a lot of knowledge, and when I was ready, he sent me to the school in the capital, where, after having passed the exam on my moral rectitude, by the Paladin Hagar (the former mentor of my Father), I perfected my techniques of infiltration.
Not always the objectives of the Gods can be attained merely by force or clerical power: sometimes you have to hit the enemy with its own weapons, using subterfuge, cunning and deception, where the light of the Saint fails to arrive, then justice must follow other paths.
The day that Hagar gave to me the Holy Mantle that identifies me as a True Follower of the Saint, also told me, "If you would face openly a Blackguard, you would not be brave, but stupid. Cuthbert has given you many gifts that you have to use: move in the shadows, strike without being seen, kill by stealth. Do not care about the evil or the fool who will accuse you of cowardice. The important thing is the reason why you do it."
And I said, "So, the end justifies the means?" And he, with the patience that only showed to his students, said: "That phrase is the excuse of those who, in fact, pursue their own interests and perform abhorrent actions for questionable purposes. Remember that we are acting in the name of The Saint, and that, in a land without law, we have to be judge, jury and executioner at the same time; your verdict, must be the same of the Saint... Help the needy, punish the guilty, be merciful, but never let pity obscure your judgment. "
So did I, so do I, and so I always do.


annnddd...



What manner of concepts beyond the very traditional, sword-board and spotless armor type paladins have you come across?

women and wine, party and dine (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19873326/Horik,_Human_Paladin_of....._Olidammara)!

Cerlis
2013-02-04, 04:37 AM
Not sure about 2nd Edition, but in 3rd he does both worse than a fighter/cleric.

Well thats what i meant. A Ranger doesnt fight as well as a Fighter (maybe on par with a two weapon fighter (with weaker armor and HP) until mid-low lvl) and cant cast nearly as well as a druid. A Hybrid isnt suppose to be as good at each thing as someone who specializes in both.

P.S. (unless by "fighter/wizard" you mean a multiclass character). Though i think that still really depends on what challenges the character faces. Without casting any spells the Paladin is by far the hardiest PC in the game thanks simply to his charisma bonus on all his saves.



But that's not really the main issue. The bigger problem is, that the class doesn't even have a real concept except "a lawful good fighter with some clerics spells and Lay on Hand". A ranger is specialized in hunting foes in the wilds, a bard is a collector of knowledge, and even a barbarian is a warrior who focuses on primal strength instead of sophisticated swordplay and equipment.
But a paladin always is a cleric with a higher attack bonus and less spells. He looks the same, he does the same things, he has the same cultural background, he has the same position in society. Give some clerics of Helm, St. Cuthbert, or Torm a sword in the hand a put a paladin next to them, and there is nothing that would allow any onlooker to tell which one it is. Except that one of them might seem to cast a stilled cure light wounds two times per day.

If anything i think the problem is the Cleric. Never before I got involved with D&D had i seen any depiction of a holy warrior that wasn't more knight than priest.

I've never heard of warrior priests (outside of fantasy), but there was an entire era (in both traditional fantasy(read:King Arthur) and history) based around Holy Knights. While clerics and monks are usually holy men, usually pacifists, not involved in combat at all. Even the most iconic cleric from a novelized D&D campaign setting (Dragonlance) doesnt wear more than leather armor and seems to not the the slightest bit battle hardened (at least at the beginning).

So i really dont know why the cleric as it is depicted in 3.5 even exists.

Also i think the Paladin has more flavor than a cleric. As even before you pick your race or any god you worship or specific mission you know what you are and what your purpose is when you pick a paladin. So you dont even need any -personal-details to already have strong motivation and purpose in your story. While a cleric (and more so a Dragon shaman) is almost completely ruled by the existence of his deity. A Cleric of Boccob or Olidimmara is completely different from a cleric of Pelor. But none of that difference has anything to do with the PC themselves.


----------------

I also really like that first idea Sir A.

As for different types or paladins i think it would be very interesting to think about if the forces of good chose paladins outside the usual cultural norm. If i ever created a barbarian character i thought about having her using the whirling frenzy variant, dubbing her " The Lioness", and be based off a Zulu warrior.

Would be interesting if she was a noble hunter an protector of her tribe that was actually born with a divine patron of good who empowered her thus a tribal paladin.

Daftendirekt
2013-02-04, 05:34 AM
My idea of a paladin, and the way I intend to play the one I eventually play (never played one yet) is Balian from the movie Kingdom of Heaven. He wears simple clothing most of the time, never a lord's silks. He's unassuming, but confident at the same time. He does right and sticks to what he believes in, always, but without being a huge stick in the mud.

Daedroth
2013-02-04, 09:31 AM
If anything i think the problem is the Cleric. Never before I got involved with D&D had i seen any depiction of a holy warrior that wasn't more knight than priest.


Because a cleric is not a priest, is a holy warrior, a crusader.


Dungeons & Dragons (1974-1976)

The cleric character class first appeared in the original 1974 edition of Dungeons & Dragons.[2] There the class is described as gaining "some of the advantages from both of the other two classes (Fighting-Men and Magic-Users) in that they have the use of magic armor and all non-edged magic weapons (no arrows!), plus they have numbers of their own spells. In addition, they are able to use more of the magical items than are the Fighting-Men." As is typical of the terse manner of the original rulebooks, little more is said about the cleric class, though since the followers gained when creating a stronghold include "Turcopole"-type horsed crossbowmen, there is already a hint of the crusades as an inspiration, as seemingly later confirmed by Len Lakofka.[3]

The cleric character class began as a simulation of vampire hunting clergy, such as seen in B grade "Hammer Horror" films, specifically created to oppose a vampire player character called "Sir Fang".[4] E. Gary Gygax added the restriction on weapon types, influenced by a popular interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry where Odo of Bayeux is depicted with a mace in hand, though this is sometimes conflated with Archbishop Turpin of Chanson de Roland fame, who actually wields both spear and a sword called "Almace". When the paladin character class was introduced in Supplement I - Greyhawk (1975), the potential for confusion between the roles of the two classes arose. Probably the clearest way to understand the distinction is to envision the archetypes as relating primarily to Archbishop Turpin and Roland as models.

LibraryOgre
2013-02-04, 02:05 PM
The Paladin is all kind of weird. As mentioned, he butts pretty heavily against the Cleric's role, with the difference being mostly one of degree... the cleric was originally seen as a "militant priest", while the paladin was a "holy warrior." If you look at the source material (Charlemagne, Song of Roland), the difference often came down to "is the dude ordained".

This problem became worse as the systems advanced. In oD&D, the paladin was essentially a fighter Prestige class... put in your time as a fighter, and you could be a paladin. The cleric was a lesser spellcaster, more on par with 3e's bard (delayed to 2nd level for 1st level spells) than the wizard.

With AD&D, Paladin became a full class, and clerics got bumped up in spellcasting.

The two classes just grew towards each other, until Paladin became "The limited guy with a horse."

ZeroGear
2013-02-04, 04:33 PM
Well, in Second he ends up better than a Fighter/Cleric. As only non-humans could be a Fighter/Cleric (And only some of them), and those non-humans were level capped. And the difference in XP per Level rates for Clerics and Fighters all conspired against them.

In 3rd? Not so much. For all the obvious reasons we all know.

In 4th? A Paladin still ends up better than a Fighter/Cleric hybrid due to specialization instead of halfassing two different roles.

In 5th? Can't wait to see how it ends up.

I would like to point out that the Paladin was fixed up quite a bit in Pathfinder, allowing his Lay on hands ability to have additional effects, an alternative bond instead of just a mount, and a few other features.