Number of paladins in a party

[huginn]

I seem to remember that there can only be one paladin in a party but for the life of me I cant find where it says that. Am I remembering wrong or just going blind?

If only one is allowed then why?

[JadedDM]

What edition are you thinking of? I can confirm there is no such rule in 2E, at least.

[huginn]

What edition are you thinking of? I can confirm there is no such rule in 2E, at least.

Oh my bad first edition

[Spore]

That is weird. With the insane restrictions put onto the class: http://www.mjyoung.net/dungeon/char/clas020.html

all they ever COULD align themselves with are paladins or similar.

[SimperingToad]

In AD&D1E, I see no restrictions to the number in a party. Maybe it was something specific to an adventure somewhere?

Since it was brought up, and possibly related.
Paladins will have henchmen of lawful good alignment and none other; they will associate only with characters and creatures of good alignment; paladins can join a company of adventurers which contains non-evil neutrals only on a single expedition basis, and only if some end which will further the cause of lawful good is purposed.

If possible, paladins will take service or form an alliance with lawful good characters, whether players or not, who are clerics or fighters (of noble status).
A paladin is supposed to be a paragon of virtue. It makes sense that they would not normally be found associating with those of 'lesser' morality as it were, as doing so would besmirch their honor. There is, however, the option that if they were attempting to show others 'a better way...' *shrugs* After all, would a by-the-book 'serve and protect' cop really be all that friendly with a mob hitman?

[D+1]

Rangers are limited to 3(?) but no limit on paladins. They do, as noted, only associate long term with good aligned characters, one mission at a time with neutrals who aren’t also evil, and not at all with evils. Those limitations can _obviously_ be fudged, but the intent, just as obviously, is for CAREFUL consideration to be given to whom a paladin works with and why. The more deeply and repeatedly you fudge those restrictions the less the paladin IS whom they are supposed to be.

[Bohandas]

Rangers are limited to 3(?) but no limit on paladins. They do, as noted, only associate long term with good aligned characters, one mission at a time with neutrals who aren’t also evil, and not at all with evils. Those limitations can _obviously_ be fudged

And has been canonically. In the Greyhawk setting the paladin Murlynd canonically adventured with the wicked witch Tasha Iggwilv as part of the Company of Seven

[2D8HP]

It's the 1e AD&D Ranger you were thinking of, which was similar to the The Original Ranger Class (which was AWESOME!, with some extra Awesome on top of the Awesome, next to the Awesome and with a side order of AWESOME! Drizzit can stuff it!)
As presented in a 1975 issue of The Strategic Review #2 (http://annarchive.com/files/Strv102.pdf)
RANGERS:
AN EXCITING NEW DUNGEONS & DRAGONS CLASS
By Joe Fischer
Rangers are a sub-class of Fighting Men, similar in many ways to
the new sub-class Paladins, for they must always remain Lawful or lose
all the benefits they gained (except, of course, experience as a fighter).
Strength is their Prime Requisite, but they must also have both Intelli-
gence and Wisdom scores of at least 12 each, and a Constitution of at
least 15. The statistics regarding Rangers are:
Rangers Experience Points Hit Dice* SpelI Ability**
Runner 0 2 Nil
Strider 2500 3 Nil
Scout 5000 4 Nil
Guide 12000 5 Nil
Pathfinder 25000 6 Nil
Warder 50000 7 Nil
Guardian 100000 8 Nil
Ranger-Knight 175000 9 Cleric, 1st Level
Ranger-Lord 275000 10 +Magic-User, 1st Level
Ranger-Lord, 10th 550000 10 +2 +Cleric 2nd Level
Ranger-Lord, 11th 825000 10 +4 +Magic-User 2nd Level
Ranger-Lord, 12th 11OOOOO 10 +6 +Cleric 3rd Level
Ranger-Lord, 13th 1375000 10 +8 +Magic-User 3rd Level
*either with the standard system or the alternate system which
allows fighters 8-sided dice
**spell progression is as follows: when only 1st Level are usable,
then only one spell is usable, when 2nd Level spells can be
taken then the R-L gets 2 1st Level and 1 2nd Level, and at
3rd Level it is 3, 2 and 1 respectively.
Until they attain the 8th level (Ranger-Knight) characters in the
Ranger class are relatively weak, for they have a number of restrictions
placed upon them, These restrictions are:
- They may own only that which they can carry with them, and
excess treasure or goods must be donated to a worthy cause.
- They may not hire any men-at-arms or other servants or aides
of any kind whatsoever.
- Only two of the class may operate together.
Advantages which accrue to low-level Rangers are:
+They receive no regular bonuses for advancement due to ability,
but they automatically gain 4 experience points for every 3 earned.
+They have the ability to track the path of most creatures when out-
doors, and even in dungeons they are often able to follow:
Monster’s Action Regular Needs to Track
goes down a normal passage 01-65
goes through a normal door 01-55
goes through a trap door 01 - 50
goes up/down a chimney 01 - 40
goes through a secret door 01-30The ranger so tracking must have observed the monster no more than
six turns previously when in dungeon situations. On the outdoor he has
a basic 90% chance of following a trail, with a 10% reduction for every
day old the signs are.
Because of their ability to track Rangers also are difficult to surprise,
requiring a roll of 1 instead of 1 or 2.
All Rangers gain a special advantage when fighting against monsters
of the Giant Class (Kobolds - Giants). For each level they have gained
they add +1 to their damage die against these creatures, so a 1st Level
Ranger adds +1, a 2nd Level +2, and so on.
Upon reaching the 8th and higher levels, Rangers begin to accrue a
number of advantages besides the use of spelIs already indicated.
+From 2-24 followers will join the character as soon as 9th level is
attained by him. These followers are detailed later.
+Ranger-Knights are able to employ magic items which heal or cure
disease, including scrolls.
+Ranger-Lords are able to employ all devices which deal with
Clairvoyance, Clairaudience, ESP, Telepathy, Telekenesis, and Tele-
portation, including scrolls.
Drawbacks which apply to the 8th and higher levels are:
-The 4 experience points for every 3 earned bonus is lost.
- Followers who are killed cannot be replaced, although regular
mercenaries can be.
-As already mentioned, if a Ranger turns Neutral or Chaotic he
loses all benefits of the class, becoming an ordinary Fighting Man.
Special Followers: For each of the 2-24 followers the Ranger gains
a dice roll must be made to determine what the follower is. Further
dice rolls to determine type, class, and/or level will also be necessary.
Type Class (Men Only)
01-60 Man 01 - 50 Fighter
61 - 75 Elf or Half-Elf 51 - 75 Cleric
76 - 90 Dwarf 75 - 95 Magic-User
91 - 99 2 Hobbits 95 - 00 Thief
00 Extraordinary (see below)
Multi-Class (Elves Only) Level of Ability (Roll for each)
01 - 50 Fighter 01 - 50 2nd Level
51 - 75 Fighter/Magic-User 51 - 65 3rd Level
76 - 90 Magic-User 66 - 80 4th Level
91 00 Fighter/Magic-User/Thief - 81 - 90 5th Level
91 - 99 6th Level
00 7th Level
Extraordinary Followers
01 - 20 Ranger, 3rd - 7th Level
21 - 40 Lawful Werebear
41 55 2 Unicorns -
65 - 70 Pegasus
71 80 Hill Giant -
81 - 90 Stone Giant
91 - 99 Golden Dragon
00 Take two rolls ignoring any 00’s which might come up
Where not otherwise specified Rangers perform as Fighting Men.
They may build strongholds. In all cases the Ranger will prefer Lawful
to Neutral types.

[Algeh]

When I played in a 2nd ed campaign with an old school DM many years ago he'd only allow one paladin in the (8 person) party. He had several rules about party composition when we all rolled up characters in a session zero, mostly so that a party that size would have both reasonable coverage and enough in common to not immediately split up. At this point, all I really remember was the the only one paladin rule and that everyone had to be some flavor of Good aligned (except for the druid, since they had to be True Neutral in that edition) to give the party a bit more in common. He may have also encouraged a shared religion for the cleric and paladin, but I really don't remember because I was playing a bard and none of the extra rules affected my intended character.

Maybe only one paladin per party was a common-ish houserule back in the day for some reason? I'm not really sure what problem you'd be trying to solve with such a houserule beyond niche protection, though.

[jk7275]

Maybe only one paladin per party was a common-ish houserule back in the day for some reason? I'm not really sure what problem you'd be trying to solve with such a houserule beyond niche protection, though.

I think it was assumed that paladins given their high charisma are expected to be the leader. Id you had 2 then each would demand to be leader, go in first ETC ETC
What could happen if you paladins of Pholtus and St Cuthbert in your group. How would that work given the conflicts and rivalry between them

[Bohandas]

If anything I think it would make a lot more sense to have a party of all or mostly paladins once you have at least one

[hamlet]

There are no rules limits on the number of paladins in a party in 1e (or any other edition that I'm aware of). However, it is worth pointing out that in the DMG (I'm positive in the 2nd edition version and 90% sure in the 1st edition) it's stated that paladins don't generally group together in significant numbers. Twelve is pointed out as being a rather large gathering (i.e., the 12 peers of Charlameign etc.) but they tend to be singular.

Not a rule, but a flavor note.

And there's nothing at all, despite what folks will tell you, stopping a paladin from adventuring with an evil or neutral person as long as their goal is to prevent evil acts or reform said person. That, in itself, is a good deed.

[Scots Dragon]

It's the 1e AD&D Ranger you were thinking of, which was similar to the The Original Ranger Class (which was AWESOME!, with some extra Awesome on top of the Awesome, next to the Awesome and with a side order of AWESOME! Drizzit can stuff it!

Given that Drizzt's first published appearance was in 1988, a year before the AD&D 2E update, and R.A. Salvatore has stated a couple of times that AD&D 1E is his favourite edition and that he tends to mostly write from that perspective, this seems an odd sentinment.

[hamlet]

Given that Drizzt's first published appearance was in 1988, a year before the AD&D 2E update, and R.A. Salvatore has stated a couple of times that AD&D 1E is his favourite edition and that he tends to mostly write from that perspective, this seems an odd sentinment.

AD&D 2nd edition seemed to open the door to a million million Drizzle clones, though. So many off brand angsty one of a kind rebel against a corrupt and decadent society semi-drow dual wielding not-scimitars, etc., leaves a bad taste in the mouth of a lot of gamers.

[Scots Dragon]

AD&D 2nd edition seemed to open the door to a million million Drizzle clones, though. So many off brand angsty one of a kind rebel against a corrupt and decadent society semi-drow dual wielding not-scimitars, etc., leaves a bad taste in the mouth of a lot of gamers.

Seriously, angsty one-of-a-kind rebels against the corrupt and decadent drow society who could dual-wield have been around for literally as long as the drow have been part of Dungeons & Dragons.

The first adventure module to feature them in any real detail was D3: Vault of the Drow. It had multiple instances of rebellious groups. Also in AD&D 1E, drow could be rangers, and as a special ability were automatically ambidextrous and thus could dual-wield freely. In Unearthed Arcana, the drow were also mentioned as frequently being adventurers as a result of alignment disputes.

Honestly I've seen more complaints about Drizzt Do'Urden than I have seen reasons for people to actually complain about Drizzt Do'Urden.

[LibraryOgre]

Seriously, angsty one-of-a-kind rebels (http://goblinscomic.com/comic/07102005) against the corrupt and decadent drow society (http://goblinscomic.com/comic/07112005) who could dual-wield have been around for literally as long as the drow have been part of Dungeons & Dragons.


And, of course, it doesn't make it better that Drow in UA got "Dual wield anything without penalty".

To add to the chorus... there's no single-paladin rule. I'd say that the default limitation would be 12 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paladin), but that's just me.

Oh, and since I've gone link-happy, The Three Ranger Limit, (https://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/2014/09/three-ranger-limit.html) a card game