[3.5] Expanding Paladin Spells (up to 6th)

[Thurbane]

Hey all,

Not sure if this should be here, or in home-brew?

If I was going to give Paladins the casting progression of Bards, what spells would you flesh their list out with (i.e. 0, 5th and 6th level spells)?

Not interested in prestige Paladin, thanks.

Cheers - T

[OgresAreCute]

Easy way to do it is just slam on the cleric list the same way Sublime Chord just slaps on the Sor/Wiz list.

[Thurbane]

Easy way to do it is just slam on the cleric list the same way Sublime Chord just slaps on the Sor/Wiz list.

I was thinking all Cleric spells of the Abjuration and Conjuration (healing) schools, that haven't already appeared ion the Paladin list?

[Yogibear41]

My knowledge of it is limited, but in 1st edition a Paladin cast all of its spells of the cleric list, but was limited to certain "spheres" with a few always spheres, and a few based on the paladin's deity. Something like paladins always got abjuration/divination, and if you worshiped a fire deity you got [fire] spells too. Something like that but not exactly.

There is actually a 3rd party pathfinder book I have that trades the anti-paladins smite ability for bard spell progression using the cleric spell list. Tome of Wicked things or something like that if I recall. Although I think the paladin still prepares spells he is not spontaneous, which is probably better anyway.

[OgresAreCute]

I was thinking all Cleric spells of the Abjuration and Conjuration (healing) schools, that haven't already appeared ion the Paladin list?

If you're gonna limit it that much, the base paladin list has like ~10-15 spells on most levels, if you factor in various splat spells then you get roughly 15 spells for level 5 and 6, maybe less since higher levels usually have fewer spells. Sooo just go grab some cool divine-y spells I guess. That way you won't miss out on potential spicy things like Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, which is an enchantment spell and would be banned by your healing + abjuration rule.

[AnimeTheCat]

Besides the points listed by others, the evocation school should not be overlooked either. Paladins are holy crusaders, they should be able to bring the fire and brimstone (which should be associated primarily with evocation but oh so often it isnt...)

[Cosi]

One thing to remember is that the Paladin should get spells a couple of levels earlier. Frequently, partial casters get spells at the spell level a full caster would get them, and that makes an already anemic feature even worse. The reverse is also worth taking note of, as a Bard-casting Paladin will get 1st - 4th level spells substantially sooner than his traditional counterpart. I sort of assume that doesn't result in anything broken happening, but you should probably check.

As far as evocation goes, I agree that you can justify it, but if you aren't overhauling the Paladin list as a whole, it seems weird from them to suddenly get blasting half way through the game.

[SLOTHRPG95]

As far as evocation goes, I agree that you can justify it, but if you aren't overhauling the Paladin list as a whole, it seems weird from them to suddenly get blasting half way through the game.

I wouldn't want to argue for showering Paladins with Evocation spells, but that doesn't mean there aren't one or two that come to mind. Hallow as a 5th-level spell is low-hanging fruit in this regard, but also getting Holy Word (and maybe also Dictum) as a 6th-level spell would seem both reasonable and thematic.

As for other non-Abjuration, non-healing spells, I'd advocate minimally for the Mass versions of their stat buffs (Eagle's Splendor, etc.) and for Disrupting Weapon. Undeath to Death and Righteous Might could also work.

[Nifft]

5th


Atonement F X: Removes burden of misdeeds from subject.
Commune X: Deity answers one yes-or-no question/level.
Cure Light Wounds, Mass: Cures 1d8 damage +1/level for many creatures.
Dispel Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: +4 bonus against attacks.
* Dispel Magic, Greater: As dispel magic, but up to +20 on check.
Disrupting Weapon: Melee weapon destroys undead.
Hallow M: Designates location as holy.
Mark of Justice: Designates action that will trigger curse on subject.
Plane Shift F: As many as eight subjects travel to another plane.
Raise Dead M: Restores life to subject who died as long as one day/level ago.
Righteous Might: Your size increases, and you gain combat bonuses.
Spell Resistance: Subject gains SR 12 + level.
True Seeing M: Lets you see all things as they really are.


6th


* Antimagic Field: Negates magic within 10 ft.
Banishment: Banishes 2 HD/level of extraplanar creatures.
Bear’s Endurance, Mass: As bear’s endurance, affects one subject/ level.
Bull’s Strength, Mass: As bull’s strength, affects one subject/level.
Cure Moderate Wounds, Mass: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level for many creatures.
* Dictum: Kills, paralyzes, slows, or deafens nonlawful subjects.
Eagle’s Splendor, Mass: As eagle’s splendor, affects one subject/level.
Heal: Cures 10 points/level of damage, all diseases and mental conditions.
Heroes’ Feast: Food for one creature/level cures and grants combat bonuses.
* Holy Aura F: +4 to AC, +4 resistance, and SR 25 against evil spells.
* Holy Word: Kills, paralyzes, blinds, or deafens nongood subjects.
Owl’s Wisdom, Mass: As owl’s wisdom, affects one subject/level.
* Regenerate: Subject’s severed limbs grow back, cures 4d8 damage +1/level (max +35).
* Restoration, Greater X: As restoration, plus restores all levels and ability scores.
* Resurrection M: Fully restore dead subject.
* Shield of Law F: +4 to AC, +4 resistance, and SR 25 against chaotic spells.
Undeath to Death M: Destroys 1d4 HD/level undead (max 20d4).


*) Lower level than the Cleric version.

[TiaC]

I grabbed all the core 5th and 6th level spells that aren't clearly inappropriate off the Pathfinder inquisitor list as a start:

5th:
Atonement
Banishment
Command, Greater
Commune
Cure Light Wounds, Mass
Disrupting Weapon
Flame Strike
Geas/Quest
Hallow
Righteous Might
Spell Resistance
Telepathic Bond
True Seeing
6th:
Blade Barrier
Cure Moderate Wounds, Mass
Dictum
Dispel Magic, Greater
Find the Path
Forbiddance
Heal
Heroes' Feast
Holy Word
Legend Lore
Repulsion

Then I went to the cleric list in SPC and looked at levels 5-7 and came up with these:

5th:
Blistering Radiance
Divine Agility
Incorporeal Nova
Life’s Grace
Revivify
Righteous Wrath of the Faithful
Sanctuary, Mass
Stalwart Pact
Vigor, Greater
Zone of Respite
Zone of Revelation
6th:
Bolt of Glory
Brilliant Blade
Energy Immunity
Ghost Trap
Holy Star
Holy Transformation
Lion's Roar
Lucent Lance
Make Manifest, Mass
Opalescent Glare (maybe)
Stone Body
Restoration, Mass
Vigorous Circle
Visage of the Deity
Zealot Pact

Then, CC:
5th:
Divine Retribution
Mark of Sin
Surge of Fortune
6th:
Light of Courage
Rejuvenating Light
Weight of Sin

That seems a good place to start

[Cosi]

I wouldn't want to argue for showering Paladins with Evocation spells, but that doesn't mean there aren't one or two that come to mind. Hallow as a 5th-level spell is low-hanging fruit in this regard, but also getting Holy Word (and maybe also Dictum) as a 6th-level spell would seem both reasonable and thematic.

I didn't mean they shouldn't get anything from the evocation school, just that getting a bunch of blasting at high levels would be weird. Spell that fit their existing themes but happen to be evocations would be fine.

[SLOTHRPG95]

5th


Atonement F X: Removes burden of misdeeds from subject.
Commune X: Deity answers one yes-or-no question/level.
Cure Light Wounds, Mass: Cures 1d8 damage +1/level for many creatures.
Dispel Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: +4 bonus against attacks.
* Dispel Magic, Greater: As dispel magic, but up to +20 on check.
Disrupting Weapon: Melee weapon destroys undead.
Hallow M: Designates location as holy.
Mark of Justice: Designates action that will trigger curse on subject.
Plane Shift F: As many as eight subjects travel to another plane.
Raise Dead M: Restores life to subject who died as long as one day/level ago.
Righteous Might: Your size increases, and you gain combat bonuses.
Spell Resistance: Subject gains SR 12 + level.
True Seeing M: Lets you see all things as they really are.


6th


* Antimagic Field: Negates magic within 10 ft.
Banishment: Banishes 2 HD/level of extraplanar creatures.
Bear’s Endurance, Mass: As bear’s endurance, affects one subject/ level.
Bull’s Strength, Mass: As bull’s strength, affects one subject/level.
Cure Moderate Wounds, Mass: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level for many creatures.
* Dictum: Kills, paralyzes, slows, or deafens nonlawful subjects.
Eagle’s Splendor, Mass: As eagle’s splendor, affects one subject/level.
Heal: Cures 10 points/level of damage, all diseases and mental conditions.
Heroes’ Feast: Food for one creature/level cures and grants combat bonuses.
* Holy Aura F: +4 to AC, +4 resistance, and SR 25 against evil spells.
* Holy Word: Kills, paralyzes, blinds, or deafens nongood subjects.
Owl’s Wisdom, Mass: As owl’s wisdom, affects one subject/level.
* Regenerate: Subject’s severed limbs grow back, cures 4d8 damage +1/level (max +35).
* Restoration, Greater X: As restoration, plus restores all levels and ability scores.
* Resurrection M: Fully restore dead subject.
* Shield of Law F: +4 to AC, +4 resistance, and SR 25 against chaotic spells.
Undeath to Death M: Destroys 1d4 HD/level undead (max 20d4).


*) Lower level than the Cleric version.

Care to provide a bit of justification? In particular, for the 5th levels, why give Greater Dispel earlier when they don't get regular Dispel earlier? Not saying this is a crazy decision when they don't get 5ths until level 13, when Clerics are getting 7ths, but they're not trying to be full casters here. Also, why Plane Shift at all? Doesn't seem to fit the core theme. As for 6ths, I definitely agree with Antimagic Field, but I don't see why they'd have Resurrection right after Raise Dead. I'd say either bump the latter down to 4th or get rid of the former, depending on how you think about the central theme of a Paladin's magic. Personally, given their delay on Cure spells I'd go with dropping Resurrection, (and also probably Regeneration) but I could see arguments both ways. As for Holy Aura (and the Law equivalent), it's not that they're not thematic. It just seems a bit crowded when also giving them the Power Word: Alignment spells at the same level.

Oh, and I didn't notice this before, but you put Mark of Justice on the level for 5ths. They already get that in core as a 4th level spell. Edit: And so are Dispel Chaos and Dispel Evil. I guess given this information, one could argue for the inclusion of Holy Aura and Shield of Law as 6ths and bumping down Dictum and Holy Word to 5ths. Honestly, that sounds reasonable to me. It's not like they'd be getting them before Clerics.


I didn't mean they shouldn't get anything from the evocation school, just that getting a bunch of blasting at high levels would be weird. Spell that fit their existing themes but happen to be evocations would be fine.

Ah okay, my misunderstanding. In that case, I agree.

[Nifft]

Care to provide a bit of justification? In particular, for the 5th levels, why give Greater Dispel earlier when they don't get regular Dispel earlier? Show me the justification for Bards getting Greater Dispel Magic at level 5 and I'll come up with something.

[Falontani]

are you doing this change, while leaving Battle Blessing in?

Looking at the paladin's list that already exists, we should be looking for all the different buffs up there, like Spell Resistance (mass), Zealot Pact, Holy Transformation (and it's lesser version), Pact of Return, Death Pact, and Mass death Ward. But also spells like Lion's Roar, Last Judgement, and Consecrate Battlefield.

[Elkad]

...Also, why Plane Shift at all? Doesn't seem to fit the core theme...

It fits a Paladin perfectly.

How else can you "March into Hell for a Heavenly Cause"?

[Nifft]

It fits a Paladin perfectly.

How else can you "March into Hell for a Heavenly Cause"?

Yes.

They almost got Gate so they could lead a cavalry charge into Hell, but I couldn't figure out how to justify it. I figure some sort of Planar Cavalry Pounce (Su) alternate class feature might do the trick instead.

[Cosi]

Just don't give them the Calling mode. Travel-only gate isn't nearly as powerful. I think you could even give it out as a 5th level spell on Bard progression, though that might be pushing for a character that's only intended as a partial caster.

[tyckspoon]

One thing to remember is that the Paladin should get spells a couple of levels earlier. Frequently, partial casters get spells at the spell level a full caster would get them, and that makes an already anemic feature even worse. The reverse is also worth taking note of, as a Bard-casting Paladin will get 1st - 4th level spells substantially sooner than his traditional counterpart. I sort of assume that doesn't result in anything broken happening, but you should probably check.


There's a couple of Paladin-specific 4th level spells that may be worth bumping up to 5th or even 6th in an expanded progression; things like Holy Sword and similar that were intended as class capstone effects. (Holy Sword isn't even that impressive for a high level spell slot, but when they would first get access to it at 10th level on the Bard chart it creates an effect that is valued at nearly twice as much as the character's entire WBL allotment.)

[PrismCat21]

It fits a Paladin perfectly.

How else can you "March into Hell for a Heavenly Cause"?

That's one of my absolute favorite songs :D
And is of course, the theme song for my Prestige Paladin, Sir Bradford. :elan:

[ericgrau]

I'd follow existing patterns.

5 PHB

Atonement
Cure Critical Wounds
Raise Dead
Righteous Might
True Seeing

5 SpC
* Bolt of Glory
* Call Zelekhut
Life's Grace (min/lev death ward + immune to various undead special attacks, ghost touch armor)
Revivify
Righteous wrath of the faithful (melee haste-ish with +3 to hit)
Stalwart pack (half HP => temp HP, DR, +2 saves)
Wall of Dispel Magic


6 PHB
Bull's Strength, Mass
Cure Light Wounds, Mass
* Dictum
Dispel Magic, Greater
Eagle's Splender, Mass
** Holy Aura
* Holy Word
* Regenerate
* Restoration, Greater
** Shield of Law
Owl's Wisdom, Mass

6 SpC
Resitance, Superior
Revive Outsider (LG outsider only)
* Zealot Pact (CE foe only)

* early

I tried to give early when similar spells give early. I made cure spells late (but not condition fixing spells) because core does the same.

Homebrew

I also looked at lower level spells in both core and spell compendium, combined with a lack of similar cleric spells, and I quickly noticed that this paladin really needs some super thematic and unique homebrew spells. Spells with a holy crusader theme. At least one spell that does something awesome to his weapon, for example, if not five. Plus smiting spells, mount based spells, and some auras.


There's a couple of Paladin-specific 4th level spells that may be worth bumping up to 5th or even 6th in an expanded progression; things like Holy Sword and similar that were intended as class capstone effects. (Holy Sword isn't even that impressive for a high level spell slot, but when they would first get access to it at 10th level on the Bard chart it creates an effect that is valued at nearly twice as much as the character's entire WBL allotment.)
And when he gets it at level 14 it is still worth about 3/4 of his WBL. Except it's a precious standard action to cast, it only lasts a round per level, and doesn't stack with many existing common effects including one on the paladin list. So it's actually not that great of a spell and WBL isn't a good way to measure it. Plus all of this paladin's spells will be better too thanks to the faster progression. I'd leave it at 4.

I likewise like the idea of taking certain 8th level spells or similar power homebrew effects and making them level 6 paladin spells. But they similarly must be a close match to the paladin theme. They will probably target his weapon or his mount, and/or be heavily alignment based.

[SLOTHRPG95]

Show me the justification for Bards getting Greater Dispel Magic at level 5 and I'll come up with something.

Bards already pick up magic-disrupting abilities in the form of Countersong and Song of Freedom, so I'd argue that it's already more their sort of thing. But again, I did say that it wouldn't be crazy/game-breaking for Paladins to have Greater Dispel at 5th, I just asked why you specifically put it there. I see now that the answer is "because Bards get it then." I did, however, also ask about other spells, and while Plane Shift was later addressed, I still don't see why Paladins would get Resurrection or Regeneration at all. Sure, healing magic is a thing Paladins do, but it's not their main thing, and they even have Cure Moderate Wounds and its successors delayed a spell level. Honestly, I almost argued for putting Raise Dead as a 6th or off the list entirely. When I think holy warrior, I don't think about the revolving door of the afterlife. But even without going that far, I see no reason to give them Resurrection to boot.


It fits a Paladin perfectly.

How else can you "March into Hell for a Heavenly Cause"?


Yes.

They almost got Gate so they could lead a cavalry charge into Hell, but I couldn't figure out how to justify it. I figure some sort of Planar Cavalry Pounce (Su) alternate class feature might do the trick instead.

I went back and forth on Plane Shift for this exact sort of reason, but ultimately I figured the spell was too general in its possible destination. If you want a planar crusade, just bring along a Cleric. They're the ones who're going to take care of your high-end magical needs, anyways.

[Nifft]

Bards already pick up magic-disrupting abilities in the form of Countersong and Song of Freedom, so I'd argue that it's already more their sort of thing. But again, I did say that it wouldn't be crazy/game-breaking for Paladins to have Greater Dispel at 5th, I just asked why you specifically put it there. I see now that the answer is "because Bards get it then." I did, however, also ask about other spells, and while Plane Shift was later addressed, I still don't see why Paladins would get Resurrection or Regeneration at all. Sure, healing magic is a thing Paladins do, but it's not their main thing, and they even have Cure Moderate Wounds and its successors delayed a spell level. Honestly, I almost argued for putting Raise Dead as a 6th or off the list entirely. When I think holy warrior, I don't think about the revolving door of the afterlife. But even without going that far, I see no reason to give them Resurrection to boot. You're making a false distinction, because Cleric is also a holy warrior. There's a reason Clerics get heavy armor and some of the best combat-long self-buffs in the game and they're the only class with native access to the feat Holy Warrior (literally the name of the feat), so yeah. The holy warriors of the game absolutely do have everything that Clerics have, because Clerics are also holy warriors in this game.

Paladins get a wide range of healing spells, and they get Lay On Hands and other non-spell healing features. They even get a unique (Healing) spell, and earliest access to lesser restoration.

Healing is part of what Paladins do, and shattering the gates of the afterlife is just basic healthcare in D&D.




I went back and forth on Plane Shift for this exact sort of reason, but ultimately I figured the spell was too general in its possible destination. If you want a planar crusade, just bring along a Cleric. They're the ones who're going to take care of your high-end magical needs, anyways. It sounds like you're saying that the OP shouldn't bother making this thread, since "just take a cleric along" solves every casting problem that a Bard-progression Paladin might have tried to solve.

Is that what you're saying? If so, maybe you could find something constructive to say instead?

[ben-zayb]

For my basis/justification, the list follows the trend of Paladin spells being often consisting of weapon buffs, AC/attack buffs, "retribution" effects, effects that require/cause self-harm, punishing/warding alignment effects, single-target healing, and debuff/condition removal. Note that due to staggered Bard spell progression, some spells that were originally levels 6-7 and 8-9 I have now placed under levels 5 and 8, respectively.

5th level
Bear's Endurance, Mass
Cure Critical Wounds
Eagle's Splendor, Mass
Freedom of Movement
Hallow: simply thematic
Heroes' Feast
Owl's Wisdom, Mass
Restoration, Greater
Righteous Might

6th level
Atonement: thematic but IMO Paladins themselves should get much, much, later
Dictum
Dispel Magic, Greater
Find the Path: thematic for a rider class
Freedom
Heal
Holy Aura
Holy Word
Shield of Law5th level
Brilliant Aura
Fortunate Fate
Indomitability
Resistance, Superior
Revivify: conditional revive like Revenance
Righteous Wrath of the Faithful
Stalwart Pact
Zealot Pact

6th
Death Pact: another conditional revive like Revenance
Death Ward, Mass
Renewal Pact
Restoration, Mass
Summon Heavenly Host
Unbinding
Visage of the Deity
Holy Transformation
5th level
Axiomatic Creature
Bastion of Good
Righteous Smite
Shield of the Archons
Vengeance Halo

6th level
Last Judgement
Righteous Glare
Sanctify the Wicked

[SLOTHRPG95]

Paladins get a wide range of healing spells, and they get Lay On Hands and other non-spell healing features. They even get a unique (Healing) spell, and earliest access to lesser restoration.

Healing is part of what Paladins do, and shattering the gates of the afterlife is just basic healthcare in D&D.

I'll address this part first, as it's the most detail-specific. Healing is one of the components of a Paladin, yes. That doesn't make them primary healers, nor can they really be if they're not full casters. With that said, bringing the dead back to life falls short of "basic healthcare" that one might expect of a non-primary healer. This is why Bards don't get access to Raise Dead or anything like it in core, even though they have modest secondary healing abilities of their own. It would've been a perfectly valid design choice to double down on this, and give them it as a 5th level spell. They'd still get it later than Clerics, and would have to spend one of their precious spells known on it, so it's not like they'd be stepping too heavily on any toes. But Bards aren't meant to be fantasy equivalent of a top-end hospital staff, that's what Clerics (and sort of Druids) are for. No, they (along w/ Rangers to a lesser extent) are relegated to the role of combat medic. Able to get the wounded back up on their feet, not able to cure all their possible ailments. Paladins in core are between these two roles: they're able to do more than just restore hit points, but they can't cure the most serious maladies. They can make the blind see, the diseased hale and healthy, or the drained restored. But they can't cure death, or madness, or loss of limb. Of course if you're going to expand their magic, you're going to expand what they can do. But it doesn't follow that you have to let them do everything.


You're making a false distinction, because Cleric is also a holy warrior. There's a reason Clerics get heavy armor and some of the best combat-long self-buffs in the game and they're the only class with native access to the feat Holy Warrior (literally the name of the feat), so yeah. The holy warriors of the game absolutely do have everything that Clerics have, because Clerics are also holy warriors in this game.

It sounds like you're saying that the OP shouldn't bother making this thread, since "just take a cleric along" solves every casting problem that a Bard-progression Paladin might have tried to solve.

This is the bit for which it's trickier to develop a response, since there seem to be two issues intertwined here. On the one hand, there's the content part of your argument, which seems to boil down to, "Clerics and Paladins are both holy warriors, and hence they should both get all the standard goodies to which a holy warrior is entitled." On the other hand, there's the structural part of your argument, in which you conflate necessity and sufficiency. It's never easy to fully separate content from form, but I'll do my best as I believe the former to be the more important part. Nonetheless, I'll briefly address the latter once I've discussed the former.

I've never said that Clerics cannot possibly be holy warriors, since that'd be just silly. There are plenty of Clerics who are, demonstrably, holy warriors. They have the tools to be so should they so choose. This is not to say that they inherently fill this role, which does indeed contrast with Paladins. Clerics are divine agents and miracle-workers first and foremost, and to that end they might use their powers to man the front lines in the fight against the enemies of their faith. But this isn't just something a Paladin might do, it's something they're all expected to do. The following pulls from the Characteristics and Role sections of the two classes in the PHB (pp. 30-31, 43-43):


Clerics are masters of divine magic, which is especially good at healing. [They] have some combat training. They can use simple weapons, and are trained in the use of armor, since armor does not interfere with [their] spells...

The cleric serves as a typical group's primary healer, diviner, and defensive specialist. He can hold his own in a fight, but usually isn't well served by charging to the front of combat. The cleric's domains and spell selection can greatly affect his role as well.

cf.


Divine power protects the paladin and gives her special powers. It wards off harm, protects her from disease, lets her heal herself, and guards her heart against fear. [She] can use this power to destroy evil. Even the least experienced paladin can detect evil, and more experienced paladins can smite evil foes and turn away undead....

The paladin's chief role in most groups is as a melee combatant, but she contributes other useful support as well. She makes a good secondary healer, and her high Charisma opens up fine leadership opportunities.

Clerics are definitely holy, and they might often use their holy power to wage war. But they aren't all warriors by nature, hence their lack of training in martial weapons, and their lack of full BAB progression. Paladins, on the other hand, are by definition holy warriors. They are first and foremost warriors, and due to their purity and devotion, they have been granted divine power to aid them in their crusade. This is why the all-popular Cloistered Cleric ACF makes any sense, and why it wouldn't make sense for Paladins. Clerics are priests who often take an active role in martial affairs, but they are priests first and foremost. Paladins are knights set on holy missions, and are the textbook example of holy warrior in fantasy gaming. The distinction is not a false one.

Finally, a note on necessity versus sufficiency. Even were we to deem all Clerics holy warriors, that wouldn't mean all holy warriors have everything that Clerics have. You state that being a Cleric is sufficient to be considered a holy warrior, and from this you conclude that all holy warriors necessarily have access to the powers of the Cleric. This is analogous to arguing that all squares are also parallelograms, and hence all parallelograms have four right angles and four equal sides. After all, squares have these things, and squares are indeed parallelograms. Similarly, you say that taking a Cleric along would be sufficient to solve any casting problem that a Bard-progression Paladin can solve. That is correct, but then this says nothing about whether the Cleric is necessary to solve any/all of these problems. I have suggested that the Bard-progression Paladin should be sufficient to solve some problems, but specifically that a Cleric be necessary to solve the problem of interplanar travel. This is not equivalent to saying that expanding the Paladin's spellcasting is useless or pointless. There still remain problems for which a Cleric would previously be necessary pre-expansion, but for which said Cleric would not be necessary post-expansion. These are, in fact, precisely the problems that an expanded Paladin can solve that a core Paladin cannot. I hope this helps you clarify your argument.

[ericgrau]

Both clerics and paladins might be holy warriors, but their casting isn't the same. There is a small number of paladin only spells. Paladins get restoration early but healing late, and this matches their class features. Most other spells they get at the same time, but they tend to be focused around combat and such. Many cleric spells that don't fit this description aren't on the paladin list. Because while clerics are holy warriors they are also other things that paladins aren't.

I've provided a list and so has one other poster for a 2nd opinion. I think all the lists are missing is a handful of unique paladin-only spells, and I've suggested homebrewing those. Probably revolving around his weapon, smiting and/or mount. And/or another super-paladin-y thing that isn't also a super-cleric-y thing. I've wasted too much time online already but it's something Thurbane could do, and/or posters could post 1 spell each. A grand total of 2-3 is probably plenty, though more doesn't hurt.

[Zaq]

Regarding greater dispel magic specifically, it's not actually an improved version of dispel magic. Aside from the "can also affect things that remove curse affects" clause (which isn't nothing, but isn't an unbelievable game-changer), it's basically just "the version of dispel that you're allowed to use at high levels if you want to matter." It removes an arbitrary cap. It's a treadmill spell, really. It's kind of like a Vancian version of psionic augmentation; you eventually need to pay more (a 6th level slot vs. a 3rd level slot) to get the same net effect, but slot-based casting doesn't have the granularity that point-based casting does, so we've gotta make it two spells.

It's not typically a 6th level spell because it's necessarily on par with 6th level spells; it's a 6th level spell because that's approximately the level when typical casters start having real trouble with dispel magic's CL bonus cap. It's not that it's being ranked against heal and find the path and true seeing and whatever other 6th level spells you want to pick. The desired end result is exactly the same as that of casting the 3rd level dispel magic. It's just that the devs chose to require a higher-level spell slot at higher ECLs to have a fighting chance of dispelling anything with a level-appropriate CL. (There are arguments for and against this from a design standpoint; I'm not sure how I'd reconcile "dispel magic's cap is arbitrary and kind of awkward" with "a 3rd level spell shouldn't necessarily be expected to nix 7th or 8th level spells" while also recognizing that dispel magic affects some things that might not have defined spell levels. But anyway.)

tl;dr: Basically, greater dispel isn't a spell that's appropriate for being cast out of a 6th level slot so much as it is a spell that's expected to come online at around 11-13 HD. Expecting a character to have spells their whole career (even if not a full 9th level progression) but denying them access to a way to break dispel magic's CL 10 cap means that they won't have access to dispelling effects in the second half of the game, which doesn't seem intentional.

[Nifft]

I'll address this part first, as it's the most detail-specific. Healing is one of the components of a Paladin, yes. That doesn't make them primary healers, nor can they really be if they're not full casters. With that said, bringing the dead back to life falls short of "basic healthcare" that one might expect of a non-primary healer. This is why Bards don't get access to Raise Dead or anything like it in core, even though they have modest secondary healing abilities of their own. It would've been a perfectly valid design choice to double down on this, and give them it as a 5th level spell. They'd still get it later than Clerics, and would have to spend one of their precious spells known on it, so it's not like they'd be stepping too heavily on any toes. But Bards aren't meant to be fantasy equivalent of a top-end hospital staff, that's what Clerics (and sort of Druids) are for. No, they (along w/ Rangers to a lesser extent) are relegated to the role of combat medic. Able to get the wounded back up on their feet, not able to cure all their possible ailments. Paladins in core are between these two roles: they're able to do more than just restore hit points, but they can't cure the most serious maladies. They can make the blind see, the diseased hale and healthy, or the drained restored. But they can't cure death, or madness, or loss of limb. Of course if you're going to expand their magic, you're going to expand what they can do. But it doesn't follow that you have to let them do everything. This is a long-winded straw-man argument -- what I've done is obviously NOT "let[ting] them do everything".

You're also wrong in your foundation: Core Paladins can cure HP damage, remove diseases (including green slime infestation), neutralize poisons, restore level drain, ability damage, ability drain, remove fatigue, cure exhaustion, remove paralysis, break enchantments, remove curses, and dispel evil or chaotic possession. They get an aura which helps against fear, too.

Which specific maladies do you think they fail to remove?


This is the bit for which it's trickier to develop a response, since there seem to be two issues intertwined here. On the one hand, there's the content part of your argument, which seems to boil down to, "Clerics and Paladins are both holy warriors, and hence they should both get all the standard goodies to which a holy warrior is entitled." Nope.

Try instead: "Holy Warrior fits both Clerics and Paladins, therefore it cannot be used as a criteria to distinguish between them."

Paladins and Clerics are obviously different classes which are not identical, but "Holy Warrior" is a thing that both classes share.


On the other hand, there's the structural part of your argument, in which you conflate necessity and sufficiency. Nooooooooope.

What I've done is point out that you had confused "non-identical" with "non-overlapping".

Paladin and Cleric have significant overlap. You need to understand that having some overlap isn't going to kill either class -- this is easy to see since they already had overlap before we started touching them -- and Clerics were hardly on the endangered list in the first place.




Both clerics and paladins might be holy warriors, but their casting isn't the same. There is a small number of paladin only spells. Paladins get restoration early but healing late, and this matches their class features. Most other spells they get at the same time, but they tend to be focused around combat and such. Many cleric spells that don't fit this description aren't on the paladin list. Because while clerics are holy warriors they are also other things that paladins aren't.

I've provided a list and so has one other poster for a 2nd opinion. I think all the lists are missing is a handful of unique paladin-only spells, and I've suggested homebrewing those. Probably revolving around his weapon, smiting and/or mount. And/or another super-paladin-y thing that isn't also a super-cleric-y thing. I've wasted too much time online already but it's something Thurbane could do, and/or posters could post 1 spell each. A grand total of 2-3 is probably plenty, though more doesn't hurt.

Yeah, this is a good idea.

There ought to be a few unique Paladin-only spells at levels 5 and 6, maybe even mildly overpowered stuff that's character-defining (if you pick spells known like a Bard), on par with Form of Doom (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/formofDoom.htm) (level 6 PsyWar power).

Hmm, maybe have Oath or Patron spells, too -- that way a Paladin of Bahamut would play differently from a Paladin of Wee Jas or a Paladin of Sune.

[SLOTHRPG95]

This is a long-winded straw-man argument -- what I've done is obviously NOT "let[ting] them do everything".

You're also wrong in your foundation: Core Paladins can cure HP damage, remove diseases (including green slime infestation), neutralize poisons, restore level drain, ability damage, ability drain, remove fatigue, cure exhaustion, remove paralysis, break enchantments, remove curses, and dispel evil or chaotic possession. They get an aura which helps against fear, too.

Which specific maladies do you think they fail to remove?


If you looked that the context, you'll see I never claimed that you were trying to let Paladins do everything under the sun and moon. That "long-winded" paragraph was only talking about healing, and yes letting them reverse death is one step closer to letting them do everything within that domain. But at this point I doubt you even bothered to read thorough what I posted before replying. If you had, you'd know I already noted that Paladins can cure multiple status conditions (besides just loss of hit points), and also that I then immediately after listed some maladies that they cannot cure in core. Death is the most obvious one, and the original point of contention as we were speaking of Raise Dead and Resurrection.



Try instead: "Holy Warrior fits both Clerics and Paladins, therefore it cannot be used as a criteria to distinguish between them."

Paladins and Clerics are obviously different classes which are not identical, but "Holy Warrior" is a thing that both classes share.

What I've done is point out that you had confused "non-identical" with "non-overlapping".


This might be what you thought you originally said, or what you intended to say, but it's not what you wrote. However, I am glad that with more thought you were able to clarify and distill your position. With that said, you might want to read more carefully (both posts you reply to and your own) before you respond. It would save you the trouble of having to clarify your points in the first place, and would also ward off many of the phantom misunderstandings you think haunt the posts of others.

[Nifft]

If you looked that the context, you'll see I never claimed that you were trying to let Paladins do everything under the sun and moon. Man, even what I suspect are your good-faith attempts end up riddled with straw.

You really need to cut down on the embellishments if you want to have a serious conversation. When you're embellishing an argument that you don't like, it comes across as dishonesty -- and that's because embellishment is dishonest, even when you don't mean it to be.


That "long-winded" paragraph was only talking about healing, and yes letting them reverse death is one step closer to letting them do everything within that domain. But at this point I doubt you even bothered to read thorough what I posted before replying. I actually did read it, thoroughly.

You were wrong about more than what I'd focused on -- like you think a Paladin can't cure insanity, when that's exactly what break enchantment does -- but those things were tangential, so I let them go.

And that act of rhetorical mercy gave you ammo for this personal attack.


If you had, you'd know I already noted that Paladins can cure multiple status conditions (besides just loss of hit points), and also that I then immediately after listed some maladies that they cannot cure in core. Death is the most obvious one, and the original point of contention as we were speaking of Raise Dead and Resurrection. Yeah I was asking for specifics because what you listed contained errors, and I'd wanted you to re-examine your assertions.

Instead you fling crap at me.

Welp.



This might be what you thought you originally said, or what you intended to say, but it's not what you wrote. However, I am glad that with more thought you were able to clarify and distill your position. With that said, you might want to read more carefully (both posts you reply to and your own) before you respond. It would save you the trouble of having to clarify your points in the first place, and would also ward off many of the phantom misunderstandings you think haunt the posts of others.


You're making a false distinction, because Cleric is also a holy warrior.



Try instead: "Holy Warrior fits both Clerics and Paladins, therefore it cannot be used as a criteria to distinguish between them."

Paladins and Clerics are obviously different classes which are not identical, but "Holy Warrior" is a thing that both classes share.


Looks to me like what I wrote before is identical in meaning to the wordier version which you were able to accept.

Could you point out what you think are differences?

[ben-zayb]

I've provided a list and so has one other poster for a 2nd opinion. I think all the lists are missing is a handful of unique paladin-only spells, and I've suggested homebrewing those. Probably revolving around his weapon, smiting and/or mount. And/or another super-paladin-y thing that isn't also a super-cleric-y thing. I've wasted too much time online already but it's something Thurbane could do, and/or posters could post 1 spell each. A grand total of 2-3 is probably plenty, though more doesn't hurt.
There could be a very fast travel spell similar to Cloud Chariot, Shadow Walk, or Planar Navigation, that thematically centers around a Paladin riding his mount. Call it "Godspeed", "Swift Justice", "Divine Light Speed", "Steed of Light", or some other terrible pun.

[ezekielraiden]

Yeah, it seems to me that a simple "all Cleric spells of school X/Y/Z up to 6th level"...won't quite cut it. Because I do think a very advanced Paladin should be able to, for example, cry out to her deity for divine aid and have the angelic host (or at least one member thereof) appear and provide it. But I don't think every Paladin should have access to every 5th and 6th Conjuration spell.

You'd probably be best served by:
1. Setting specific thematic goals you want to achieve. E.g. like the above, "a very advanced paladin should be able to summon an angel." Do this until you have a list of, I dunno, 8-12 thematic goals.
2. If spells already on the list would fulfill that goal if a more powerful version were available, grant that more powerful version as a 5th or 6th level spell.
3. If no spells already present would do so, peruse the Cleric list for appropriate options, and include enough that work to satisfy the goal (no need to double/triple up).
4. If no Cleric spells achieve that result, check to see if any spell would do so, and include those that would work as in step 3.
5. If no spells whatsoever do it--well, make one! There are already Paladin-only spells. Why not some at 5th and 6th too?

[Thurbane]

Thanks for all the suggestions and feedback everyone...