I would like to play Paladin but...

[Akisa]

I like the flavor of paladin class, be it I want to play holy shiny knight or someone chosen by the gods to destroy evil. However the class leads a lot to be desired, the amount of different good ability scores it requires makes it hard to choose or squeeze in point buy. Then other classes just plain old fight evil better then Paladin. More often than not I would find myself playing Cleric (at least they don't have to worry about tripping over that evil rock and "fall"). However even playing cleric in this fashion also has its disadvantages. Then came Pathfinder...

It seems the class is actually useful, smite evil is no longer a one hit wonder that can be wasted (aside for being a target of non evil), healing abilities that are actually useful in battles and ability to have cheap magical weapons (weapon bond). However it seems I would have to play her in a pathfinder game which has its own flaws (cmd/cmb, power attack and other melee nerfs), not to mention actually finding a pathfinder game (face to face I mean). How hard is it to convince DMs to play a 3.5 game to use Pathfinder's Paladin?

[Acero]

You could just mix Cleric and Fighter...

[Terazul]

Or play a Crusader. It's like a paladin, but with more hitting things. Make your own code! Be whatever alignment you give a crap about! Smite things!

[Snake-Aes]

You could just be a Cleric

There. As far as power goes for divine "by teh gods" types go, clerics are the go-to, Archivists being a notch above but not with the "holy warrior" feel.

[Thiyr]

To actually attempt to answer the OP, it ultimately depends on the playgroup. Does your DM think that paladins in 3.5 were a well-made class with no major issues? Probably not then. Are you open to homebrew fixes? Shouldn't be too hard. Are you going to pitch it as "I want to be better" (no) or "Paladins are kinda bad, and I don't want to be stuck as a cleric, and this is a remake of the paladin that makes it work a bit better" (more likely)?

[Gavinfoxx]

Crusader! Totally Crusader!

[Boci]

Serenty changes any Paladin ability dependant on Cha to Wis and battle blessing allows you to cast spells as a swift action. These greatly improve the power of the class, as does Sword of the Arcane Order (its rating ranging from good to awsome, depdning on how it interacts with BB). But i would still recomend the crusader instead.
As for falling, that depends on how much you trust your DM.

[devinkowalczyk]

Fighter mixed with Exalted Deeds?

[Boci]

Fighter mixed with Exalted Deeds?

How is that going to solve the problems faced by someone playing a paladin?

[Lhurgyof]

Depends how optimized the group is... If they're none too optimized/havent discovered class teirs, then there shouldn't be a power discrepancy between you guys.

[W3bDragon]

How hard is it to convince DMs to play a 3.5 game to use Pathfinder's Paladin?

Well since you're asking how a DM would react, then I'll give you my 2 cp.

I would probably not be open to using the paladin from another system, even if it happens to be compatible, for a few reasons.

• Most of my games are low to mid optimization, so power level isn't an issue.

• If the optimization in the current game would make paladins look extremely weak, then there are other paladin-like classes that you could play. These range from Crusaders to Knights to Rangers to multiclass cleric-somethings.

• Stating that stats are a reason won't swing it for me either, because you don't really need high stats in all of those, just decent ones. You could get decent ones in what you need with most point-buys.

I would be open to adjusting the paladin manually using the available ACFs, and if I have multiple players wanting to play paladins, so its a paladin themed campaign, then I'd be willing to houserule it some more.

Obviously, YMMV.

[Gorgondantess]

Shameless self insertion, goooo!

[Zaydos]

As a DM, and a DM's opinion: I'm not too familiar with pathfinder and I'd need to see Pathfinder paladin and see how much work it is to convert it, how powerful it is, etc. I'd possibly allow it or house rule some changes to paladin (Serenity as a bonus feat, Smite per encounter; I actually favor those in general) or just see it depends upon whose playing (a party with a fighter, a monk, a miniature's handbook healer, and a warlock is going to be a no deal; a party with 2 sorcerers, a cleric, and a wizard and it would be a different story; a party with a fully optimized set of sorcerers, cleric and wizard and it would be a very different story). If I already have a player playing an established paladin (for example in the game I'm running currently) then probably no dice.

[Lysander]

You can also play a Favored Soul.

[FlamingKobold]

Same as Gorgondantess. Se the sig

[Dr.Epic]

Or be a fighter and just be good and fight for a religious cause. You don't need the class paladin to act like a paladin.

[Scarey Nerd]

You can also play a Favored Soul.

I agree with this. Favored souls do the whole "Holy Warrior" schtick well, and are more versatile than Paladins, which is what I gathered from the OP that you want?

Also, angel wings=good.

[The Shadowmind]

Try a mix of cloister cleric(trading the two domains for travel and animal devotion)/generic warrior(grab Healing and Knowledge as the first two bonus feats it you didn't get them though flaws/level) then just go a with the better combat feats(since the generic warrior isn't limited to the fighter bonus list, but doesn't get the fighter only feats). The when the able to go into Divine crusader with the a Domain you like.

It requires a few house rules, such the removal of the multiclass exp penalty, allowing the Generic warrior class without making it generic classes only, and access to a god with those domains.
It is a little different that most suggestions.

[Skaven]

I want to play a Paladin, unfortunately my DM thinks Paladins should be Lawful Stupid and holds Miko up as a shining example of Paladins. If you aint smiting people for pinching the barmaids butt for 'sin/violating a lady', you fall.

[hamishspence]

Yurgh.

I much prefer paladins that at least make a nod to "respect for life"- even for their enemies, and don't consider themselves entitled to be judge jury and executioner most of the time.

Fight evil, yes, defend people who need defending, yes, but smiting should be reserved for seriously violent situations, not petty crime.

[UnChosenOne]

Like others have said, just play a Favorite Soul or a Crusader. Both of them can be easily played as a Paladin styled Holy Champion of Goodness.

[AslanCross]

I want to play a Paladin, unfortunately my DM thinks Paladins should be Lawful Stupid and holds Miko up as a shining example of Paladins. If you aint smiting people for pinching the barmaids butt for 'sin/violating a lady', you fall.

That's...quite depressing.

Anyway, OP, it's really up to your DM if he'll let you play one.

My suggested solutions:
1. Play a Cleric or Favored Soul, though I prefer the former.
2. Use one of the many homebrewed Paladins. The two I like are OneWinged4ngel's Rebalanced Paladin and Fax Celestis's mantle Paladin.
3. If your group allows Tome of Battle, play a Crusader. Same concept, more melee smiting, command ability and ally support, and no mechanical code (though you could roleplay as if you had one of course)

[potatocubed]

From a GM's point of view, I would be wary of allowing a class built for another game into one I was running. (I would also far prefer to run Pathfinder than 3.5 though, so.) You might get further with a homebrew suggestion.

That said, I add my voice to the suggestions of crusader - pick LG as an alignment and get with the holy-warrioring, without any of the annoying code restrictions on your class abilities and ensuing derailment of the game into a quagmire of moral philosophy.

[Ravens_cry]

I second the Pathfinder Paladin. I think they made some good, significant in the colloquial sense, changes that made it a lot more fun to play. Smite, even with the errata, actually helps, and they are less MAD. And the ability to decide where you want a mount, a frequently useless option in a dungeon, or a god empiowered magic weapon is fun.

[Kaeso]

Why not take a few levels of cleric (maybe combined with some fighter levels) and take the paladin prestige class from unearthed arcana? That way you'll have a core paladin but with better spells.

[nyarlathotep]

The pathfinder paladin is very good in its own way and makes it so that with great responsibility come great power rather than well, just being a sub par melee fighter.

[Frosty]

I second the Pathfinder Paladin. I think they made some good, significant in the colloquial sense, changes that made it a lot more fun to play. Smite, even with the errata, actually helps, and they are less MAD. And the ability to decide where you want a mount, a frequently useless option in a dungeon, or a god empiowered magic weapon is fun.

Can you post the relevant PF Paladin errata here? I'd be interested to know.

[gartius]

here is the link to see the pf pally in all its awesomeness

http://http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/basic-classes/paladin

the only thing the table doesnt show is the progression of the channel positive energy-but is easy to work out

and yes i would also go for him over 3.5s paladin

sum up of details -casting for spells comes from charisma-less MAD
-no dead levels
-divine bond means you can choose between a companion or a bond to your weapon
-smite evils gets better -you can give it to your allies

[TooManyBadgers]

This thread makes my head hurt.

To address the OP:

I don't know. Probably nobody here does. It depends completely on the DM's prior experiences with 3.5 D&D.

If they think the Paladin is the most powerful class in Core (some people really do), you're probably going to have a hard time having the PF pally approved -- it's pretty blatantly more powerful than the 3.5 pally.

If they think Paladin is one of the classes that really needs a boost, you're probably more likely to get it in.

And if the class isn't approved, you might try pretty much any of the options presented here.

[true_shinken]

To all people presenting homebrew: you really think a DM that does not accept the Pathfinder Paladin would accept a homebrewed Paladin? O.o