Paladin/Cleric... Why Not?

[shaka gl]

A little argument grew between my DM and I. He says that, flavour-wise, the Paladin/Cleric combination cannot happen, as they are "two separete sides of the same thing". As for me, I think thats nonsense. What do YOU think?

PS: This is a discussion about the Flavour of the combo, not the Numbers.

[Yeti]

Umm a Paladin/Cleric crossclass couldn't happen simply because pallies can't multi-class.

[SITB]

I think your DM has a point. Clerics exist to serve their god and his ideals, a paladin exists to serve some abstract "good" idea. The cleric goals are much more well, selfish; as he does everything in the name of his god rather then by the aforementioned "good" cause.

On the other hand maybe if you take a cleric that doesn't believe in a god but rather in the abstract ideal of good and chivalrousness then maybe it could work...

[shaka gl]

Umm a Paladin/Cleric crossclass couldn't happen simply because pallies can't multi-class.

Ehm... Since When?

If I remember correctly, in the part where Deitys are listed in the FRCS, in the description of Torm, it reads: "Clerics of Torm usually multiclass as Paladins(...)"

Im wrong?

[Knight_Of_Twilight]

I can see what he means, but it seems kind of arbitrary. A cleric could decide to take up the mantle of paladin, or a paladin could decide to further devote himself the church.

Heck, if you want, take the knight training feat in the eberron book- He can study them both side by side.

[Yeti]

Ehm... Since When?

If I remember correctly, in the part where Deitys are listed in the FRCS, in the description of Torm, it reads: "Clerics of Torm usually multiclass as Paladins(...)"

Im wrong?

Well that could happen but Paladins who take levels in any more classes can't take more levels in Pally. I.E. you could have a Paly2/cleric1 but not a Paly1/cleric1/paly1. that would limit you at mid to high levels.

EDIT:/\Point

[ocato]

Well, you'd have to get all of your paladin-ing done in one shot, then go to Cleric, or vice versa, as Paladins cannot take other levels in between that I recall. However, I see Clerics as the wisdom and devotion of a deity and paladins as more of the sword and justice part. If I were a DM, I'd be okay with it. Imagine a Strength/War Cleric with levels of Paladin, that sounds so not-weird to me, I might do it. Granted, the paladin levels would be mildly unnecessary.

[Khantalas]

Well that could happen but Paladins who take levels in any more classes can't take more levels in Pally. I.E. you could have a Paly2/cleric1 but not a Paly1/cleric1/paly1. that would limit you at mid to high levels.

EDIT:/\Point

Well, see, freely means that Paladins can switch between classes. A lot of FR deities allow free multiclassing between classes for Paladins. Especially Arcane Devotee. Even though they don't allow free multiclassing into any arcane spellcasting class.

Can I get a "Huh?" moment?

[Sergeantbrother]

My personal opinion is that the distinction between a paladin and a cleric is just kinda arbitrary. What if you have a combat oriented cleric of a god of goodness? The cleric just knows a few more spells and is a little worse in combat than the paladin. If I were GM I'd let you multiclass paladin and cleric, I'd even let to get levels in paladin afer getting cleric levels, since they are so theoretically similar.

[Matthew]

It would work fine. Basically, the Paladin could take Holy Orders. the other way round is a little less intuitive, but it works fine. It all depends on your actual understanding of Paladins and Clerics. Too many people confuse the roles of these two Classes.

[FdL]

Ok, that's me, I'm his DM. And I'm really interested to know what the rest thinks about this.

His idea was to have a Paladin/Cleric/Gray Guard. Then I said "why the cleric levels?".

It strikes me as if having a paladin who's also a cleric is a little weird, because they're somehow overlapping in that they could be considered different options of the divine paradigm. That is, you have the divine magic oriented class, and the divine melee oriented class. A similar thing could be said about druid and ranger.

But that's only part of my opinion. I feel that the way religions are organized in Faerun, they are different paths to take in serving a deity (barring the fact that you can have a more tenuous affiliation to a church as both classes). And so, I feel that they kinda overlap.

I do know that as of FRCS there are religions that have these kind of combinations (eg, Torm). But it's still too linked to the nature of that deity and its policies.

I definitely think that a paladin or cleric character in a given written setting fit better with the material, but also restricted by it. Which is good because it's easier to play with the reference material in mind, helps RP and makes the character a part of the world. Either by affiliation or by opposition, of course, either way it's there.

[Matthew]

Forgotten Realms in particular blends these two Classes in people's minds, as the Paladin has to serve a particular Deity. As it stands, though, there would be nothing problematic in having a secular, if exemplary, Knight become a Templar (which is essentially what a move from Paladin to Cleric is). As far as Greyguard goes, I'm not familiar with that Class.

[ocato]

Paladin/Cleric/Greyguard almost sounds like the Divine Good God Gish. Granted that may not be entirely apt.

[FdL]

However, I see Clerics as the wisdom and devotion of a deity and paladins as more of the sword and justice part. If I were a DM, I'd be okay with it. Imagine a Strength/War Cleric with levels of Paladin, that sounds so not-weird to me, I might do it. Granted, the paladin levels would be mildly unnecessary.

That's the point. If you make a very melee oriented, war domain cleric, why not play a paladin? Both classes do overlap IMHO. That's why I say I see them as extremes of the same paradigm.

Besides, I guess it's possible to have a change of career in the life of a character, but doesn't sound so plausible. I tend to like more solid, coherent characters, and actually I see those "career changes" as related to meta gaming.

It would work fine. Basically, the Paladin could take Holy Orders. the other way round is a little less intuitive, but it works fine. It all depends on your actual understanding of Paladins and Clerics. Too many people confuse the roles of these two Classes.

Sure, that's why this happens. And that's why I bring the point about referencing the FR setting and understanding both classes as distinct roles within organized religions in Faerun.
To me a paladin is the enforcer of his deity's dogma, the pro-active agent, the soldier of a faith.
A cleric's role is somehow a little less defined in my mind, as it seems to depend more on the goals and dogma of the deity and his view of the world. A cleric can be a priest, a healer, someone who spreads the word of his deity and looks to convert people, or a magic using divine warrior too.

Paladin/Cleric/Greyguard almost sounds like the Divine Good God Gish. Granted that may not be entirely apt.

That was his idea, as he told me. He wanted to make a divine gish.

[ocato]

Well, a nonmelee cleric multiclassed with a paladin allows the Cleric to be all casterific and still get his melee powers. I mean, unless you want to let him Multiclass two different domained clerics.

I'm a War/Strength Cleric 4/ Good/Healing Cerlic 3, my name? Crazy McHuh?

[Lemur]

Well, why not? I don't see any particular problems with the combination flavor wise. There are weirder things you can make work that are still perfectly reasonable. I don't see the argument "they're too similar" as a good reason to disallow multiclassing.

That said, I'm going to ignore the OP for a moment and say, yeah, the crunch for it sucks. What's the point of doing it in the first place, anyway? As far as gish-types go, the cleric class is practically a gish already if you want it to be.

The setup isn't going to break the game, unless the other players have significantly more optimal builds, in which case the class is going to be a bit of a deadweight.

Grey Guard, however, I have plenty of problems with in terms of flavor, but that's not what the question is about.

[SpiderBrigade]

It seems to me that if you see the classes as very similar, that would be more of a reason to allow the multiclassing, rather than banning it. A paladin might gradually come to focus more on the less-combat-oriented magical side of the religion, while a cleric could easily get inspired with the divine fervor to go out and Smite some Evil. It would be very organic. Note that this doesn't mean you should allow free back-and-forth multiclassing. It's still very plausible that once you stop taking Paladin levels, that represents a certain loss of focus, and you cannot go back. But a one-time-only switch makes perfect sense to me.

You mentioned that you have some doubts about all multiclassing, and consider it somewhat metagamey. I disagree, but I can somewhat see where you're coming from, especially for some builds which go all over the place to fit a certain concept. I'd say that this particular case is just about the least metagamey you can get. As others have said, from a mechanical standpoint it's just not very practical. So it really would be about the character's changing priorities as he grew more experienced.

[Tokiko Mima]

A little argument grew between my DM and I. He says that, flavour-wise, the Paladin/Cleric combination cannot happen, as they are "two separete sides of the same thing". As for me, I think thats nonsense. What do YOU think?

PS: This is a discussion about the Flavour of the combo, not the Numbers.

"Two separete sides of the same thing" "cannot happen?" Umm.. I would show him a coin, and point out that it has two seperate, similiar but unique sides, and it yet exists in complete defiance of his logic.

The fact that they're similar only makes them MORE likely to happen, not less. You're right, if that is what he said it's a load of bunk.

Maybe he's trying to argue that fighters don't become casters, but that's kinda what multiclass is all about.

Then I guess you could explain to him that Succubi Paladins are technically legal in D&D even though they have an Evil Subtype and watch his head spin.

[FdL]

Well, why not? I don't see any particular problems with the combination flavor wise. There are weirder things you can make work that are still perfectly reasonable. I don't see the argument "they're too similar" as a good reason to disallow multiclassing.

For me the fact that they are "similar" weakens the point for multiclassing them. That said from fluff, of course.

That said, I'm going to ignore the OP for a moment and say, yeah, the crunch for it sucks. What's the point of doing it in the first place, anyway? As far as gish-types go, the cleric class is practically a gish already if you want it to be.

I said the same thing to him about the cleric being already a divine gish. :p

The setup isn't going to break the game, unless the other players have significantly more optimal builds, in which case the class is going to be a bit of a deadweight.

I'm not measuring the character in terms of power. I do strive to keep some kind of balance and I usually don't allow min/maxing and weird stuff.
My main objection to this character, even if it's just a suggestion, comes from the fluff flavor.

The idea was for the players to make a "backup" character, but it ocurred to me that it would be better if they were more integrated to the setting and the region, as not to have another random adventurer from afar or two joining them out of the blue to complete their ranks.

Grey Guard, however, I have plenty of problems with in terms of flavor, but that's not what the question is about.

I don't dislike it, but it seems to be one of those classes that doesn't necessarily fit every campaign or party.

"Two separete sides of the same thing" "cannot happen?" Umm.. I would show him a coin, and point out that it has two seperate, similiar but unique sides, and it yet exists in complete defiance of his logic.

The fact that they're similar only makes them MORE likely to happen, not less. You're right, if that is what he said it's a load of bunk.

Hey, Tokiko Mima, I'm here. You can talk directly to me.

What I said was more in the lines of being two different extremes within a common category of classes, that of divine. More than a coin, think about a rod with its two opposite poles. On one there's the more melee oriented paladin and in the other there's the more casting oriented cleric, though both feature elements of each other.
Then I consider that making a character that has both ends of this same paradigm is redundant and overlapping also in the fluff.

Maybe he's trying to argue that fighters don't become casters, but that's kinda what multiclass is all about.

Then I guess you could explain to him that Succubi Paladins are technically legal in D&D even though they have an Evil Subtype and watch his head spin.

No, sorry, that's not what this discussion is about. It seems to me that you've not read all that's being said in this thread and I suggest you to do so before posting, thank you.

[Raistlin1040]

Meh. If you wanted a better healing than a paladin but better fighting than a cleric, why not go Cleric and cherrypick a few fighter levels? Maybe like Cleric 10/Fighter 4-5?

[FdL]

Meh. If you wanted a better healing than a paladin but better fighting than a cleric, why not go Cleric and cherrypick a few fighter levels? Maybe like Cleric 10/Fighter 4-5?

Personally I don't like this kind of pick and mix multiclassing. I could allow it but I don't like its spirit. Besides, considering that the cleric already is in part a fighter, I tend to dislike it, even more because it's certainly all for the crunch.
I mean, almost every class IS a fighter in part. Except for Wiz/Sorc, where it would bring something new into the mix that the original class doesn't feature in any degree. So I tend to see multiclassing with fighter as a metagaming way of adding melee power.

[Little_Rudo]

If you're worried about how much the mechanics of the two classes overlap, then you might consider using the Cloistered Cleric variant. He'll lose some BAB, but he'll gain the Lore ability, a third domain (Knowledge), and an additional 4 skill points, while the Paladin will provide more BAB and Medium and Heavy armor proficiency. I'm not sure if this is what you want, but it would give him a bit extra for taking Cleric.

To be honest, I've always felt that the cleric's martial skills (medium/heavy armor, high BAB) somewhat impede on the paladin's role. Granted, the cleric is devoted to a deity (sans clerics of causes), while the paladin is devoted to Good, but it's always kind of rubbed me the wrong way. This is why I love the Cloistered Cleric so much.

[SpiderBrigade]

For me the fact that they are "similar" weakens the point for multiclassing them. That said from fluff, of course.

Again, why? Wouldn't the very similarity of the two make it easier to go from one to the other?

I'm trying to think of a realistic example to demonstrate what I mean, but it's difficult because multiclassing in D&D is a lot easier than picking up a similar skillset in any kind of "realistic" world. But for instance, think of a university math department. All of the professors are going to have a solid grounding in higher-level mathematics in general, but they'll have different specializations. There will likely also be many who are also physicists, using the math practically. Isn't it quite plausible that as he explores the field, one of them might find that his interests are tending away from, say, n-dimensional vector calculus, and more towards complexity theory? Or, similarly, might not a pure theorist get more interested in applying his knowledge to a "real-world" problem? In my opinion, the shift from Cleric to Paladin would be similar in nature.

[Roderick_BR]

Yes, it can happen. Paladins can follow deities (actually, I think they do it more than clerics) and clerics can be "abstracts". I think that female paladin from PHB is a follower of Heronius, the deity of valor and heroism, and you can have clerics of Heronius too.
You can gain levels as paladins, then multiclass into cleric, though you face the normal paladin's multiclassing rules, unless you play in a setting that allow a paladin to multiclass without penalty. Forgotten Realms has a lot of examples.
The only real requisite, is that you need to worship only one god, and he must be lawful good, or neutral good, or lawful neutral, and you channel positive energy as a cleric. Btw, your turning level will be your cleric level plus your paladin level -2

[Matthew]

Sure, that's why this happens. And that's why I bring the point about referencing the FR setting and understanding both classes as distinct roles within organized religions in Faerun.
To me a paladin is the enforcer of his deity's dogma, the pro-active agent, the soldier of a faith.
A cleric's role is somehow a little less defined in my mind, as it seems to depend more on the goals and dogma of the deity and his view of the world. A cleric can be a priest, a healer, someone who spreads the word of his deity and looks to convert people, or a magic using divine warrior too.

...and that's the problem. Paladin's are not Soldiers of God in the same sense that Clerics are. A Paladin, whether he worships a single Deity or is devoted to a cause or whatever is a secular figure, he is not usually ordained, unlike the Cleric. The difference is important, because what it means is that a Paladin is an exemplary secular figure, a Lancelot or a Roland or even a Godfrey of Bologne, but he isn't a Templar.
There are literary examples of Paladins becoming Clerics, many medieval stories basically depict a Paladin who becomes a Cleric (Cloistered or not). Le Morte DArthur is a particular case in point (some Knights could be said to go from Fighter to paladin to Cloistered Cleric to Cleric, if you're willing to ignore the magic aspect...). If you can get a clear definition in your mind of what distinguishes a Paladin from a Cleric (who is not simply a Priest, by the by, but a Warrior Priest), the rest of this will slot into place.

[Renegade Paladin]

But that's only part of my opinion. I feel that the way religions are organized in Faerun, they are different paths to take in serving a deity (barring the fact that you can have a more tenuous affiliation to a church as both classes).

Hilariously enough, that's exactly the position of one of the most orthodox branches of Tyr's church in-universe. But they have this position precisely because there are some more liberal temples that allow the mixing of the cleric and paladin or paladin and monk traditions, so it's obviously possible. Really, it all has to do with whether his church and sect tell him that he may not do it, and for a divine caster in the Realms, that does matter very much.

[Lyran Greymoore]

(Hey-oh, first post!)

Something I feel the need to point out, is that you are confusing the character's class with the character. A character is a person, with his own abilities, ideals, and personality. A character's class is merely a predefined set of themed skills and abilities that have a name. A class is an arbitrary way of defining a certain amount of abilities that the character has. It's got no bearing, except possibly in the case of certain prestige classes, on the character in a roleplaying sense. It's totally a metagame concept, and it should be left as such.

Put another way, I could play a straight up fighter class character, who worships Torm and holds himself to a paladin's code of honor as well as the tenants of Torm. He's got more fighting ability, but less divine spiffyness. He's certainly not a paladin by class, but he's a paladin in spirit.
Or, I could play a paladin with all paladin levels. Then I'm getting paladin abilties, and I'm a paladin by class. But I'm not necessarily a paladin in spirit.

If the OP wants his character to be a paladin, but wants to have better casting at the cost of fighting ability, why can't he? He's not his class. He's a person with abilities defined by a class. And abilities are just an arbitrary way of solving problems.

Alright, I better stop before I get further into rant mode. Just my thoughts on the matter.

[Cybren]

Isn't there a PRC based around this very idea in the Book of Exalted Deeds?

[Matthew]

(Hey-oh, first post!)

Something I feel the need to point out, is that you are confusing the character's class with the character. A character is a person, with his own abilities, ideals, and personality. A character's class is merely a predefined set of themed skills and abilities that have a name. A class is an arbitrary way of defining a certain amount of abilities that the character has. It's got no bearing, except possibly in the case of certain prestige classes, on the character in a roleplaying sense. It's totally a metagame concept, and it should be left as such.

Put another way, I could play a straight up fighter class character, who worships Torm and holds himself to a paladin's code of honor as well as the tenants of Torm. He's got more fighting ability, but less divine spiffyness. He's certainly not a paladin by class, but he's a paladin in spirit.
Or, I could play a paladin with all paladin levels. Then I'm getting paladin abilties, and I'm a paladin by class. But I'm not necessarily a paladin in spirit.

If the OP wants his character to be a paladin, but wants to have better casting at the cost of fighting ability, why can't he? He's not his class. He's a person with abilities defined by a class. And abilities are just an arbitrary way of solving problems.

Alright, I better stop before I get further into rant mode. Just my thoughts on the matter.

That's one way of looking at it, but particularly in the case of the Cleric and the Paladin it doesn't hold up. These two Base Classes are very closely integrated with their fluff, a Paladin who is not a paladin in spirit loses his Paladin status. A Cleric who is not faithful loses his ability to use Cleric Class Features. There's no getting away from this with these Classes.

[Droodle]

That's one way of looking at it, but particularly in the case of the Cleric and the Paladin it doesn't hold up. These two Base Classes are very closely integrated with their fluff, a Paladin who is not a paladin in spirit loses his Paladin status. A Cleric who is not faithful loses his ability to use Cleric Class Features. There's no getting away from this with these Classes.

A Paladin of a lawful good warrior deity is actually more likely to embody the tenets of his deity than a cleric would, wouldn't he?