Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think that Paladins are granted their 'divine' powers from a...divine source - it is just that I think that all these years I in fact *did* think that they had to be devoted to a specific deity when apparently this was not the case!

 Alpharius wrote:
I think that Paladins are granted their 'divine' powers from a...divine source - it is just that I think that all these years I in fact *did* think that they had to be devoted to a specific deity when apparently this was not the case!

Neither is correct as matter of the AD&D PHB, which ties all the Paladin's powers to alignment rather than religion. To wit, "Law and good deeds are the meat and drink of paladins."

 Melissia wrote:
I can see the paladin as a non-religious moral knight, but I'm wondering where they get their divine powers from if not from a deity?

There are any number of ways you could fluff it depending on what tone you want your campaign/setting campaign to have.

The moral energy of the world could be something that is in a sense tangible something you interact and manipulate with the proper tools. Things that drop from a great height are accelerated by gravity, a spring can be compressed to hold force, fuel and oxygen combust to generate heat, a strong will, good heart and disciplined mind can channel the positive energy of the world to heal innocent or harm the wicked.


Alternatively, perhaps the energy comes strictly from within. Maybe the soul is a tangible source of power, something you can tap and shape. With training and conviction one can project one's inner energy to whatever effect that soul desires. The way the power manifests for the paladin is a reflective of their particularly righteous (or evil, in the case of anti-paladin) soul.


Maybe the the energy is just an offshoot of what might be traditionally seen as "Arcane" magic, force of will changing the world to effect. Maybe paladins derive their power from ancient relics ritually implanted during their initiation rites. Perhaps it is the will of humanity that fuels them, the hopes and fears of good people reaching out to empower them to better the world. It could be the paladins of the past reaching in from some other realm, connected to this one by the strength of the conviction they had in life being matched by the the current paladins.

There really are a ton of ways you could explain what powers the abilities we see in the paladin class. "Ethos-powered warrior" has a lot of design space. You could also just have the gods hand them their power, or a rabbit wearing a silly hat. Whatever works for your game.

 Manchu wrote:
Well, first, I am not arguing that Paladins are non-religious just that their powers are not bestowed on them in exchange for ritual worship, as appears to be the case with Clerics. Paladins wield special powers because of their righteous conviction. Remember, we are dealing with a universe where Law and Good are fundamental cosmic principles. Paladins align themselves with those cosmic principles so perfectly, through living lives of dedication to a strict moral code, that they can wield that very power. This is why Paladins who do evil immediately lose all their powers -- they have lost their alignment with the cosmic forces that empowered them.

So basically like Guild Wars 2's Guardian? They draw magic, literally, from the virtues of courage, justice, and resolve.

I still think the Intent is that they must be paying fealty to some Deity - all indications seem to point in that direction.

I don't think Lawful Good in of itself grants them...anything?

But, like Ahtman, that's the way its always been in my campaigns.

In spite of my question, it is my interpretation that in past DnD games the rules have always stated that they had divine powers granted by a deity, and regained their magic through prayer to said deity-- I'm interested in seeing if this one differs.

I wouldn't object to it being different. A paladin need not necessarily be the "righteous fist of god", as it were.

In other news, continued the starter. Fighters are badass.

 Alpharius wrote:
I still think the Intent is that they must be paying fealty to some Deity - all indications seem to point in that direction.

I don't think Lawful Good in of itself grants them...anything?

But, like Ahtman, that's the way its always been in my campaigns.

I agree it's clearly the intended default. I certainly usually run things that way. Still, paladins as typically presented can certainly fit into any number of metaphysical frameworks without much if any modification, if that's the sort of thing you're inclined to do.

Fighters are very good at opening the encounter with a flurry of blows. It has really helped the players, especially when they use it to ensure that a guy goes down. They are also generally the last ones standing, thanks to Second Wind. I think that the Fighter class finally gives the impression of being the skilled and dangerous guy that we all wanted it to be.

If nothing else, this has gotten me to take a 'fresh look' at 1E Paladins - and I'm cautiously optimistic/looking forward to 5E.

Even if it is just to see 'what's what'!

Fighters have always been dangerous at low levels, with level 5 (3rd level spells) being the breaking point for casters.

Guess we'll see once the PHB actually drops if that pattern holds or not.

Folks who say D&D rules state or intend that Paladins get their powers through devotion to a deity, by all means please let me know where a PHB actually supports this statement. We have already seen how it is not supported by the AD&D PHB. Nearly the same text is found in the 2E Revised PHB, right down to the "meat and drink" point quoted above. The 3.5 PHB explicitly says: "A paladin need not devote herself to a single deity -- devotion to righteousness is enough." Only in 4E are Paladins required to choose a "patron" deity but apparently only because they are no longer required to be LG; their alignment must now be identical to their deity's. Even so, the 4E PHB clarifies that "Paladins are not granted their power directly by their deity, but instead through various rites performed when they become paladins" (and this again is a consequence of the lack of a LG requirment; Paladins no longer lose their class/class powers by straying off the moral-ethical path because in 4E alignment is basically a non-thing).

The interpretation/assumption that Paladins are the champions of a certain deity, which as far as I know is unique to the Forgotten Realms, really does explain the confusion about/reaction against the LG alignment requirement -- especially in light of the explicit correlation in 4E between these issues. Given the default setting of 5E is the Forgotten Realms and 5E alignment is still a non-thing as in 4E, it will be surprising if 5E Paladins are not required to have patron deities. But the Paladin preview pages seem to indicate that a Paldin's power comes from living by a strict moral code (actually, that's a pretty good analog to alignment), specifically the oath mechanic, rather than religious devotion.

 Manchu wrote:
Folks who say D&D rules state or intend that Paladins get their powers through devotion to a deity, by all means please let me know where a PHB actually supports this statement. We have already seen how it is not supported by the AD&D PHB. Nearly the same text is found in the 2E Revised PHB, right down to the "meat and drink" point quoted above. The 3.5 PHB explicitly says: "A paladin need not devote herself to a single deity -- devotion to righteousness is enough." Only in 4E are Paladins required to choose a "patron" deity but apparently only because they are no longer required to be LG; their alignment must now be identical to their deity's. Even so, the 4E PHB clarifies that "Paladins are not granted their power directly by their deity, but instead through various rites performed when they become paladins" (and this again is a consequence of the lack of a LG requirment; Paladins no longer lose their class/class powers by straying off the moral-ethical path because in 4E alignment is basically a non-thing).

The interpretation/assumption that Paladins are the champions of a certain deity, which as far as I know is unique to the Forgotten Realms, really does explain the confusion about/reaction against the LG alignment requirement -- especially in light of the explicit correlation in 4E between these issues. Given the default setting of 5E is the Forgotten Realms and 5E alignment is still a non-thing as in 4E, it will be surprising if 5E Paladins are not required to have patron deities. But the Paladin preview pages seem to indicate that a Paldin's power comes from living by a strict moral code (actually, that's a pretty good analog to alignment), specifically the oath mechanic, rather than religious devotion.

I think most were saying they "thought" it was like this, or that they 'preferred' it this way?

I can see how a lot of what Paladins are about (the 'divine' powers, the access to clerical spells, the tithing, etc.) seems to 'imply' it.

Otherwise, it is odd that LAWFUL GOOD (The Alignment) is what 'grants' and 'revokes' these things!

Why do you say it's odd?

Alignment was a pretty big deal until 4E. And not just as a mechanic but as a setting element. Keep in mind that the moral and ethical axes went beyond individual characters and helped determine the shape of reality itself, with entire planes of reality being defined by their alignment.

Paladins are not LG in the same sense as any other given PC but then again no other class is totally about alignment. While all PCs have an alignment (again, before 4E), only the Paladins really live and breathe it (or in the idiom of AD&D, eat and drink it). Paladins are invoking the cosmic power of LG itself in the material plane.

 Manchu wrote:
Why do you say it's odd?

Alignment was a pretty big deal until 4E. And not just as a mechanic but as a setting element. Keep in mind that the moral and ethical axes went beyond individual characters and helped determine the shape of reality itself, with entire planes of reality being defined by their alignment.

Paladins are not LG in the same sense as any other given PC but then again no other class is totally about alignment. While all PCs have an alignment (again, before 4E), only the Paladins really live and breathe it (or in the idiom of AD&D, eat and drink it). Paladins are invoking the cosmic power of LG itself in the material plane.

Well, this here is the fairly 'odd' part:

 Manchu wrote:
Paladins are invoking the cosmic power of LG itself in the material plane.

At least, it is for me.

I just prefer that "Divine" powers come from an actual Deity, and not from some vague representation of a way of life/moral/ethical code, even if that is BTB and/or How Gary Would Play It!

 streamdragon wrote:
Fighters have always been dangerous at low levels, with level 5 (3rd level spells) being the breaking point for casters.

Guess we'll see once the PHB actually drops if that pattern holds or not.

Actually it was a point of contention between level 1 (Color spray) and level 5 (flight, fireball, haste)

I don't really care about How Gary Would Play It, or at least not any more than I do about How Alpharius Would Play It, because that is just a matter of personal taste. There is really nothing to discuss after someone says "I play it this way because that's how I like it." I mean, you can't argue with someone about their favorite color: "no, you really should think blue is better than red." It's just not a worthwhile conversation. For the same reason, declaring one's favorite color in the first place doesn't make for a worthwhile conversation. All anyone can say in response is, okay that's nice.

On the other hand, statements like "the text says ...", "the text intends ...", and "the text implies ..." can be discussed. According to at least four different PHBs, Paladins do not get their powers from being devoted to deities. Three of them say Paladins get their powers from their moral conviction (e.g., "law and good deeds," "righteousness") while the fourth says they are invested with their powers in rites associated with their dedicated lifestyle. That last one, the 4E PHB text, is fascinating because it really shows how there is a relationship between the source of a Paladin's powers and alignment precisely because the 4E Paladin has no specific alignment restriction -- and does not lose powers or get kicked out of the class for behaving contrary to alignment. And for the first time, Paladins must have a deity.

Even considering 4E explicitly says Paladins don't get their powers from their patron deities, these developments still represent a huge break from every previous edition. That is actually how this came up; specifically in Zebio's post here:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
You mean besides the fact that Paladin's being a specific lawful good class despite the fact they are just militarized fighter clerics of a god...

I still don't understand why they were made so specific in the first place, A paladin of Grummash and a paladin of Tor isn't exactly different aside from Allegiance, with clerics being un-specific is sort of the weird thing.

Why must pre-4E Paladins be LG when they are just Champions of [Insert Deity Here]. If Grummsh is CE, then shouldn't his champion also be CE? That is in fact how 4E works! And we know from these 36 pages that Zebio likes his 4E (and so does Ahtman, which might explain why he requires Paladins to have a deity). The problem comes when one starts reading that 4E assumption "back" onto previous editions, where Paladins were not (outside of FR) champions of some deity.

Instead, they were the knights errant of medieval romance. The AD&D 2E Revised PHB goes so far as to give Charlemagne's paladins and Arthurian knights like Sir Galahad as examples. These guys were not men of the cloth. They were warrior noblemen who, instead of being ruthless barbarian warlords or pious cloistered monks, lived and fought and loved according to a code of courtly, honorable conduct called chivalry.

Why must pre-4E Paladins be LG when they are just Champions of [Insert Deity Here]. If Grummsh is CE, then shouldn't his champion also be CE? That is in fact how 4E works! And we know from these 36 pages that Zebio likes his 4E (and so does Ahtman, which might explain why he requires Paladins to have a deity). The problem comes when one starts reading that 4E assumption "back" onto previous editions, where Paladins were not (outside of FR) champions of some deity.

I was discussing 3.5, thanks for assuming and all that, I mostly played FR which for most purposes ended up the main campaign setting due to just how saturated it ended up.

FR required EVERYONE to have a deity, and thus why he might think of it as well.

I never played much before 3E, thus my knowledge is lacking beyond that.

I know you were discussing 3.5 and not 4E, it's pretty obvious given you were asking about an alignment restriction that doesn't exist in 4E.

And it is possible not have a deity in FR but your soul winds up stuck in the Fugue Plane as part of the Wall of the Faithless.

 Manchu wrote:
I know you were discussing 3.5 and not 4E, it's pretty obvious given you were asking about an alignment restriction that doesn't exist in 4E.

And it is possible not have a deity in FR but your soul winds up stuck in the Fugue Plane as part of the Wall of the Faithless.

Still don't like that thing!

Like the ultimate dick move of the gods and yet it has to remain because the gods are like parasites that need faith to function or die.

Generally though, things do change over time for the classes and mechanics, bards used to be the first prestige class, fighting men used to end up as lords, and gold used to be exp, I just find that as long as they find a natural flow for where the mechanics and classes end up they'll be fine myself, so long as the balance isn't broken two ways to sunday. Like how they are trying to make arcane casters mechanically different from each other in 5E.

I completely agree about the Wall. That always irritated me but you are right -- it's a result of the concept that gods only exist because they are worshiped so we have this narrative conceit to punish the Faithless. It's like a store where you are free to leave at any time after you purchase something.

 Manchu wrote:
I completely agree about the Wall. That always irritated me but you are right -- it's a result of the concept that gods only exist because they are worshiped so we have this narrative conceit to punish the Faithless. It's like a store where you are free to leave at any time after you purchase something.

Except even in the narrative the Overgod AO can survive without being worshiped by mortals (in fact he punishes those that find out about him and worships him), so as a concept it seems like the under-deities just really want to keep their power. I'm pretty sure Forgotten Realms would be far better off if Cyric had no power, even if Mystral provides magic (Which ended up a bust anyways as the spellplague ended up in 4E due to it )

I think the only other realm I really know is Greyhawk, which was the standard up until FR become like seriously popular, while the rest (Eberron, Planescape) I only know in passing, so my knowledge of what could be 'baseline' is somewhat skewed.

Adjudicating Illusions has always been something that is difficult to do 'correctly' and/or 'fairly'.

Is there anything about this in the 5E materials that have been released so far?

The Illusionist class is something I've always liked in 1E (especially after they expanded the spell list for them via 'Unearthed Arcana'), but they were always hard to play in terms of survivability and just plain old player/DM interactions too!

Supposedly the reasoning behind it was that unless the gods required worship to live, they'd stop doing their jobs, therefor they require worship to live, so sayeth Ao-- and becaus ethey require worship to live, even the good-aligned ones are donkey-caves to those who don't worship.

I always found it rather flimsy myself. When I DMed, the souls of those without faith "slept", as it were, after death, until they were awoken by necromancy. No pain, no pleasure, just the titular "eternal rest".

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I think the only other realm I really know is Greyhawk, which was the standard up until FR become like seriously popular, while the rest (Eberron, Planescape) I only know in passing, so my knowledge of what could be 'baseline' is somewhat skewed.

The whole 'gods need faith' is really most predominant int he Forgotten Realms. I don't think it ever came up in Dragonlance or many other settings.

Now Planescape is an interesting disucssion, as a core conceit of Planescape is that everything is powered by faith. Existence only has a shape because we will it to do so. Or maybe not... it's confusing, and as Planescape technically encompasses the Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, etc. all legends are true, for a different meaning of 'true.'

Planescape even has a faction (The Athar) that are dedicated to the idea that Powers aren't gods and shouldn't be worshiped...They're just really powerful people.

Just got the PHB. It's a treat!

 Manchu wrote:
Just got the PHB. It's a treat!

Hurry up and go through the thing, then report back here.

ASAP!

 Manchu wrote:
Just got the PHB. It's a treat!

Less telling us you got it more reading it and giving us impressions.

Some of the art is just beautiful, much better than the previews let on. There is a picture in the spell section of a Wizard casting Prismatic Spray at some Chuul. Just phenomenal.

Let me know if people have questions and I will try to answer them later tonight (much later probably, playing X-Wing this evening).

 Manchu wrote:
Some of the art is just beautiful, much better than the previews let on. There is a picture in the spell section of a Wizard casting Prismatic Spray at some Chuul. Just phenomenal.

Let me know if people have questions and I will try to answer them later tonight (much later probably, playing X-Wing this evening).

How are warlocks.