TrashMan Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) I like Paladins. They are my favorite D&D class. I also loved DAO Templars. PALADINS PALADINS!!!! CARDGAMES ON MOTORCYCL- ... wait.. let me try again .. PALADINS!!!! http://www.elfwood.c.../paladin_01.jpg http://www.paperspen...68961166224.jpg Edited October 4, 2012 by TrashMan 1 * YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hypevosa Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 A paladin is NOT a priest or cleric, not at all. They might share a comparable gameplay but contentswise they are very different. Or would you say that a druid is the same as a cleric because they share common spells (in D&D at least)? I wouldn't say so. Playing RPGs is as much about imagination as it is about gameplay. *wimp mode on* So I won't raise my pledge any more until there is confimation that you can play as paladin (at least as a serious sub-class of the fighter class)! */wimp mode off* A paladin is just a slightly less useful healer than a cleric with slightly more combat ability to make up for it. A cleric in this universe sounds like it has the ability to easily become a paladin equivalent and focus more on combat than cleric-y stuff- hence, paladin is redundant. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCrash Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 A paladin is NOT a priest or cleric, not at all. They might share a comparable gameplay but contentswise they are very different. Or would you say that a druid is the same as a cleric because they share common spells (in D&D at least)? I wouldn't say so. Playing RPGs is as much about imagination as it is about gameplay. *wimp mode on* So I won't raise my pledge any more until there is confimation that you can play as paladin (at least as a serious sub-class of the fighter class)! */wimp mode off* A paladin is just a slightly less useful healer than a cleric with slightly more combat ability to make up for it. A cleric in this universe sounds like it has the ability to easily become a paladin equivalent and focus more on combat than cleric-y stuff- hence, paladin is redundant. You just don't get the point. I'm NOT talking about gameplay.... I'm talking about that picture and it's message (not only the written one): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronzepoem Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I love Bard class. Hope we can see it in next goal. Her mind is Tiffany-twisted, She got the Mercedes Benz She's got a lot of pretty, pretty boys, that she calls friends How they dance in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat. Some dance to remember, some dance to forget Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sesobebo Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Cadegund: confirmed paladin. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDoomII Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Bard's would be cool, but they need that something to make them more useful. Or at least give the feeling of being useful. In Baldur's Gate II I always felt that bards were a little useless or had too little to add to the experience. Do you think Pillars of Eternity doesn't have enough Portraits? Submit your vote in this Poll! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hypevosa Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 A paladin is NOT a priest or cleric, not at all. They might share a comparable gameplay but contentswise they are very different. Or would you say that a druid is the same as a cleric because they share common spells (in D&D at least)? I wouldn't say so. Playing RPGs is as much about imagination as it is about gameplay. *wimp mode on* So I won't raise my pledge any more until there is confimation that you can play as paladin (at least as a serious sub-class of the fighter class)! */wimp mode off* A paladin is just a slightly less useful healer than a cleric with slightly more combat ability to make up for it. A cleric in this universe sounds like it has the ability to easily become a paladin equivalent and focus more on combat than cleric-y stuff- hence, paladin is redundant. You just don't get the point. I'm NOT talking about gameplay.... I'm talking about that picture and it's message (not only the written one): Then deck your cleric out in awesome armor, with an awesome sword, get protection from evil, immunity to fear, smite evil, etc as spells, and go ****ing kill some evil instead of focusing on healing the party Again, my first D&D character was a paladin, I know where people are coming from, but if the class is called cleric and I can basically turn it into a paladin by following god X and by preparing XYZ spells, I still get to play as one. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lychee26 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I think a lot of it is that the names priest and paladin have very different meanings, that while related do create different characters in peoples heads. You can dress a priest up all you want, but it's still a priest inside. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Gates' Son Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) I think a lot of it is that the names priest and paladin have very different meanings, that while related do create different characters in peoples heads. You can dress a priest up all you want, but it's still a priest inside. A good or evil Priest/Cleric smites others in the name of their God. A good or evil Paladin does the exact same thing. I'm not seeing a huge difference. At least, lore-wise in some games. For example, Linu from Neverwinter nights pretty much acted like a Paladin personality wise (Kind, caring, and wants to smite evil), yet she was a cleric. Edited October 4, 2012 by Bill Gates' Son Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensuki Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I'm not fussed about either of these classes. No Paladin makes sense due to no alignment, but I think 4th Edition changed Paladins a little bit to be more universal. With the supposed looseness of classes, a martial cleric could end up being quite Paladin-y. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaShard Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 Bard's would be cool, but they need that something to make them more useful. Or at least give the feeling of being useful. In Baldur's Gate II I always felt that bards were a little useless or had too little to add to the experience. I beat Bg2 as a Bard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronzepoem Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Bard's would be cool, but they need that something to make them more useful. Or at least give the feeling of being useful. In Baldur's Gate II I always felt that bards were a little useless or had too little to add to the experience. I beat Bg2 as a Bard. Sword danner is a good chioce for BG2 solo. Her mind is Tiffany-twisted, She got the Mercedes Benz She's got a lot of pretty, pretty boys, that she calls friends How they dance in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat. Some dance to remember, some dance to forget Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sistergoldring Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) My two cents is why not? Paladins are a great class if you like to roleplay and Bards (although personally I absolutely suck at them - never made a good one yet) similarly have great potential for interesting backstories and characters. Depending on funding I'd love to see them both included in the game (I'd go for Paladin first - did I mention I'm total crap with bards) and as not much has been mentioned about subclasses yet I don't think there's any reason to think that they are completely off the table. Edited October 4, 2012 by Sistergoldring The Divine Marshmallow shall succour the souls of the Righteous with his sweetness while the Faithless writhe in the molten syrup of his wrath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOK222 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I posted this on another thread, I'm posting it here too. 3 Ka-ka-ka-ka-Cocaine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlux Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Paladins have always been my favorite class in the IE engine games and I demand that they are in the game! The paladin is in general a holy knight, crusading in the name of good and order and also has limited divine spellcasting options. This however does not mean that he cannot stray from his "lawful good" alignment. He might even fall and become an evil character, a fallen paladin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberarmy Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I only liked paladins for one reason. Holy Avengers! IWD 1&2 and BG2. As a long time P&P player i find paladins generic, boring and easly predictable at best. This is mainly our main GMs fault who is a paladin lover and often desings game around them ... Nothing is true, everything is permited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karranthain Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I'll just add this to the topic : I'd also add a Skald class - a warrior poet; a bard who can fight well. Various songs - of course, summoning mythical creatures, using war horns and greatswords. At least that's how I'd picture them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrashMan Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 DM and many players often intepret many of the rules (and aligment) too rigidly, thus basicly forcing paladin players to be...dull. 1 * YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Trethon Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Paladins? No, just no. There are already the Priest and Monk classes confirmed.....adding another righteous/religious class like the Paladin is a complete waste of time and resources. The Cipher class on the other hand is an absolutely brilliant bit of original class design that is new and amazing so they need to come up with more like it. Bards are just not that interesting really but I wouldn't mind if implemented. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lychee26 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 How are bards not interesting? You can have them use song to cast spells, which is already different from other classes. They can sing songs of war to bolster allies, sing songs of doom to weaken foes, and of course make loud noises to distract people. I find the act of using music to battle enemies to be highly satisfying... but maybe that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrashMan Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Cipher? Pfffft... They can't hold a candle to the awesome that is a PALADIN. 1 * YOU ARE A WRONGULARITY FROM WHICH NO RIGHT CAN ESCAPE! *Chuck Norris was wrong once - He thought HE made a mistake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCrash Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Paladins? No, just no. There are already the Priest and Monk classes confirmed.....adding another righteous/religious class like the Paladin is a complete waste of time and resources. The Cipher class on the other hand is an absolutely brilliant bit of original class design that is new and amazing so they need to come up with more like it. Bards are just not that interesting really but I wouldn't mind if implemented. A paladin is as little a priest as a cipher is a wizard..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaShard Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 Paladins? No, just no. There are already the Priest and Monk classes confirmed.....adding another righteous/religious class like the Paladin is a complete waste of time and resources. The Cipher class on the other hand is an absolutely brilliant bit of original class design that is new and amazing so they need to come up with more like it. Bards are just not that interesting really but I wouldn't mind if implemented. Cipher's are PE's version of Jedi, how is that new or original? I'm open to it, I just don't understand why we have to close the door on Paladins who are Crusaders of their cause, they don't have to be boring, or good even. Same with Bards I think they are a under utilized class. I get some people want to play a "grey character" and some want to play an evil one so why should I lose the ability to play a Good character the way I want to? Even it it is boring to someone else, it isn't to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majek Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Paladins and Bards as you people want them, can stay in D&D, no need for them here. Or if there are bards they can be what bards were, professional poets.Nothing else. And paladins are unnecessary when you have almighty clerics. 3 1.13 killed off Ja2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lychee26 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Well... if druids, rangers, monks, barbarians and ciphers(psionics) can be in the games I don't see why paladins and bards can't be in as well. What's wrong with more choices?? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now