well, i've finally had my hands on a copy of the player's handbook v3.5 (here in Europe was not so easy...) and, even if i like the changes to the ranger , i just can't believe what i read about the paladin.
it seems that the paladin can "summon" his warhorse directly from HEAVEN, a horse that will DISAPPEAR after 2 hour/lvl and REAPPEAR the day after fully healed and so on...
i was using the paladin as a default class for the KoS, but i don't think i can use THAT for a Dragonlance campaign...and actually, i don't think i will use it for any other campaign...
it seems that the level of strangeness in the game is raising dangerously...
just my two cents on the issue...
greetz
Effectively, paladins are extremely rare...rare enough to be considered legendary figures. In eras without gods, there are no paladins as they have no patron deity to call upon (although you could tweak a fighter/mystic multiclass to create a semi-similar substitute). When the gods are present, there are a few paladins of some of the gods of good, but most of the gods have much more specialized "holy warriors."
We'll be dealing more and more with the holy warriors of particular faiths as we move forward
Stay tuned.Christopher
Originally posted by Delazar
it seems that the paladin can "summon" his warhorse directly from HEAVEN, a horse that will DISAPPEAR after 2 hour/lvl and REAPPEAR the day after fully healed and so on...
This is actually a pretty good idea that stemmed from problems people were having with taking the warhorse into the dungeon. The revision means that the paladin calls his warhorse and it appears from its celestial home (which could mean anything - maybe it runs through the plains of Arborea, or perhaps it's composed of holy energy and merely manifests itself on the material plane when needed, etc) at which point the paladin has 2 hours/level with it. The ability doesn't appear until somewhere around 5th level, according to what I've read, which means it's available 10 hours a day to start with. That's plenty of time for a ride across country or a day's worth of campaigning against evil.
In my Birthright campaign, my wife's character wasa paladin of a Lawful Neutral deity of the sun and knowledge, Avani. Avani's paladins did not have normal warhorses, but axiomatic ones - creatures aligned with Law that were reflections of the Platonic ideal of the horse. As such it was perfectly proportioned, never got dirty, never needed food or water, and never seemed to tire. With this rule in 3.5, it makes even more sense, as the paladin will now be able to call it forth from the extraplanar "concept world" where such things dwelled and it would show up. I'm glad they went with it.
My 3.5 books are on order from Walmart.com, so I'm awaiting them eagerly.
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by Cam Banks
This is actually a pretty good idea that stemmed from problems people were having with taking the warhorse into the dungeon. The revision means that the paladin calls his warhorse and it appears from its celestial home.
I'd have to desperately agree that (though I haven't yet bought my 3.5 manuals) having a heavenly steed seems really wierd to me. If entering a dungeon, why couldn't a paladin be like every one else and say so long to his brave companion, let him lose and hope to pick him up at a nearby meadow or stable when he comes back out.
Anyway, I'm not one to make rules but seems to me there's a whole lot of potential for abuse here unless there is more detail around summoning the steed.
Example:
DM: "An Ogre Titan turns from the rest of the party and charges you (paladin) because you currently stand apart from the rest of the party and he sees you are terribly hurt."
Player: "I summon my warhorse in the middle of a tavern between me and the Ogre Titan, he'll either have to hack his way through the warhorse or go around... buying me seconds to yell 'Help!' to the rest of my party."
:fight!:
To quote a recent movie that comes to mind "Even a brave pony like Sam..."
-Gilles
Originally posted by Gilles Prefontaine
I'd have to desperately agree that (though I haven't yet bought my 3.5 manuals) having a heavenly steed seems really wierd to me. If entering a dungeon, why couldn't a paladin be like every one else and say so long to his brave companion, let him lose and hope to pick him up at a nearby meadow or stable when he comes back out.
Because that's no ordinary horse.
It's an agent of the paladin's deity or a symbol of the paladin's faith and commitment to a divine purpose. It's not like they can shop around in a horse market for a nice nag and saddle up and ride off and expect it to be a noble mount fated to serve its righteous master.But then I have a funny way of looking at these things.
Cheers,
Cam
I must say the summon mount ability in RevPaladin is definetely NOT my cup of tea. I can see why they changed it but it just warped the whole vibe of the class for me. It's no wonder that I'll be changing that for my home game. That's what's so great about RPGs.This has been said before but some more information might help. A lot of paladins would take riding feats. Yet a lot of adventures happened in dungeons. Horses won't go in a deep cave. So they tried to cut out the problem of spending a lot of time without access to your full abilities. I don't know if it is the best solution and it likely doesn't work for all settings.
Imagine how terrifying it would be to sack a Paladin's stronghold now (not on Krynn of course). Basically, it would involve sallying forth with their summoned mounts for shock attacks on horseback, and retreating back to the stronghold. Since you don't have to feed or heal any horses, it's a distinct advantage.
Originally posted by Gilles Prefontaine
I'd have to desperately agree that (though I haven't yet bought my 3.5 manuals) having a heavenly steed seems really wierd to me. If entering a dungeon, why couldn't a paladin be like every one else and say so long to his brave companion, let him lose and hope to pick him up at a nearby meadow or stable when he comes back out.
Horses are a very valuable commodity, and you don't just let one run free, hoping you can catch up with it later (provided nobody else has picked it up). At one point, horses were the equivalent of cars today, both as transportation and in terms of cost (meaning they aren't cheap).
More than likely, a good paladin who cares for his steed would tie him up as he took on the dungeon and its denizens. Or, he would have found a way to take care of the horse.
I can see how the spiritual warhorse would be beneficial to a paladin. I can also understand the desire to keep with a more traditional outlook. I think both ideas are cool.
Just go with whatever works for you. Like Richard said, you can do whatever you want in your games.
Seriously though I'm not sure that I like the idea. Its an interesting idea though.
Player: I spur Thunder onward, charging at the foul Chemoshan high priest!
DM: Ok. You're 10 feet away from the priest when your horse suddenly crashes into something and tosses you forward like a rag doll. The Chemoshan stares down at you gleefully.
Has the System Reference Document been updated yet?
Originally posted by Eidolon
I brought up a strange interplay in the Unanswered Questions thread. The spell magic circle against good/law keeps the called mount at bay -- at least currently -- so the following situation becomes possible:
Player: I spur Thunder onward, charging at the foul Chemoshan high priest!
DM: Ok. You're 10 feet away from the priest when your horse suddenly crashes into something and tosses you forward like a rag doll. The Chemoshan stares down at you gleefully.
Nope, because the magic circle against good/law is a ward, not an invisible sheild. It just doesn't want to go in the circle. So it would rear up and refuse to go forward, but it wouldn't "crash".
Even if it was a wall, the Paladin should get a ride check to stay in saddle. ;)
Originally posted by ferratus
Nope, because the magic circle against good/law is a ward, not an invisible sheild. It just doesn't want to go in the circle. So it would rear up and refuse to go forward, but it wouldn't "crash".
Even if it was a wall, the Paladin should get a ride check to stay in saddle. ;)
The "crash" was more for effect - I'd give a Ride check as well, but magic circle stops the horse regardless, and a number of demons/devils have the spell.
Originally posted by Gilles Prefontaine
To quote a recent movie that comes to mind "Even a brave pony like Sam..."
Sam's pony is named Bill.
Right now, I'm not ready to upgrade my D&D rules to 3.5e, and having the DLCS 3.5e-compatible is a good enough incentive to get 3.5e immediately. Does the book have useful guidelines to use DLCS with previous edition rules?
originally posted by Dragonhelm
Horses are a very valuable commodity, and you don't just let one run free, hoping you can catch up with it later (provided nobody else has picked it up). At one point, horses were the equivalent of cars today, both as transportation and in terms of cost (meaning they aren't cheap).
That is what henchmen/lackeys/squires are for.
The group rides to the dungeon/cave entrance. The paladin dismounts and hands the reins of his mount over to his trusted henchman stating, "Meet me here in a fortnight when the sun is in mid-sky."
To me, it just makes it too convenient to have "POOF, now it is here and POOF now it is gone." The paladin is a spiritual character not a mystical one.
I have not seen the books, but this is one rule that I am not adopting. :sad:
Originally posted by Maladaar
To me, it just makes it too convenient to have "POOF, now it is here and POOF now it is gone." The paladin is a spiritual character not a mystical one.
Going to get rid of the spells, the aura of courage, immunity to disease, laying of hands, remove disease, saving throw bonuses, undead turning, and smiting of evil? Because all of that's pretty mystical. Granted, some of these aren't as overt as having your horse appear out of nowhere, but then having divine servants manifest before you at your call is very Old Testament.
Cheers,
Cam
The things you listed that the paladin can do comes from divine power, much like the cleric. To me, having the mount appear and disappear takes away from the appeal of having a bond with the mount.
I prefer to think of the mount as a creature sent by the divine power to aid the paladin. That does not mean that it cannot be from the same plane as the paladin. I think that WotC is just trying to help the people that complained about not knowing what to do with their mount during a dungeon crawl. Well... that is where roleplaying comes in...
Originally posted by Maladaar
The things you listed that the paladin can do comes from divine power, much like the cleric. To me, having the mount appear and disappear takes away from the appeal of having a bond with the mount.
That's perfectly fine, and it won't "ruin" your experience of 3.5 to keep it how it was. What I did want to get across was that the notion of a paladin having the ability to call a divine servant to aid him is not outside the realm of the existing powers he demonstrates. There's a variant rule for summon monster which treats the summoned creature as the same specific individual each time it is summoned - if you summon a celestial lion, it's the same celestial lion as the last time. The paladin's mount is an extension of this concept of an extraplanar ally.
Cheers,
Cam
I am sorry if I gave the impression that I thought it would ruin 3.5 for me. That is hardly the case, most of what I have seen of the changes I am glad to see. It is just that most of the players in my group prefer to keep the paladin's mount as is, which I happen to agree with.
I was just trying to state some of the reasons that I prefer the mount in its previous existence.
I can also see your point especially since you point out the variant summon monster.