I found out the excerpt of Paladin.
http://media.wizards.com/downloads/dnd/Excerpt_PHB_1_20140729.pdf
Prepare yourself for another LG Paladin flame war! Hide your family! Flee! Its not safe here!
Looks like things haven't really changed much from the playtest.
Not sure why they feel the need to call paladins out as being super rare anymore. It feels like they're the Force of Nature to the fighter's Grizzly Bear.
Except for the sworn to take vengeance part, the rest of them describe the good old Lawful Good Paladin of D&D. Why in the hell do they need to break up the one concept into so many different ones?
Lame.
I don't know exactly how I feel about folding avenger and warden into the paladin, but it is better than not having wardens or avengers at all. I want to see the sacred oath features, dammit 
And their spell list. I hope they get some unique spells, not just nerfed cleric or wizard spells.
Did we have actual confirmation before this that the 1/2 casters don't get Cantrips or spellcasting until 2nd level?
seti wrote:
DemoMonkey wrote:
DemoMonkey wrote:
REALLY love the role play idea of playing an alignment that doesn't quite fit with your oath. Trying to overcome your base human nature to attain that higher holiness will make for some awesome RP oppurtunity.
I am so excited. Paladins are my favorite class. 
(Please don't turn this into an alignment flame thread. Please please please pretty please?)
I really like how they mention that you should already know and understand your oath at level 1, even though it doesn't start giving you class features until level 3.
And there's nothing that says Lawful Good liek donning a black cloak and sneaking in to an orc encampment during
the dead of night to start killing them with extreme prejudice.
Gunthar wrote:
Last year, DC Comics did a "Villain Month" where all their comics starred villains. It was an interesting experiment, but didn't go too well because it just ended up pointing out some of the more... problematic... implications of the list of villainous origin stories DC used. Like the fact that about half the issues had the plot "Person is abused, turns evil."
D&D has a half-orc as the giant image on the first page of the Paladin class section.
I love D&D so very much.
I wish I could see one more page so I could create my favorite old paladin, Lance Goodthrust.
iserith wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
Qmark wrote:
I like the bit about "your oath might represent standards of behavior you have not yet attained." I will be curious to see what sacred oath benefits are for wardens.
I love what they've done with the paladin. Instead of enforcing a specific alignment, they've baked the ideals that Lawful Good represents into the concept of the class itself:
- Paladins are"united by their oaths to stand against the forces of evil."
- They swear "to uphold justice and righteousness, to stand with the good things of the world against the encroaching darkness, and to hunt the forces of evil wherever they lurk."
- They have the "power to heal the sick and injured, to smite the wicked and the undead, and to protect the innocent ..."
- "Every paladin lives on the front lines of the cosmic struggle against evil."
- They abandon their former occupations to "take up arms to fight evil."
- A paladin might be a "devoted servant of good", a "glorious champion of the light", or an "embittered loner sworn to take vengeance on those who have done great evil ...".
- Paladins are "guardians against the forces of wickedness ...". Most "walk the paths of charity and justice."
It's almost like they're encouraging people to choose an alignment other than Lawful Good so that you can give your character a bit of internal conflict. As long as you are fighting evil, it doesn't matter what your own alignment is. You could be like Dexter or the Punisher ~ a bad guy who does bad things to bad people in the name of the greater good. LOL. Great stuff.
I think this might go some way to explaining why blackguards are in the DMG, while drow, tieflings, assassins and necromancers are in the PHB. Drow and tieflings can be good, or they can want to be good, and assassins and necromancers can ostensibly use their nefarious powers for the greater good. They can be anti-heroes. A blackguard, on the other hand, isn't an anti-hero. They're the opposite of heroes. They're fundamentally opposed to good, just like a paladin is fundamentally opposed to evil, no matter what an individual's alignment is. Think Vader (blackguard) vs Luke (paladin) here.
That being said, I can't think of any good reason to relegate the cleric's Death domain to the DMG. If necromancers can be in the PHB, then so can clerics of the death gods, especially since many of them oppose the goals of necromancers in the first place (what with undeath being a way to cheat the death gods of their due and all).
My playtest paladin can heave a sigh of relief. His prayers have been answered and he's good to go. I'm pleased too, it would be a shame to waste his 106 page backstory ...
Mephi1234 wrote:
I can't unsee the cropping of the characters on these pages.
i like the background more then the half-orc Paladin of Torm, the shield just looks so ugly and elven.
Teggerdine wrote:
ShadoWWW wrote:
Orzel wrote:
Orzel wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
To me the large elipsoide jewel and gold work with the embelished points looks like some of the art work for elven made objects in previous editions, most notably 3.5. Also Skyrim elven shields and
Some style simularity.
The rest of the Orcs armor is actually nice.
More than anything else it is the fact that the image of the paladin wasn't blended into the scene. Look closely and you will see rough edges.
Teggerdine wrote:
Well, then the artist must play alot of WFB, just like I do. 
Images tend to run together.
For me the shield isn't very attractive, but anyone else can go ahead and like it. The 5e Paladin is awesome either way.
The half-orc Paladin doesn't meld into the scene because he originally had a blank-backdrop, much like the Half-elf Bard from the earlier reveal. On the Bard-artist's deviant-art page, he said that the artists who did the character art were asked to have no backdrops so that the art could be pasted in however the final book designers wanted.
You have a discerning eye to see that they don't match. Another example of this happening is the Hafling Art on the new website. you may notice a different backdrop on two different pages for the Hafling race.
Marandahir wrote:
TiaNadiezja wrote:
Without having read the paladin exceprt, is it just me or is that paladin a goblinoid, possibly a bugbear?
Also, I love that the went this route rather than just making saying that a Guardian is an LG paladin, an Avenger is a LN paladin, Blackguard is LE, etc. ALL paladins are dedicated to fighting evil and defending good, and the subclasses focus on different aspects of that. I also agree that it's good to have a distinction between their oaths and their personal alignment or beliefs. I love paladins who just want to kick the crap out of some evil without all the pious babbling, kind of like that Orc dude in the picture.
P.S., we're like 4/4 on these class samples showing characters that look (1) badass, (2) iconic, and yet (3) distinctive enough to have their own spice. Not only the class/race combo, but also the expression, the jewelry, and the style of clothing and armor all combine to make this an intriguing character. The creepy warlock girl was my favorite, but the androgynous bard manages some great rock star swagger and the sorcerer looks like his blood is really boiling with ancient magic. Man do I want this book!
MechaPilot wrote:
XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Ah.... my favorite class by far....
To be a player, just for a day even. I can dream.
Besides....
Dang, whippersnappers of today, what do they know of being a Holy Knight... Couldn't roleplay as the paper bag... much less their way out of it.
Mephi1234 wrote:
Oh my. If only I had a chance to be a player, the Paladin/avenger would be my immediate choice. Can't wait to see the full rules!
I'm sad we have no cha ladies. And no way to turn our attacks into radiant damage. And no divine sanction. Those would have made for an interesting paladin.
I guess es so can always homebrew a "crusader".
Lawolf wrote:
I too found it very interesting that for all the hype of paladins of any alignment a la 4E they intenionally baked in the overwhelming aspect of good instead of law or law + good. No real mention of evil or neutral deities. No real mention of holy warrior concept compared to a cleric (who was the orignal holy warrior). Its more like you can be superman (LG Paladin), Batman (NG Paladin) or Green Arrow (CG Paladin). Very cool. I like it.
Saelorn wrote:
Flavor text is really strong. I also like this art better than the Warlock, even though it's a little bit WoW.
THEMNGMNT wrote:
I'm glad that paladins aren't required to be any particular alignment, and I like how it mentions that your oath can represent standards of behavior that you haven't yet attained. I am a bit disappointed that they didn't include the blackguard, though.
I also just noticed that paladins get an extra attack at 5th level now, instead of 8th, but they never get a 3rd or 4th attack. Interesting. I'm guessing that the paladin's spells are supposed to make up for the loss of 2 attacks compared to the fighter?
FallingIcicle wrote:
FallingIcicle wrote:
I didn't know half-orcs got x-ray vision allowing them to see through ridiculous shoulder armor like the one in the picture must be doing.
I understand the extremely large weight they put on plate armor now. Even with all the savings of having absolutely no head protection, having 15 pounds of metal to protect each shoulder really cranks up the overall weight.
Sturmunddrang wrote:
Marandahir wrote:
I mostly like it, but I dearly wish that they had done a better job at depicting the armor. Ugh...
WhiteHarness wrote:
Saelorn wrote:
Sturmunddrang wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Cennedi wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Sturmunddrang wrote:
Does it look like paladin save proficiencies are going to be strength and charisma because that's too weak saves? Is that because they will get a bonus to all saves?
pauln6 wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
So what does the fighter get that the paladin does not?
GladiusLegis wrote:
Daganev wrote:
masterfat78 wrote:
thespaceinvader wrote:
Daganev wrote:
From what I can tell, the Paladin gets the same subclass abilities as the fighter, through spells (unless there are major changes from the playtest and all the smites are removed)
Daganev wrote:
TiaNadiezja wrote:
Daganev wrote:
iserith wrote:
And they were doing such a good job on the art as well. Did they use all of the good art on the covers? Armor looks bad. Less cheese more of this please.
or this
Is it that hard to draw armor?
Daganev wrote:
Ashrym wrote:
TiaNadiezja wrote:
Daganev wrote:
TiaNadiezja wrote:
Daganev wrote:
Three pages in and the paladin thread is yet to derail or fall into a playstyle flamewar. It's like some sort of divine aura protects this thread.
Once we get Ranger, we can really compare notes on the Fighter v. Other Marital and Ranger & Paladin half-caster features.
I for one am glad wis was dropped as a pally stat. Way too mad in all other editions.
I like that they used a Half-Orc.
The art still seems rather poor, however. The paladin is lacking a forehead. I know Half-Orcs are not noted for their intelligence, but they do need to have some small frontal lobes for at least basic brain function.
Seeing as Paladin, Avenger, and Warden were my three favorite classes in 4e, looks like I'll become very familiar with every aspect of this class in 5e.
Though, I may switch my Avenger character over to the Shadow Monk if I ever play him. I'll have to see how well a Dex-based, Light Armor Paladin works, and if I can replicate the "I can jump all over the battlefield to get you" feel of the Pursuit Avenger.
pauln6 wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Saelorn wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
TiaNadiezja wrote:
Backlash3906 wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
ClockworkNecktie wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
I much prefer the fact that spell saves are based on the type of spell they are.... With that being said, I would much prefer to see Charisma Saves for enchantment (charm) spells and effects, as these spells attack your sense of self, which is represented by Charisma. I do see how Wisdom could also be used to represent your innate willpower, but honestly - this screams Charisma under the 6-save mechanic.
I understand why they kept it Will (aka Wisdom) based however, as it simplifies the amount of memorization required in order to know what saving throw to roll vs. what spell.
Sorry if I missed it, but are there stat minimums for the specialty classes anymore. Didn't see it in the 'quick build' section. Interesting if D&D is no longer requiring minimums for Paladin, Ranger, etc.
Sorry if I am a couple of editions behind.
basilbur wrote:
On a different note, I read some where that in the Alpha PHB leak the Paladin had proficency in Wisdom saving throws rather then Constitution. Has there been word that Paladin saving throw proficinecies will be reverted back to Con and Cha?
Teggerdine wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
Teggerdine wrote:
It is more beneficial to have a Wis save than a Con save.
If you take the feat that gives you +1 to a stat and proficiency in saves with that stat, Con is more valuable than Wisdom.
So the paladin is better off getting Wisdom from class and picking up proficiency in Con saves with a feat. The paladin has very little use for Wisdom as their Charisma bonus is added to all saving throws.
Zardnaar wrote:
Saelorn wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
Saelorn wrote:
Teggerdine wrote:
It means you add your proficiency bonus to saving throws with that proficiency. In 5e the dev's streamlined the various systems into a single mechanic - a proficiency bonus. This bonus is identical for all characters of a given character level, but is added to different things dependant upon what the character has proficiency in. For the most part, characters roll 1d20+Abil Modifier when making most checks. If they are proficient, they roll 1d20 + Abil Modifier + proficiency bonus instead.
Hope this helps
basilbur wrote:
basilbur wrote:
Ah, Cool, I like it.
I assume that there are skills as well?
If you are proficient in a skill it works the same way? d20+atttribute modifier+proficiency mod?
basilbur wrote:
Cennedi wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
Actually .... Now that you mention Austin Powers .....
From the description of the Dwarf Paladin in the sample page, I could see James Bond being a Paladin. Not sure about the Lawful Good thing though...
Are Paladins still required to be LG?
Nope. Any alignment although usually lawful and/or good
basilbur wrote:
Then this means that James Bond is totally a Paladin. Hmmmmm. Hmmmmm. Things that make you go 'Hmmmmmm."
The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
pukunui wrote:
animea90 wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
animea90 wrote:
I would say Bond is LN (with chaotic tendencies).
The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
Now I can create my Tiefling Paladin. +2 Prof bonus help with Low max str at level 1...
Talos_Dragon wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
animea90 wrote:
CVB wrote:
h347h50 wrote: