Two Paladins In The Same Party? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Two Paladins In The Same Party?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
lolthworshiper
Jun 02, 2009 7:35:39 My group and I just finished our characters for our upcoming games. The group is a rogue, a cleric, a druid, and two paladins. Is this a decent group? The only problem I can for see is that the two paladins, although very strong characters, could be a problem...I was thinking of adding a bard to the mix instead of my paladin. Do you think that a bard would be a good addition to this group? Should it be another warrior class..such as a fighter or monk? 3.0 D&D if you are wondering. Just a question...would like to know how the feelings are out there about two paladins in the same group. If anyone has been in a group with two paladins...I would like to hear how it turned out...Any insight would be helpful...thanks
#2
entropy_judge
Jun 02, 2009 7:53:15 I don't see why two paladins would cause problems - if the group can handle one paladin, it should be able to handle multiple paladins.
#3
kouk
Jun 02, 2009 7:57:08 If you're the same faith, then you have sort of a theme going. If you're different but compatible faiths, you have lots of RP for philosophical discussions.

Depending how you play the paladins it might be suffocating to the rest of the group though. If champions of order and goodness isn't their thing, they won't be too happy following along with two paladins that stick together on issues. But then, just one paladin would be too much in that case anyhow.

Bards always make good fifth wheels though.

EDIT: I'm not sure if this is totally 3.0 compatible, but you might try one of you being a Paladin of Freedom: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#paladinVariantsFreedomSlaughterAndTyranny

Could make for more difference between PCs and more fun, if you don't kill each other.
#4
gargs454
Jun 02, 2009 14:14:10 Two paladins will not be a problem in and of themselves. As others have said, some players hate paladins in the party because of their "Holier than thou" attitudes, but from a balance standpoint, there really isn't an issue.

As for what else to play, the short answer is nothing. You should play the character that you really want to play and worry about the balance, etc. later. Otherwise, I would suggest either the aformentioned bard, or perhaps a wizard just to cover the arcane side of things. Though even that really isn't necessary because of wands, scrolls, and multiclassing possibilities.

Your group will be fine as it is, its just a matter of what you want to play at this point. Just be leery of enemy wizards. :p
#5
Novacat
Jun 02, 2009 16:07:35 Two paladins are no more likely to conflict with each other thematically than two clerics or two wizards. It's important to remember that paladins are not Lawful Stupid crusaders of smiting all that isn't holier than Baby Jesus' tears. They're normal people now, capable of sinning without becoming worthless, making them more human in a way. A paladin can get along with another paladin, even one of another deity, so long as their philosophies don't clash too hard. They're also not likely to try to dictate the every move of their companions, as was the tendency in previous editions when part of their code prohibited the tolerance of everything deemed less than perfect.

Mechanically, however, you may be stepping on each other's toes a bit, but no more so than any two defenders. Since a creature can only be marked by one enemy at a time, you can't both mark the same enemy, and you two should establish your own protocol for who marks who in battle, and be careful not to override each other's marks unless asked to do so.

Two defenders in a party is not a bad thing, especially if you learn to take full advantage of it. Having one paladin be the exclusive defender for a while, then switching off when he's injured isn't a bad way to keep a strong front on your party's battle lines. The ability to defend equally against two monsters at once will make your squishies more secure, allowing them to do their jobs with less hinderance.
#6
gargs454
Jun 02, 2009 17:16:18 @ Nova: He's playing 3.0, not 4th Ed., just for reference.
#7
Novacat
Jun 02, 2009 21:14:04
@ Nova: He's playing 3.0, not 4th Ed., just for reference.

Oh, I missed that. Consider my post completely irrelevant, then.
#8
MrCustomer
Jun 03, 2009 0:21:54 2 Paladins go together well enough, I don't see a huge issue with your group, except from an Rping problem with the rest of thre party. As said before if the Paladins play holier then though and band together on issues where the rest of the party would rather not, then there will be conflict. Make sure that the party is compatible with Paladins and that the Paladins aren't Lawful Stupid.

Other ideas are too diverge on your paladin's focus from each other. Choose feats etc that are different conceptually, and perhaps choose a different race and deity then the other paladin (that way they aren't so joined at the hip) Check out Complete Arcane, it has alternative starting abilities for classes, drop Turn Undead for Divine Counterspell, if one focuses on solving problems with a Detect Evil/Smite Evil approach then the other should try more diplomatic approaches.
#9
gargs454
Jun 03, 2009 6:44:30
Oh, I missed that. Consider my post completely irrelevant, then.

Eh, its still relevant for when they switch to 4th Ed. :p

Even the "Holier than thou" elements can at times lead to fun. While not exactly the same thing, in a recent game we had a rogue who (ironically enough) was the party conscience. When a group of known "bad guys" entered the tavern but were otherwise minding their own, some members of the party wanted to start a bar fight with them by provoking them. The rogue shook her head and decided to go off and scout the town. When she came back and found that one of the bad guys was in fact a demon of some sort (that had since been destroyed) she chuckled and said "Hmm maybe I coulda stayed around after all."

It all depends on your group and their ability to separate character disputes from player disputes. There's nothing wrong with the characters occasionally getting into a dispute so long as your group is mature enough to leave it in character and not let it spill over into rl.
#10
Man_in_the_Funny_Hat
Jun 03, 2009 15:59:04 I'd say that two paladins is actually better than one for at least one reason - the DM is vastly less likely to focus on roleplaying/alignment traps since he would need to be screwing with both characters at once.

The difficulty with paladins is seldom how the player runs them, or even the restrictions they must abide with, but how the DM handles alignment and how too many DM's seem to pointlessly obsess about getting paladins to FALL at the earliest opportunity when they don't do anything even close to that with any other class. With two paladins in the party the DM will simply take it as read that the two paladins are secure in their faith and commitment to their alignment rather than try to trick or bully both of them into otherwise undesired roleplaying territory.
#11
toryn
Jun 04, 2009 15:22:16
"Hello...I am the righteous sword of the Mac"

"...And I am the Avenging Fist of the PC"

"Heathen!"

"Infidel!"

*FIGHT!FIGHT!STAB!FIGHT!SLASH!BLEED!PANT!MAKE OUT!*

"Hi...It's me...the Acer that runs on Linux...I brought salmon dip!"

"Kill it!"
"Death to the heretic!"

LOL!!!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 lolthworshiper Jun 02, 2009 7:35:39	My group and I just finished our characters for our upcoming games. The group is a rogue, a cleric, a druid, and two paladins. Is this a decent group? The only problem I can for see is that the two paladins, although very strong characters, could be a problem...I was thinking of adding a bard to the mix instead of my paladin. Do you think that a bard would be a good addition to this group? Should it be another warrior class..such as a fighter or monk? 3.0 D&D if you are wondering. Just a question...would like to know how the feelings are out there about two paladins in the same group. If anyone has been in a group with two paladins...I would like to hear how it turned out...Any insight would be helpful...thanks
#2 entropy_judge Jun 02, 2009 7:53:15	I don't see why two paladins would cause problems - if the group can handle one paladin, it should be able to handle multiple paladins.
#3 kouk Jun 02, 2009 7:57:08	If you're the same faith, then you have sort of a theme going. If you're different but compatible faiths, you have lots of RP for philosophical discussions. Depending how you play the paladins it might be suffocating to the rest of the group though. If champions of order and goodness isn't their thing, they won't be too happy following along with two paladins that stick together on issues. But then, just one paladin would be too much in that case anyhow. Bards always make good fifth wheels though. EDIT: I'm not sure if this is totally 3.0 compatible, but you might try one of you being a Paladin of Freedom: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#paladinVariantsFreedomSlaughterAndTyranny Could make for more difference between PCs and more fun, if you don't kill each other.
#4 gargs454 Jun 02, 2009 14:14:10	Two paladins will not be a problem in and of themselves. As others have said, some players hate paladins in the party because of their "Holier than thou" attitudes, but from a balance standpoint, there really isn't an issue. As for what else to play, the short answer is nothing. You should play the character that you really want to play and worry about the balance, etc. later. Otherwise, I would suggest either the aformentioned bard, or perhaps a wizard just to cover the arcane side of things. Though even that really isn't necessary because of wands, scrolls, and multiclassing possibilities. Your group will be fine as it is, its just a matter of what you want to play at this point. Just be leery of enemy wizards. :p
#5 Novacat Jun 02, 2009 16:07:35	Two paladins are no more likely to conflict with each other thematically than two clerics or two wizards. It's important to remember that paladins are not Lawful Stupid crusaders of smiting all that isn't holier than Baby Jesus' tears. They're normal people now, capable of sinning without becoming worthless, making them more human in a way. A paladin can get along with another paladin, even one of another deity, so long as their philosophies don't clash too hard. They're also not likely to try to dictate the every move of their companions, as was the tendency in previous editions when part of their code prohibited the tolerance of everything deemed less than perfect. Mechanically, however, you may be stepping on each other's toes a bit, but no more so than any two defenders. Since a creature can only be marked by one enemy at a time, you can't both mark the same enemy, and you two should establish your own protocol for who marks who in battle, and be careful not to override each other's marks unless asked to do so. Two defenders in a party is not a bad thing, especially if you learn to take full advantage of it. Having one paladin be the exclusive defender for a while, then switching off when he's injured isn't a bad way to keep a strong front on your party's battle lines. The ability to defend equally against two monsters at once will make your squishies more secure, allowing them to do their jobs with less hinderance.
#6 gargs454 Jun 02, 2009 17:16:18	@ Nova: He's playing 3.0, not 4th Ed., just for reference.
#7 Novacat Jun 02, 2009 21:14:04	@ Nova: He's playing 3.0, not 4th Ed., just for reference. Oh, I missed that. Consider my post completely irrelevant, then.
#8 MrCustomer Jun 03, 2009 0:21:54	2 Paladins go together well enough, I don't see a huge issue with your group, except from an Rping problem with the rest of thre party. As said before if the Paladins play holier then though and band together on issues where the rest of the party would rather not, then there will be conflict. Make sure that the party is compatible with Paladins and that the Paladins aren't Lawful Stupid. Other ideas are too diverge on your paladin's focus from each other. Choose feats etc that are different conceptually, and perhaps choose a different race and deity then the other paladin (that way they aren't so joined at the hip) Check out Complete Arcane, it has alternative starting abilities for classes, drop Turn Undead for Divine Counterspell, if one focuses on solving problems with a Detect Evil/Smite Evil approach then the other should try more diplomatic approaches.
#9 gargs454 Jun 03, 2009 6:44:30	Oh, I missed that. Consider my post completely irrelevant, then. Eh, its still relevant for when they switch to 4th Ed. :p Even the "Holier than thou" elements can at times lead to fun. While not exactly the same thing, in a recent game we had a rogue who (ironically enough) was the party conscience. When a group of known "bad guys" entered the tavern but were otherwise minding their own, some members of the party wanted to start a bar fight with them by provoking them. The rogue shook her head and decided to go off and scout the town. When she came back and found that one of the bad guys was in fact a demon of some sort (that had since been destroyed) she chuckled and said "Hmm maybe I coulda stayed around after all." It all depends on your group and their ability to separate character disputes from player disputes. There's nothing wrong with the characters occasionally getting into a dispute so long as your group is mature enough to leave it in character and not let it spill over into rl.
#10 Man_in_the_Funny_Hat Jun 03, 2009 15:59:04	I'd say that two paladins is actually better than one for at least one reason - the DM is vastly less likely to focus on roleplaying/alignment traps since he would need to be screwing with both characters at once. The difficulty with paladins is seldom how the player runs them, or even the restrictions they must abide with, but how the DM handles alignment and how too many DM's seem to pointlessly obsess about getting paladins to FALL at the earliest opportunity when they don't do anything even close to that with any other class. With two paladins in the party the DM will simply take it as read that the two paladins are secure in their faith and commitment to their alignment rather than try to trick or bully both of them into otherwise undesired roleplaying territory.
#11 toryn Jun 04, 2009 15:22:16	"Hello...I am the righteous sword of the Mac" "...And I am the Avenging Fist of the PC" "Heathen!" "Infidel!" FIGHT!FIGHT!STAB!FIGHT!SLASH!BLEED!PANT!MAKE OUT! "Hi...It's me...the Acer that runs on Linux...I brought salmon dip!" "Kill it!" "Death to the heretic!" LOL!!!