Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Any D&D/D20

Shadowrun

World of Darkness

Palladium

Other (feel free to post about it)

[My Name is Immaterial]

Quote the actual rule to that asshole and tell him that people on the internet don't like him.

What's his name? Dave?
Dave, you're a dumbass.

(Sorry to all non-dumbass Daves out there.)

[Flying Dice]

Spoiler: thesituation.jpg (click to show/hide)

[highmax28]

His name is Dakota.

And I don't know why he said that... The character is awful in my opinion though, as he's the only front line fighter and his HP is lower than it should be for a ranger. Throw in every stat I had at level 8 was 12 except for str and dex, which was 19/18, it wasn't going to end well for this guy...

[My Name is Immaterial]

Dakota, you're a dumbass.

[GiglameshDespair]

storyline wise, I would stay dead.

"It's such a shame X isn't with us anymore."
"I'm standing right here."

This part is the part that made me go 'what?' the most. So you'd just... stop being relevant to the plot?

[highmax28]

He fulfilled what he wanted to do in life, but at the same time, I really like this guy, despite him sucking really badly.

I have a week or two to prepare, plus it's going to be horror based...

[Neonivek]

Huh... so apparently all the issues I've been having conceptually with the Anti-paladin is moot since honestly even the creators of DND have issues with the Anti-paladin.

I still say they are a ridiculous class.

But I like that I am more well versed with the sort of poor idea of making equivalents some of the time. That Good is Evil, Evil is Good, and the only difference is their motivations.

It reminds me of when I wanted a Chaotic Monk, but when I thought of it I obviously was thinking of something that would be drastically different (because obviously... One cannot withdraw from the inner mastery and still even remotely be a monk) rather then just say "Ohh yeah, it is just the monk except chaotic".

While the Anti-Paladin is the opposite of a Paladin in everyway... but somehow still has the same powers and abilities colored black without any of the real features that actually made Paladin special.

So an Anti-Paladin isn't really devout (as is the nature of chaos) but has the benefit of being devout. Doesn't believe in anyone but himself (yet has the power of protection).

Basically the way to become an Anti-Paladin is to become such a monumental ass that a Dark Deity basically hands you the Paladin's powers except against good.

Though I also found out that my initial issue with the Anti-Paladin of "Not really being able to fit in normal society" is kept. They are not allowed to be secretly evil (as befitting the champions of evil)

[Rolan7]

... Anti-paladin?  *Googles*
Okay dandwiki has a thing, and it claims it's core (how unusual, since people so commonly post irrelevant homebrew there for existing classes), and it's *almost* identical to the "paladin of tyranny".  Though the aura is different, but whatever, it's dandwiki.

So it's probably another name for the paladin of slaughter, one of the 3 variant paladins in core.

@Neonivek Could you expand on what issues Wizards have with anti-paladins?

Personally I don't mind the paladin variants at all.  A paladin, to me, is just someone who follows a code to excess.  The Lawful evil paladin (the "anti-paladin", as some apparently call it) makes just as much sense as the default lawful good.  The chaotic variants, slaughter and freedom, are a bit more iffy...  But they still work for me.

Because I see paladins as people who dedicate themselves to the four cardinal forces which vie for influence over the material plane.  The opposite of druids, who champion the material plane itself.  It's perfectly possible to be zealously chaotic.
_{just look at libertarians}

As someone who most identified with their druid character, I welcomed the existence of paladins in the world.  And cultists of Asmodeus who were practically anti-paladins.  They opposed the natural order, but they mostly opposed each other (;

[Rolan7]

It reminds me of when I wanted a Chaotic Monk, but when I thought of it I obviously was thinking of something that would be drastically different (because obviously... One cannot withdraw from the inner mastery and still even remotely be a monk) rather then just say "Ohh yeah, it is just the monk except chaotic".

Complete Warrior (I think) had a pugilist or brawler class which was basically an alignment-unlocked scummy monk.  Since monks do punch, of course, but primarily they're supposed to be about discipline and purity.

While the Anti-Paladin is the opposite of a Paladin in everyway... but somehow still has the same powers and abilities colored black without any of the real features that actually made Paladin special.

So an Anti-Paladin isn't really devout (as is the nature of chaos) but has the benefit of being devout. Doesn't believe in anyone but himself (yet has the power of protection).

Oh, you're talking about paladins of slaughter (Chaotic Evil).  Yeah they're... probably the iffiest variant, I agree.  But, he doesn't protect others:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm
Rather he weakens their defenses.  Tear down the walls.  STRIP THE FLESH, SALT THE WOUNDS! /borderlands

Basically the way to become an Anti-Paladin is to become such a monumental ass that a Dark Deity basically hands you the Paladin's powers except against good.

Personally I feel like paladins in particular should/can draw from the primal alignment forces instead of a god.  Technically clerics can do so, but paladins are even more alignment-centric.

Though I also found out that my initial issue with the Anti-Paladin of "Not really being able to fit in normal society" is kept. They are not allowed to be secretly evil (as befitting the champions of evil)

Yeaaaah, the codes of the evil paladin variants are pretty awkward to work around.  Even worse than the default LG paladin's.

[NullForceOmega]

Nope Rolan, anti-paladins are a thing since 3.0 (and kinda before, but not really), they were initially a prestige class, then WotC decided to make them a main class (oh how I hate the class bloat.)

[Neonivek]

Their original issue with Anti-Paladins is that basically one cannot mirror a Paladin and have it be an equal, as that cheapens the concept of Paladin.

It is kind of easy to see because while yes, Paladins are champions of good... The way they embody virtue is their source of power... and While Evil can be powerful, intensely so, they are not powerful because they are so evil... They are more endless then black.

Paladins are supposed to be unique.

Not that Champions of Evil cannot exist, but that they aren't simply mirrors. (And frankly I agree...)

Yet oddly Adnd printed probably the best written Anti-Paladin of all the editions... Simply because while it is a flip of a Paladin, they put a LOT more work into it then even Pathfinder did with its total nonsense.

Heck it is why Clerics bug me because Clerics are so custom tailored to good deities that it makes me wish there was an evil Cultist class.

---

Yeaaaah, the codes of the evil paladin variants are pretty awkward to work around.  Even worse than the default LG paladin's.

Honestly I don't think the Lawful Good Paladin is that bad, especially if you understand the setting. Paladins are not the people you have huddling in cities trying to route out mildishly evil people. They are in the front lines.

Yet many a time they kind of bordered on NPC. Since having a party that can have a Paladin is frankly not that hard, but it does limit what the party can do and you usually have one person who wants to play a neutral Rogue.

Don't get me wrong it can be tough to play a Paladin, but the more I read the more that is the point. A Paladin isn't an easy class to be. It isn't easy to be the shining beacon of law and goodness. They are the people who have the courage to stand up and say that they won't compromise.

Heck I don't even like "Freedom Paladins" or other Paladins. Paladins are literally just fighting Clerics now.

Nope Rolan, anti-paladins are a thing since 3.0 (and kinda before, but not really), they were initially a prestige class, then WotC decided to make them a main class (oh how I hate the class bloat.)

Since Adnd

[Rolan7]

Nope Rolan, anti-paladins are a thing since 3.0 (and kinda before, but not really), they were initially a prestige class, then WotC decided to make them a main class (oh how I hate the class bloat.)

I don't doubt the 3.0 thing, but they aren't in the openSRD except as the (slightly different) Paladin of Slaughter.
Unless they were republished in a 3.5 book, I'd say they were supplanted by the 3 variant paladin classes which are in the 3.5 openSRD.  Which I assume are in the 3.5 Players Handbook, but I really don't know...

Of course a lot of 3.0 content can be used in 3.5 (took me forever to realize that the Book of Vile Darkness was 3.0.  And maybe the BoExaltedDeeds, but maybe not?? whatever).  It ought to be discouraged when there is a close 3.5 equivalent, though, to be considered an update.

[Bohandas]

Nope Rolan, anti-paladins are a thing since 3.0 (and kinda before, but not really), they were initially a prestige class, then WotC decided to make them a main class (oh how I hate the class bloat.)

I don't doubt the 3.0 thing, but they aren't in the openSRD except as the (slightly different) Paladin of Slaughter.
Unless they were republished in a 3.5 book, I'd say they were supplanted by the 3 variant paladin classes which are in the 3.5 openSRD.  Which I assume are in the 3.5 Players Handbook, but I really don't know...

Of course a lot of 3.0 content can be used in 3.5 (took me forever to realize that the Book of Vile Darkness was 3.0.  And maybe the BoExaltedDeeds, but maybe not?? whatever).  It ought to be discouraged when there is a close 3.5 equivalent, though, to be considered an update.

I think the Blackguard was traditionally also referred to as an anti-paladin

This may be what is meant

[BlackFlyme]

Antipaladins in Pathfinder are a bit odd to look at. Basically a mirrored paladin. Apparently they can even take paladin feats, though there is no explanation as to how they differ from the paladin version.

"I am the very image of chaos, and bow to no rules. Except my antipaladin code. And my deity's code."

Depending on their deity, they may even spend their afterlife in a GOOD plane.

[Rolan7]

Fakedit:

Nope Rolan, anti-paladins are a thing since 3.0 (and kinda before, but not really), they were initially a prestige class, then WotC decided to make them a main class (oh how I hate the class bloat.)

I don't doubt the 3.0 thing, but they aren't in the openSRD except as the (slightly different) Paladin of Slaughter.
Unless they were republished in a 3.5 book, I'd say they were supplanted by the 3 variant paladin classes which are in the 3.5 openSRD.  Which I assume are in the 3.5 Players Handbook, but I really don't know...

Of course a lot of 3.0 content can be used in 3.5 (took me forever to realize that the Book of Vile Darkness was 3.0.  And maybe the BoExaltedDeeds, but maybe not?? whatever).  It ought to be discouraged when there is a close 3.5 equivalent, though, to be considered an update.

I think the Blackguard was traditionally also referred to as an anti-paladin

This may be what is meant

Noooo no no, Blackguard is a specific thing which is ACTUALLY the opposite of a paladin.  Paladin of Slaughter, or "anti-paladin" as it's called, is just a paladin with a different alignment.  A blackguard is one who has forsaken alignment.  Paladins who fall can get bonuses for becoming blackguards, but I think technically anyone can do it.

It's kinda like a druid, but you're not championing the world.  You're just fed up with alignment and basically serve your self.  Some of the interesting characters in our campaign were blackguards.

@Neonivek
That's an interesting perspective, though mine's different.
In the one campaign I've played (it lasted two years though), there was a lot of BoVD and BoED.  Both good and evil people got blessings from the primal forces of Good and Evil.  But, honestly?  Evil people got better boons.  The corrupt spells of BoVD were just better.

Evil was a temptation because it offered, upfront, significant power increase.  Not to mention that the lord-devils, Asmodeus in particular, were offering tantalizing deals of their own.

Good was something we (well, SOME of us) followed at first for its own sake.  In a way, I followed it because only a good character would truly care about deposing the evil empire and the devilcultist city.

It was rough since the other players went arcane-neutral or crazy-evil and were either sympathetic to the evil lich empire, or omnicidal respectively...

But I guess my point is that good is most meaningful when it *isn't* a mirror to evil.  When evil offers blatantly superior powers, but you refuse, because god DAMMIT it's the right thing to do.  If anything, the reward you get should be the goodwill and support of the downtrodden.

Dunno if I mentioned this, but the campaign crumpled a couple sessions after I left.  Possibly because a greedy cannibal ogre mercenary and an insane klepto mage didn't have much reason to actually fix shit.