What's the tea, Marie? (Paladin multiclassing)

[nostalgicsamurai]

Multiclassed paladins are no more broken than blackguards, which are always multiclassed because PRC, as people take 5 levels of blackguard for much the same reasons as they would take 5 levels of paladin, which is to say turn undead and charisma to saves on a full BAB class. The standard multiclass restrictions on POTM would already limit the most egregious combinations, such as a single level of paladin on a charisma full caster for charisma to saves. Instead said caster would have to take 5 levels, sacrificing their high level spells.

When it comes to training and such, I have no more to say as I would only repeat what I said in my previous message.

[MAB77]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

[nostalgicsamurai]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

If we were in agreement there would be no debate.

A productive way to debate would be to actually try to refute my points instead of simply saying that you don't agree.

Balance wise, what supports the staff's position that dipping 5 levels in blackguard should be allowed but not dipping 5 levels in paladin, when the benefits are much the same?

Lore wise, what supports the viewpoint that paladins from an order need special training or ressources from their order to be able to multiclass with the classes that their order traditionally freely multiclasses with, instead of learning like any other character learns a new class?

[myrddraal]

Let me make a stupid busted 3 pal 4 rogue 13 fighter with all the combat feats up to strike and DR with all the paladin goodie scrolls and full tumble, no flat footed ac, spot and only losing 1 ab.  Seems totally fine.

[Maiyannah]

The multi-classing rules already prevents the meta dips, so I don't see the necessity of a general paladin multiclassing rule.  It is true many religions would have restrictions on multiclassing they would impose by virtue of their tenets, but if someone is a paladin breaking the tenets of their faith, that would be a reason for a DM to have them Fall anyways.

I find it just another decision made for meta reasons that is obstructive of roleplaying possibilities, myself.  But just in general, having played Livu for 2.5 years now, I've found the average attitudes towards Paladins pretty disheartening if I'm honest.  It's why I don't play her very much anymore, or part of that.

[nostalgicsamurai]

Let me make a stupid busted 3 pal 4 rogue 13 fighter with all the combat feats up to strike and DR with all the paladin goodie scrolls and full tumble, no flat footed ac, spot and only losing 1 ab.  Seems totally fine.

No more busted than a lot of builds currently allowed to be honest.

At best I could see an argument to set a minimum of 5 paladin levels, as if it were a PRC, that way even with a third class you'd need as many levels in paladin as you would have needed in blackguard to have access to pretty much the same goodies.

That way your pal/rogue/fighter build would be forced to lose their strike and DR.

Also, uncanny dodge only saves your DEX mod, which is probably not that high with that kind of build. You still lose tumble AC and all dodge AC, such as divine shield AC.

[MAB77]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

If we were in agreement there would be no debate.

A productive way to debate would be to actually try to refute my points instead of simply saying that you don't agree.

Balance wise, what supports the staff's position that dipping 5 levels in blackguard should be allowed but not dipping 5 levels in paladin, when the benefits are much the same?

Lore wise, what supports the viewpoint that paladins from an order need special training or ressources from their order to be able to multiclass with the classes that their order traditionally freely multiclasses with, instead of learning like any other character learns a new class?

Well.. that's were you err. It's on you to prove to the deciding instance that a change would be good. You are the one intent on changing things. You are the one that needs to prove it would be beneficial for the server. The arguments you brought up so far do not persuade and run contrary to what we try to achieve on a general level. I also think the reasons you were provided so far, by myself and others, are quite sufficient to justify the current rules. And just now, Myrdraal gave a very convincing example of why there is little appetite on our part to move in that direction.

Because some other combos are currently busted is not an excuse to allow more busted combos. Balance can, and absolutely should (in my book), be achieved by toning down what is too powerful, not in an arms race to empower classes that are already strong on their own.

We're not even in a debate at all here. There is none to be had. You made a fair request to change a given situation. I'm not faulting you for suggesting it. But you were given the reasons why it won't be, and now comes the time where you must accept the decision and move on.

[nostalgicsamurai]

Well.. that's were you err. It's on you to prove to the deciding instance that a change would be good. You are the one intent on changing things. You are the one that needs to prove it would be beneficial for the server. The arguments you brought up so far do not persuade and run contrary to what we try to achieve on a general level. I also think the reasons you were provided so far, by myself and others, are quite sufficient to justify the current rules. And just now, Myrdraal gave a very convincing example of why there is little appetite on our part to move in that direction.

Because some other combos are currently busted is not an excuse to allow more busted combos. Balance can, and absolutely should (in my book), be achieved by toning down what is too powerful, not in an arms race to empower classes that are already strong on their own.

We're not even in a debate at all here. There is none to be had. You made a fair request to change a given situation. I'm not faulting you for suggesting it. But you were given the reasons why it won't be, and now comes the time where you must accept the decision and move on.

I have not made any request in this thread actually. I merely took the opportunity to expose my viewpoint on the subject, which happens to be favorable to allowing paladins to multiclass. To which you have responded. As I saw your point on balance, which I disagreed with, I chose to address it as well. You answered saying I was not debating productively. Now you are saying we are actually not in a debate at all. If you would make up your mind, then I would have an easier time responding to you in kind.

The server rules are for the staff to decide, and you are free to disagree with players when they criticize said rules, and if a player's request gets declined, there comes a point where they have to accept it and move on indeed. But if you engage in debate well... debate is a multiple way street. It's not for one party to convince the others, but for all engaging parties to expose their viewpoints and respond to each other's viewpoints. At the end of the day, some may change their minds, often no one does, but that is how debates go.

As for the example provided by Myrdraal, it is easily addressed by making paladin require a minimum of 5 class levels. There would then be very little that a paladin would be able to achieve that a blackguard couldn't.

[Maiyannah]

As for the example provided by Myrdraal, it is easily addressed by making paladin require a minimum of 5 class levels. There would then be very little that a paladin would be able to achieve that a blackguard couldn't.

Assuming a level 20 character, you can only take less than 10 levels in a dip if you have a third level.  You cannot be more than 10 levels apart in your classes.

That general rule already prevents any "OP Paladin Meta Build" I know of when it comes to multiclassing abuse.

[Alcoholic Squirrel (Birdman)]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

Is it possible that the staff might be wrong?

[William Roberts]

As for the example provided by Myrdraal, it is easily addressed by making paladin require a minimum of 5 class levels. There would then be very little that a paladin would be able to achieve that a blackguard couldn't.

Assuming a level 20 character, you can only take less than 105 levels in a dip if you have a third level.  You cannot be more than 10 levels apart in your classes.

That general rule already prevents any "OP Paladin Meta Build" I know of when it comes to multiclassing abuse.

Fixed. (I assume it was a typo.)

Also, unless the rules have changed or my memory is bad, you are required to take 5 levels in any prestige class. So even with tri-classing, by 20th you should have 5 in any prestige class you've dipped.

[MAB77]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

Is it possible that the staff might be wrong?

There is no right or wrong about a preference. Though on this I believe we're on the best course of action. We've been around NWN a long time, seen other servers, observed ludicrous builds. Balance is a serious point, and it is for good reasons the the Dev team restricts paladins or monk multiclassing. Right now there is a line in the sand, with no beneficial value in changing its position except for those seeking to exploit more mechanical advantages. It's not a line we need to change.

It would not open RP options either. As it stands, I gave you guys the Avenger Knight prestige class precisely to open more paladin-like options to non-paladins, along the already existing Divine Champion and People's Champion. If you're in for the RP and not the mechanics, those do the job well.

And mind you, the current set up is not MY preference either. I would indeed prefer it myself if it was closer to PnP, which would entail rendering skill point banking illegal, and buying ranks only up to the level you would in PnP. But that train left the station nearly two decades ago, and would cause havoc for a great number of characters. The compromise is in the current multiclassing rules.

[Maiyannah]

It would not open RP options either. As it stands, I gave you guys the Avenger Knight prestige class precisely to open more paladin-like options to non-paladins, along the already existing Divine Champion and People's Champion. If you're in for the RP and not the mechanics, those do the job well.

I contest this.  For example, right now if I had made Emmanuelle a paladin, rather than a fighter, her entire story could never have happened.  Had she been a particularly pious paladin that later got bullied by a player Toret into seeking to become an Anchorite, the rules as they stand now would have prohibited the entire arc she took towards that end and she would be a very different character than she is today.

Is such a story any more or less invalid because she was a fighter, instead of a paladin?

If anything, I'd argue that it makes more sense a paladin would have been so taken with piety in this way.

[nostalgicsamurai]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

Is it possible that the staff might be wrong?

There is no right or wrong about a preference. Though on this I believe we're on the best course of action. We've been around NWN a long time, seen other servers, observed ludicrous builds. Balance is a serious point, and it is for good reasons the the Dev team restricts paladins or monk multiclassing. Right now there is a line in the sand, with no beneficial value in changing its position except for those seeking to exploit more mechanical advantages. It's not a line we need to change.

It would not open RP options either. As it stands, I gave you guys the Avenger Knight prestige class precisely to open more paladin-like options to non-paladins, along the already existing Divine Champion and People's Champion. If you're in for the RP and not the mechanics, those do the job well.

And mind you, the current set up is not MY preference either. I would indeed prefer it myself if it was closer to PnP, which would entail rendering skill point banking illegal, and buying ranks only up to the level you would in PnP. But that train left the station nearly two decades ago, and would cause havoc for a great number of characters. The compromise is in the current multiclassing rules.

Of course it would open RP options. If you want to play a paladin/wizard of Mystra, from the order of the Knights of the Mystic Fire, is that not a different flavor of RP than a pure paladin? If you want to play a paladin/monk of Yondalla, from the order of the Shields of Yondalla, isn't that a different flavor of RP than a pure paladin?

You can argue all you want about balance (even though I fail to see why 5 levels of paladin is so much more powerful in a multiclassed build than five levels of blackguard, especially when a lot of classes cannot be lawful good, while there are very few classes that can't be evil), but it is undeniable that there is a number of paladin concepts that cannot be portrayed with the current rules.

[myrddraal]

There are plenty of reasons you shouldnt allow a wizard paladin.  Tensers and a holy sword scroll would be insane.

[Alcoholic Squirrel (Birdman)]

Indeed, you are simply repeating points the staff do not agree with. It's not a productive way to debate.

Is it possible that the staff might be wrong?

There is no right or wrong about a preference. Though on this I believe we're on the best course of action. We've been around NWN a long time, seen other servers, observed ludicrous builds. Balance is a serious point, and it is for good reasons the the Dev team restricts paladins or monk multiclassing. Right now there is a line in the sand, with no beneficial value in changing its position except for those seeking to exploit more mechanical advantages. It's not a line we need to change.

It would not open RP options either. As it stands, I gave you guys the Avenger Knight prestige class precisely to open more paladin-like options to non-paladins, along the already existing Divine Champion and People's Champion. If you're in for the RP and not the mechanics, those do the job well.

And mind you, the current set up is not MY preference either. I would indeed prefer it myself if it was closer to PnP, which would entail rendering skill point banking illegal, and buying ranks only up to the level you would in PnP. But that train left the station nearly two decades ago, and would cause havoc for a great number of characters. The compromise is in the current multiclassing rules.

That didn't at all answer a pretty straight forward 'yes or no'.

All I asked was if it was possible that the staff might be incorrect when it comes to their analysis and conclusions. Is it possible for the staff to be wrong?

Also it's not about a matter of 'preference'. Despite what many players would like to think, D&D and it's derivatives are math based games. So everything can be gauged on the mathematical level it is possible to achieve some level of fairness and balance if one were to try and do so.

There are plenty of reasons you shouldnt allow a wizard paladin.  Tensers and a holy sword scroll would be insane.

The only reason we shouldn't allow Wizard/Paladin is to protect new players from making bad decisions like... going Wizard Paladin

[myrddraal]

Using all wizard scrolls on a paladin would be insane.  Let them walk around with full arcane wards, haste themselves, full paladin buffs and then tenser lol.  No.

[MAB77]

Of course it would open RP options. [...]

None whatsoever. This is about the mechanical advantages and nothing else. Roleplay is achievable regardless of mechanics.

There is nothing in the current rules that prevents anyone to play their builds with the mentality of a paladin, or even a paladin with the attitude of an ethical rogue. A paladin will still be restricted to its code of conduct no matter what, but beyond that, nothing stops you to roleplay it as you wish. You could cross class stealth skills and build your pally as a musketeer/swashbuckler. You can't be a paladin/sorcerer, but you can be a sorcerer/divine champion, or a sorcerer/avenger knight, and still play it exactly with the RP you had in mind.

There is no item, with or without UMD, that would change the mindset required for any paladin build. No item so "critically missing" to the paladin's arsenal that restricts RP. And if for some reason you feel it is, you can propose it in the "item proposal" thread.

[Merry Munchkin]

Multiclass a paladin for a few levels for the Divine Grace and immunity to disease and fear.  Add some monk to pick up Evasion and Cleave.  You could play that straight if you wanted and add on more monk feats.  Or you could add a third class just for kicks and giggles (maybe sorcerer or favored soul).  The possibilities of multiclass abuses using paladin and monk for their feats is a time-honored NWN tradition.  If PoTM wants to put the kibbosh on that, I don't have a problem with it.

[nostalgicsamurai]

None whatsoever. This is about the mechanical advantages and nothing else. Roleplay is achievable regardless of mechanics.

There is nothing in the current rules that prevents anyone to play their builds with the mentality of a paladin, or even a paladin with the attitude of an ethical rogue. A paladin will still be restricted to its code of conduct no matter what, but beyond that, nothing stops you to roleplay it as you wish. You could cross class stealth skills and build your pally as a musketeer/swashbuckler. You can't be a paladin/sorcerer, but you can be a sorcerer/divine champion, or a sorcerer/avenger knight, and still play it exactly with the RP you had in mind.

There is no item, with or without UMD, that would change the mindset required for any paladin build. No item so "critically missing" to the paladin's arsenal that restricts RP. And if for some reason you feel it is, you can propose it in the "item proposal" thread.

Suggesting that a sorcerer/divine champion or a sorcerer/avenger knight RPs the exact same as a sorcerer/paladin demonstrates a misunderstanding of what it is to be a paladin. Being a paladin is not just about doing good or being devoted to a deity and their clergy. The most important component of a paladin's RP is their ethos, which goes beyond these broad concepts.

I highly recommand reading the complete paladin's handbook if you haven't and wish to better understand the class from an RP point of view.

[Brinty Spreas]

Of course it would open RP options. [...]

None whatsoever. This is about the mechanical advantages and nothing else. Roleplay is achievable regardless of mechanics.

There is nothing in the current rules that prevents anyone to play their builds with the mentality of a paladin, or even a paladin with the attitude of an ethical rogue. A paladin will still be restricted to its code of conduct no matter what, but beyond that, nothing stops you to roleplay it as you wish. You could cross class stealth skills and build your pally as a musketeer/swashbuckler. You can't be a paladin/sorcerer, but you can be a sorcerer/divine champion, or a sorcerer/avenger knight, and still play it exactly with the RP you had in mind.

There is no item, with or without UMD, that would change the mindset required for any paladin build. No item so "critically missing" to the paladin's arsenal that restricts RP. And if for some reason you feel it is, you can propose it in the "item proposal" thread.

I just want to say that my original post is a genuine question and has nothing to do with mechanical maximizing or anything. It was just something I wanted cleared up with a solid explanation. :l

[MAB77]

I just want to say that my original post is a genuine question and has nothing to do with mechanical maximizing or anything. It was just something I wanted cleared up with a solid explanation. :l

Apologies. I got caught up in the exchange with nostalgicsamurai. But yeah, it's because of the mechanical aspects of the class and balance issues that multiclassing is restricted on paladins.

Suggesting that a sorcerer/divine champion or a sorcerer/avenger knight RPs the exact same as a sorcerer/paladin demonstrates a misunderstanding of what it is to be a paladin. Being a paladin is not just about doing good or being devoted to a deity and their clergy. The most important component of a paladin's RP is their ethos, which goes beyond these broad concepts.

I highly recommand reading the complete paladin's handbook if you haven't and wish to better understand the class from an RP point of view.

I will thank you not to presume on what I understand or not. Making assumptions and supposition on what others think or know is always a bad call. You want your opinions to be taken seriously, remain respectful.

I have a very deep understanding and knowledge of D&D lore and rules extending from the rules cyclopedia to 5th edition (except 4th which I skipped), and all D&D settings. D&D has been my passion for the last 40 years, with Paladins very much being my favored class ever. Thank you. I can recite to you the complete Paladin Handbook by heart, from its kits to its RPing tips. It's the 1st D&D book I ever bought after the Basic Red box and the 2e PHB. What I said, and I stick to it, is that you can 100% play a non-paladin with the mentality of one. So... since, oh horror, the current rules don't allow your UMD class/sorcerer/paladin build. You can STILL use creative multiclassing with other classes to achieve the RP you would otherwise intend with the paladin build you can't make. You can even call yourself a paladin in game, for it is as much a title as a character class, just as a fighter could claim to be a non-divine casting priest of a god.

[nostalgicsamurai]

I will thank you not to presume on what I understand or not. Making assumptions and supposition on what others think or know is always a bad call. You want your opinions to be taken seriously, remain respectful.

I have a very deep understanding and knowledge of D&D lore and rules extending from the rules cyclopedia to 5th edition (except 4th which I skipped), and all D&D settings. D&D has been my passion for the last 40 years, with Paladins very much being my favored class ever. Thank you. I can recite to you the complete Paladin Handbook by heart, from its kits to its RPing tips. It's the 1st D&D book I ever bought after the Basic Red box and the 2e PHB. What I said, and I stick to it, is that you can 100% play a non-paladin with the mentality of one. So... since, oh horror, the current rules don't allow your UMD class/sorcerer/paladin build. You can STILL use creative multiclassing with other classes to achieve the RP you would otherwise intend with the paladin build you can't make. You can even call yourself a paladin in game, for it is as much a title as a character class, just as a fighter could claim to be a non-divine casting priest of a god.

My apologies if I have offended you. But I stand by my point that RPing a divine champion or an avenger knight is different from RPing a paladin, even if a lawful good DC or AK could act similarly to a paladin.

RPing a character with "the mentality of a paladin" is not the same as RPing an actual paladin. And if you really think it's all the same, then you might as well delete the paladin class from the server. After all, what good is a class in an RP server if it does not provide any different RP than what is achieved without it?

RP and mechanics are not separate. Mechanics are meant to support RP. If I am a paladin who cross classes rogue skills, I am not an "ethical rogue". I am a paladin who tries to be a rogue but will actually always stay rather mediocre at doing anything rogue-like (except if we count having a ton of skill gear to artificially boost one's skills to ridiculous levels as actually being skilled).

[Fumbles]

Apologies. I got caught up in the exchange with nostalgicsamurai. But yeah, it's because of the mechanical aspects of the class and balance issues that multiclassing is restricted on paladins.

But those balance concerns do not warrant the restriction at all. There are ways to achieve the same effect as Paladin multiclass already in the game and they are already not causing balance problems. Much of the bellyaching with these concerns is entirely founded on completely ignoring the limitations and downsides of these multiclass options. These options are not even particularly all that powerful compared to other options. I don't see how this restriction can really be justified.

[Alalaurealarialelia]

Paladin multiclassing is heavily restricted on just about any NWN server out there. And it's always for concerns of mechanical power. The POTM staff really are not the only people who have come to this conclusion.