12
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Thanks for providing a direct link to the Paizo post; I'm not a big fan of RL.

The new champion seems cool. Finally they won't be locked in by alignment on top of the actual oath that they follow. Seems a bit more similar to a 5e Paladin now. But Paizo is still stuck on forcing certain kinds of character to be "holy" and "unholy", which is still very limiting. I wish they would open their minds a bit more.

[-] Kichae@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 months ago

I mean, they are religious defenders. Knights Templar and all that. That's the core concept and fantasy they're aiming for.

Guardian Sorcerer or Guardian Oracle or something probably fits other concepts better.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

They don't need to be that though. Honestly for all of 5e's flaws, I think one thing it does far better is that there is a clear distinction between Clerics and Paladins. Clerics get their power from religion, Paladins get their power from swearing an oath. Religion doesn't need to be a part of it at all.

Like, if you told me there was a class called "champion" in Pathfinder and I knew nothing else about that class, I would assume it's the champion of a cause, not of a religion.

[-] Droechai@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

According to the post the holy or unholy sanctification is optional or do I misread it?

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The post says that certain subclasses force one or the other.

this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
12 points (100.0% liked)

pathfinder

214 readers
3 users here now

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS