Arabel Builds
-
I didn't know that the Order Multiclassing rules were handled in the same way as PnP. It sounds like the rules state only the Order multiclasses are allowed.
It does make sense that any base class should be able to eventually earn paladinhood.
-
A cleric spreads the dogma of the church
A paladin enforces the dogma of the church
A Paladin is still bound by the dogma of the patron they follow, which is why Paladin/Rogue would only fit certain dieties.
-
Why would a paladin rogue be frowned upon? A man with shady past find his calling as a paladin…
The other way around however, would not work imho.
I don't think there is even the need for a "shady" past for that. Being a rogue doesn't mean the character is a thug. Rogue is possibly the most extensive class in terms of "concepts". They can be diplomats, spies, counter-spies, etc. Also, those special orders that accepts rogue/paladin multiclass must have some kind of training in "roguish" things. I don't see a problem if you have the right back story.
-
There's some guidelines here, though they may be a bit more stringent than CoA would allow nowadays.
-
If you take Rogue levels and then take paladin levels you're going to end up sneek attacking your enemy all the time, unless you only ever strike the target who is targeting you. This would not normally be regarded as appropriate actions for a Paladin. How will you handle that?
-
Those are literally mechanics you cannot skip. But hey, even paladins go for the weak spots of an enemy in combat. Otherwise they'd be hitting an enemy's shield on purpose!
-
I could see the debate of a paladin "knocking his enemies down", using poison etc, or using the feat dirty fighting, which simulates hitting people in the bullocks or similar. However, Sneak attack is a mechanical bonus for practicing to hit where the armor is weakest. Stab for the heart, swing for the throat, go for that spot between the armor plates that allows direct acces to the bare flesh.
Secondly, you cannot be a Rogue -without- getting sneak attacks. If rogue would be changed somewhat like the sorc has been, where you can pick up certain kits, some of which would allow a rogue to -not- have sneak attack, then id discuss it. But until then, I dont see the unethical in using it.
-
A minor note, but the multiclassing rules for paladins only apply if you want to advance in both paladin and the other class.
If a paladin of Helm multiclasses as a wizard, he loses the ability to increase his paladin levels; But this does not mean he's fallen, just that he can no longer gain levels as a paladin.
Same for monks.
By the way, sneak attacks are not "aiming for the weak spots" in a fight. It's literally backstabbing, purposefully hitting an opponent where he can't defend because his attention is focused elsewhere. That's why it only kicks in for flanking attacks. A paladin doing this would be getting some dishonorable juju.
And before someone brings up the point, yes, rogue/paladins of Baravar are allowed, but rogue =/= auto sneak-attack licence. Rogues in FR are portrayed as much more than +xd6 on flank damage.
-
A cleric spreads the dogma of the church
A paladin enforces the dogma of the church
A Paladin is still bound by the dogma of the patron they follow, which is why Paladin/Rogue would only fit certain dieties.
I never saw a paladin as enforcing the dogma of their church first and foremost rather I saw them battling evil according to the paladin code first and their patron just happens to have battling evil as one of their concerns thus they support followers that are paladins. Of course the focus is going to vary from campaign to campaign as people seem to interpret paladins differently a lot.
-
Once more, story > mechanic. If a concept really makes sense, then I would be very willing to close an eye, or both.
I too knew sneak attacks are effective because they aim at weak spots. That explains why it does not work on undead or constructs. But to make it work in nwn you have to flank or to attack a "disabled" opponent, and that is something a paladin shouldn't be doing.
-
Paladins flank, otherwise they'd be obliged to take on every powerful foe alone and there's a good reason why that is a -never- taken specific knightly vow. Sneak attacks also work even when you're standing in front of a foe as long as you're not the one holding the enemy's attention.
There really is no way to escape the sneak attacks from rogue levels. Yet rogues can be lawful good since they're people who can be just as nice and honorable as any other class.
-
Paladins can't do it from behind?
Heeey oh!
-
Agreed, but a lawful good fighter or a rogue is not a paladin. Paladin take specific oaths. A good character using poison for example, cannot be classified immediately as "evil". But a paladin using poison, yes. Because they have a direct link with their Gods, they are judged much more harshly than a similarly aligned person of a different class.
The mechanics may not allow for sneak attacks to be disabled, but that doesn't mean a sneak attack paladin is A-ok.
-
So someone who happened to be a lawful good street rat and suddenly find his calling as a paladin, is chosen by his god because of him being worthy and dying to serve his god can't do it because he cannot help but sneak attacking foes? >.>
-
That's the mechanical issue with NWN. It's been discussed, we cannot easily change the mechanics and won't put the effort in for such an esoteric issue.
If you wish to player a Paladin after taking rogue levels, discuss with the DMs how you will approach it. We'll work something out with you if the story is appropriate. As Count says, Story > mechanics.
Lets move on from this narrow mechanical area and back to a generic discussion on multiclassing Paladins or other builds.
-
Rogue =/= thieves or scoundrels. They can be diplomats, scouts and even detectives.
Sneak attack =/= backstab. Those are just two similar mechanics from different editions. 3ed has no facing rules. Sneak attack is specifically classified as attack aimed at a weak spot in its description.
I would not say attacking a weak spot is dishonorable in general. For example, attacking a prone or unaware opponent ~is~ dishonorable by paladin's code, even if you're not sneak attacking. But running a lance through dragon's poorly defended underbelly while flanking it with his companions doesn't sound dishonourable at all.
In other words, there are certain circumstances when paladins will see it beneath them to attack no matter if they can SA or not. But in cases when it is ok to strike, SA is fair game too.edit: Sorry.. Was writing this before Abbot's response. Maybe we should just branch this discussion to a different thread?
-
Lets move on from this narrow mechanical area and back to a generic discussion on multiclassing Paladins or other builds.
-
How would a monk/druid work?
I see some dude meditating in the wilds, befriending the wildlife there and basing his attacks off of them. Crane-Style Monk with druid powers.
-
Concerning the OP, it seems that the only "potentially problematic" builds have paladin or monk in them. And multiclassing paladins and monks is specifically regulated by server rules, no?
-
Monk|Druid - Very esoteric and only approved if your player name is Moloch.