Where the line between the cleric and the paladins?

[Scipion_Emilien]

At part time, I DM a NWN server, and one odd thing that seem to come, is that players seem to have great difficulties to differientiate the paladin (blackguard or divine champion) with the cleric. The problem arise when I should help the players with their build and they get all the reason inimaginable to stick with the cleric (thx to 3.5 cleric brokeness) and I have trouble to answer others thing than your character seem zealot so go divine fighter. (Of course they answer to me that they are the clerics of a zealeous god...)

A cleric is a divine intermediate with the gods while the divine champion is the champion of the cause of a god. So extremist cleric are the same as paladins? At what extreme should I recommend more the concept cleric and a the other should I go for the divine warrior of the faith?

This lead me to ask too, in what it is important for a cleric to get his deity favored weapon? A cleric that learn how to use a batard sword when he was young will probably stay with his most destructive weapon even if his god favorite weapon is a spear for example.

[Augustus]

NWN is 3.0 edition BTW but the difference SHOULD be that Paladins are more adept at combat than clerics would be. I figure Cleric=50% combat 50% divine while a paladin is 75% combat and 25% divine. But I've never liked that clerics could wear heavy armors anyway.

[AdamGarou]

I'm not too familiar with 3e or with Neverwinter Nights, but my tabletop gaming group has run into the problem on more than one occasion--especially because we often run multi-classed fighter/clerics.

So what differentiates a fighter/cleric from a paladin? Well, it kinda depends on the day, and the deity the cleric serves, but the general consensus for our games is something like this:

*A paladin must always use the most expensive and protective armor he/she can get (preferring non-magical field plate over +4 chainmail); a cleric can wear whatever he/she feels like

*A paladin must never retreat from battle, unless not retreating is an even greater evil--and would thus endanger more innocents; for the cleric, well, his/her deity wants the cleric to live to continue spreading the deity's word, so ducking out of a fight or conducting some sort of sneak-attack is fine

*A paladin must always do battle according to the rules of honor--such as giving all opponents (even the slimiest, sweatiest, most evil orcs and ogres and such) the chance to surrender and to pick up their weapon if they lose it in some way; a cleric can just bash away and be done with it.

*A paladin must always insist on being the leader, and being first into every battle; a cleric is less concerned with personal valor than with furthering the aims of his/her god

*A paladin serves his/her deity through combat primarily; a cleric does so through combat but also through giving to the poor, using magic to cure and heal, constructing a temple and providing worship services

In short, a fighter/cleric has a wider range of acceptable actions than a paladin does, and is likely to live longer. It's also easier to differentiate between them when the cleric DOESN'T worship a lawful good deity of combat/war/healing. I prefer to run chaotic good clerics myself.

I dunno, that's just our take on it. I'm sure there are others.

[Scipion_Emilien]

As i see, it remains a hard topic. The difference between the paladins and the clerics is somewhat obvious (the paladin must be the standard fantasy jnight), but if we take the difference between a cleric of bane and a blackguard of bane (or the lawgiver), how would make it? Since the two are somewaht enforcing a divine law.

And do you think that a cleric should absoletely wear and use his divine patron weapon or this is only a suggestion and as long as the clerics take the right feat, it doesnt matter if he wear a flail or a bastard sword?

[AdamGarou]

As i see, it remains a hard topic. The difference between the paladins and the clerics is somewhat obvious (the paladin must be the standard fantasy jnight), but if we take the difference between a cleric of bane and a blackguard of bane (or the lawgiver), how would make it? Since the two are somewaht enforcing a divine law.

And do you think that a cleric should absoletely wear and use his divine patron weapon or this is only a suggestion and as long as the clerics take the right feat, it doesnt matter if he wear a flail or a bastard sword?

I would say the biggest difference is in their approaches to enforcing that law. A cleric of Bane would fight to protect himself, but would IMO rely much more on the power of magic--he would be subtle, insinuative, whereas a blackguard of Bane would be quite blunt and prefer combat over subtle manipulation. It's not just a matter of game stats and the spells granted, it's a different outlook entirely.

As to your second question, I think it may depend on the deity's alignment. IMO, a lawful deity (whether good, neutral, or evil) would be more likely to insist on the cleric using the weapon the deity favors, whereas a neutral or chaotic deity would be a lot more concerned with the results. NE, NG, CE, CG, CN gods and goddesses are (I think) more concerned with the overall results the cleric achieves in furthering their aims than what melee weapon he uses to do the job. For non-lawful deities, I just don't think they care what weapon the cleric uses.

[Big Bad Jack]

..the Paladin should be the better combatant, in theory...

..but in NWN (which I play heavily).. clerics are buffing MACHINES. Magic Vestment, Greater Magic Weapon, and Darkfire, all stat buffs besides Cat's Grace.... Cleric gets overplayed heavily on NWN, and most servers don't even EXPECT players to halfway understand their own deity (which is awful, given the divine focus of the Realms as a setting...)

What I don't agree with, however, were these "rules of being a Paladin." I once had my beloved paladin voted "Best divine champion" on a server after its death. Paladins are champions of Order and Goodness.. as viewed through the lense of their deitiy's dogma. FOr example, a Paladin of Nobanion would HARDLY wear full-plate, and a Paladin of Kelemvor would hardly be dedicated solely to combat, or take that to be their divine mission -- and would agonize over each death they caused; "Was it necessary?", etc. One set rule for all paladins is a straighthjacket that ruins a lot of the deep roleplay potential of the class.

[Charney]

I must say I have the same problem. To me, Clerics seem more like Templars (knight-monks) and the paladins... well are basically the same thing!
I tried to dissociate them by looking at two models for Paladins: sir Galaad from the Graal cycle and Joan of Arc from history. To me, these are the best examples of paladins. What sets them appart from knight templars? First of all, they aren't part of religious order and (I'm not sure about Galaad) had not a religious upbringing and education (which clerics should have). Galaad was born a paladin and although he learned how to fight, he "had it in him". A cleric would not be born a cleric. He could have lot of faith from birth but that doesn't make him a cleric.

Same with Joan of Arc. She had a peasant life until she was illuminated (whether you believe it or not, SHE believed it) and took arms. In my mind, she was also born a paladin.

It still hard to explain since it's not too clear in my mind for now. At times, paladin does seem more fitting as a PrC then a core class.

[ScS of the Fraternity]

I think the only real distinction comes from roleplaying. In form, they are nearly identical - it comes down to the way they player uses the character.

I perfer to look at paladins the way they were described in a Book-of_S as Paragons ( I think that article was by JWM).
Paladins, under the Paragon example, are not about religions or gods. They fight for the idea of universal good, honour and virtue.

Clerics, on the otherhand, are dedicated to a God - and that god's alignment is almost inconsequential. The cleric in D&D is different than real world priests - clerics have a direct connection to their god.
Clerics are less like real-world priests, and more like biblical prophets - they have access to their god, they are his/her/its direct tools on Earth.

[Big Bad Jack]

I agree with Charney's insights. a Paladin should never be "trained" to be a Paladin. They receive the Calling, and either take it up or ignore it's sounding.

[Scipion_Emilien]

I agree with Charney's insights. a Paladin should never be "trained" to be a Paladin. They receive the Calling, and either take it up or ignore it's sounding.

So for you, what would be a warrior who was raise in faith to accomplish a specific task?

And only AdamGarou answer about the favored weapon dilemna, do you have an opinion on this?

[Augustus]

A warrior raised in a faith is just a warrior- a religous one. A paladin is something more, they represent pure honor, humility, love, justice and selflessness. IMO a cleric is a spellcaster who just happens to be able to wear heavy armor due to the nature of their magic. A paladin is a knight whos purity and love allow him to use magic to aid himself and others.
I personally don't like the example of a fighter/cleric because those don't make sense. IMHO a cleric should stick as a cleric or take a divine prestige class if allowable but thats it, for roleplaying reasons. However if the clerics god encourages multi-classing I could see it.

[Big Bad Jack]

A fighter-servant of the deity, perhaps. In Forgotten Realms, I'd say a Divine Chamipon PrC. All paladins are Divine Champions, but not all Divine Champions are Paladins.

A Paladin, to me, is the mortal incarnation of a deity's will, tempered through the lense of law and goodness. They are touched, even more than a cleric, by their God, most blessed of the blest, and given the will and the grace to be the holiest and truest of heroes, to sacrifice all they have and all they are for the Light as their deity sees it.

As for favored weapon, I always have a paladin focus on it. Clerics are less so, but still if they can reasonably wield it.