This is good. I stopped following D&D years ago but occasionally will watch videos on youtube about broken meta-game builds for the fun of it. Nobody talks about Paladins, though. Everyone seems to understand the complaints Paladin players have about the GM that's out to get them but 99% of video makers seem to buy into the Lawful Stupid stereotype that Paladin players get.Le Redditeur wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:18 pmThey kinda tried to fix that in 4th Edition - you have only 5 alignments (Lawful Good, Good, Neutral, Evil, Chaotic Evil), so there's more room to wiggle your character's beliefs inside each alignment. They also got rid of the "only LG can be paladins", and paladins became champions of their deities, no matter what their alignment was.
Oh, and there weren't creature types tied to alignments anymore. Not all Angels are of the subtype [Lawful Good], evil gods could have angels as well. Frankly, I enjoyed 4th Ed. more than any other edition of D&D, and I played all the way from the OG one through 4th.
That mentality of, "if the Paladin joins the group then we don't get to have any fun, let's ruin it for them," and turning it into the Paladin being the problem instead of the other people (or GM) just being dickwads.