Will Paladins get to follow a deity, ever?

[tunnus]

A little silly to me that we have to multiclass into a cleric just to be a Paladin of (deity). Why are the Paladins of Tyr at the Tollhouse an exception?

[Zeel Ara]

Nope, that's not how paladins work in 5e.

[Chroniver]

There are mods that allow you to select deities for all classes and even some dialogue that is hidden.

5e Paladins don't depend on their deity for their powers but on their Oath tho. So officially they've moved away from that.

[seeker1]

Only with a mod. Larian WAS going to have a deity choice option for all classes, and this got cut from release. However, as most of the functionality is already in-game, there are quite a few mods that can restore that option.

Paladins only...
https://www.nexusmods.com/baldursgate3/mods/1077

Or just do it for all classes (including druids, where it also especially makes sense) ...
https://www.nexusmods.com/baldursgate3/mods/1870

Now, BTW, want to add more deity OPTIONS (including some cut dialogue for those options)... that's at Nexus too, including:
Bhaal (for non Durges)
Shar (for other than SHs)
Myrkul & Bane (yep, why not, even if you ARE contending with their followers)

AND, these are just flavor as they have no dialogue or other impacts, but you also can add in the option for Loviatar, Jergal (I wonder how this affects dialogues with Withers, LOL), Silvanus (good for druids), Venestra, and Baphomet.

[zero]

paladins don't need a god in 5e for their powers.

nothing is stopping you from roleplaying you have one however.

playing as a drow in this game, for example.

[The Yeen Queen]

Originally posted by Ratley:

Nope, that's not how paladins work in 5e.

Which is just....stupid. The whole concept of Paladins was that they were holy warriors. Now 5e has decided just to throw that all away. But, not Larian's fault.

[SecretDragonSludge (Drugs)]

Originally posted by Night Foxx:

Originally posted by Ratley:

Nope, that's not how paladins work in 5e.

Which is just....stupid. The whole concept of Paladins was that they were holy warriors. Now 5e has decided just to throw that all away. But, not Larian's fault.

It was easier than making new classes that were basically just paladins for evil and chaos deities. People had long done evil/chaos characters and this just made it easier with less need to do any homebrewing.

[seeker1]

The Oathbreaker paladin essentially is the Anti-Paladin or Blackguard of 5E. Uses necrotic magic, controls instead of turns undead, curses people instead of blessing them, raises undead, etc. You can't start out as one in BG3, but it's also pretty easy to break your oath.

That said, it also makes sense for evil paladins to be following Oaths like the Oath of Vengeance (as Minthara does) or the Oath of Conquest (for that you need a mod). Minthara is sorta a paladin for Lolth, except, well, she's kinda sworn off serving Lolth also, and this is causing problems between her and her mum and other Drow.

[The Yeen Queen]

Originally posted by The Sludge is Life:

Originally posted by Night Foxx:

Which is just....stupid. The whole concept of Paladins was that they were holy warriors. Now 5e has decided just to throw that all away. But, not Larian's fault.

It was easier than making new classes that were basically just paladins for evil and chaos deities. People had long done evil/chaos characters and this just made it easier with less need to do any homebrewing.

Why do you think new classes were necessary?

[Wokelander]

Originally posted by Night Foxx:

Originally posted by The Sludge is Life:

It was easier than making new classes that were basically just paladins for evil and chaos deities. People had long done evil/chaos characters and this just made it easier with less need to do any homebrewing.

Why do you think new classes were necessary?

Because the old Blackguard was a very specific and narrow prestige class