Also, calling the Paladin a 'candy class' misses the point.
The 1e Paladin was a carefully laid trap for the players. You get all this cool stuff if you can roll one up BUT you lose a significant amount of your own agency in the process. The paladin is perfectly balanced, I would wager, by the fact that the presence of one prevents murder hobo'ing by the players.
Henchman as cannon fodder? Would the paladin really go for that? No. Smash and grab to get XP? If the Paladin is being played correctly, they shouldn't go for that either. They are going to have moral Precepts that they need to follow. Good and Law to champion!
Think of all the major drawbacks you have. You have to be lawful good. Your associates have to be good or lawful good (no thieves!). You have a strict limit on magic items and wealth. You have to be Lawful Good. Did I mention you have to be Lawful Good?
1e Bards are certainly not candy classes either. They are the first type of prestige class, in a way. You start with a 'normal' class, and if you are able to fill the requirements and get accepted, you start gaining levels in the 'prestige' class. This in itself is a big drawback. By the time you get the first level or two of the bard class the rest of the party is probably at that point where they're ready to retire and start a new campaign. Doh! There goes all your hard work and all those levels of thief and fighter you had to accrue to get to level one.
I know you are all tired of this discussion, as am I, but I fucking "J'accuse!"
@Prince--thanks for 'getting me'. I enjoy 'hard mode'. Doesn't mean I'm bored of the game. If I was, I wouldn't publish shit.
@The Heretic---Couldn't have said it better myself about paladins...but it's not worth arguing about with people who play "Playing Games" and not "Role-Playing Games"--they will continue to beat down their opinion into your soul and passively besmirch the way you enjoy playing. They don't acknowledge 'Lawful Good' or alignment in general even though it's in the book they worship, as that leads to 'roleplay'. But let's get to the J'accuse....
@squeen:
"Interesting NPCs and fantastic places are cool dressing --- but there is only so much pretend cultural assimilation I want. As I'll get to in a second, the crux of it may be that I'm just not that much into the ROLE playing."
Well...holy fucking shit...no wonder you don't like paladins. Yeah---I completely agree 100% (hooray, we agree)--when you IGNORE alignment/roleplaying/'shenanigans'/whatever you want to call it, a paladin becomes a total candy class...There is no question on that. A total monster murder hobo with special powers. No wonder one would hate them, because there is a REFUSAL to identify the RESTRICTIONS that make the class incredibly HARD to play correctly--instead its just easier to bitch about 'candy classes' I guess? That's on you, Mr./Mrs. DM---not the rules...or guidelines or 'candy classes'.
Your argument is complete bullshit if you don't incorporate roleplay and utilize the tools to provide balance. Plain and simple. D&D is a
roleplaying game. Do you require mages to have spellbooks and thieves to have thieves' tools to perform their skills or do you handwave/ignore that shit too? That is essentially what you are doing with your paladin class and giving them free reign. You are the candy dealer and frankly whining about something you could control, but instead choose the lazy DM route and bitching about 'candy classes'.
You are only playing half the game when you dismiss/ignore restrictions/powers you can have as a DM to combat the "candy" classes that you hate so much. Perhaps learn to adapt...or maybe be a player once in awhile. Finally glad to hear the crux of the problem/discussion and move on as its pointless to continue.
This discussion of 'candy' classes is like trying to order pizza at McDonalds. I don't think we are dining at the same place because you refuse/ignore to look at the same menu. You ignore the left pedal to push on the brakes of a car because you 'don't like it' and just repeatedly use the right pedal for speed and expect control. Use both pedals bro!
For some reason, some believe roleplay is all about funny voices or wearing costumes or something---No....just no.
Roleplay is intertwined with the DM's world and is ALL ABOUT consequences and taking responsibility for your character and your character's actions. PERIOD. Some of you should embrace that--it gives the DM power like you crave. If you don't include that shit, then sorry, in my opinion--you are only playing half the game and more power to you if you are having fun, but no thanks--that is not D&D to me. I'd rather read a book--same entertainment value. The only difference is I have the power to turn the page of a book. Roleplay doesn't have to be the #1 component of the game, but it should be part of the game in my humble opinion, especially when it can create solutions to 'candy classes'.
But we can disagree. I don't really give a shit about how you play your game nor do I pretend to 'know' what's going on at your table. Everyone plays differently and really, the important factor is that people are having fun. BUT....After months and months and MONTHS of hearing about 'candy' classes, I've grown warm to the newly labeled 'brick' playstyle that was introduced just this week by myself as a form of rebuttal (finally)---I've stooped to your level of labeling things (congrats for making me go there)--but hey!!!--don't take it personally-- it's not really directed at you...just players/DMs who prefer to ignore roleplay and play only with 'bricks' because they choose to ignore tools that can be used to combat things they feel is a threat to their DM power and/or give players any type of power at all---a stifler of imagination and creativity. The game is ONLY for the DM and its fun damn it and a total 'thrill ride'. If you think otherwise, you are just 'bored of the game' and 'trying to hard'. A classic OSR divider! yay. But it's just like candy class label--don't take it personally.
Some helpful advice @TheHeretic since you nailed some of my arguments better than myself...CAREFUL!! they may analyze you and let you know how you feel about the game and give you insights about how your group plays the game when you try to have a discussion with them. They will inform you that you are 'playing wrong'. Don't ask for their opinion on something, because instead they take that as a invitation to evaluate you that has nothing to do with the question asked and tell you 'be careful what you ask for'. Don't 'try too hard'.
They have really put effort into making people feel comfortable about sharing their ideas/experiences as it would never be used against them later!...
And for the fucking record....Beoric and I did add comments to Bryce's book awhile back--didn't realize we had to chirp about it. Waiting for a round 2 callout from Bryce. Your point?