Reminds me of a game session urban legend of a paladin who got seduced by a disguised devil – he realised the situation while in bed with her, unarmed, and unarmored, but managed to send her running with some quick thinking – let’s just say that was one smite evil she didn’t expect…
My first thought was “deadly” but Ma’am works. =)
I also wondered if she took a few monk levels but who knows. Maybe her gloves are Gauntlets of Ogre Power.
So, what level is Maddie at this point (approximately), and how high (low) a level would those clones have to be for her to so thoroughly kick their a$$es?
Derek’s vow is for DEREK to do no harm; nothing was said about ‘allowing others to cause harm…even if just and righteous’ or ‘delighting in the harm others cause’.
I would say “armed and dangerous”. Maddie’s wielding the Fists (and Feet) of Justice, now!
Does this confirm Maddie to be a more badass fighter than the Princess? Or maybe it’s a case of “unskilled but strong” versus “weak but skilled”? “Weak” being a relative term here, of course. The Princess is without a doubt the more aggressive of the two, but she got beaten by Calamitus’ magic rather easily, while Maddie opened up a can of whoop ass with the grace of a ballerina.
So, who else hopes that Maddie and Derek eventually get hitched? I think they make a perfect couple.
Maddie doesn’t necessary need to be stronger – she had the moment of surprise on her side. Well … surprise … more like they underestimated her. They were prepared for Princess.
The Princess might have avoided Calamitus’ spells if she wasn’t all stoneskin at the time. But it’s not the first time her gung-ho fighting style has gotten her in trouble, either. Maddie knows how to dodge and weave. She balances offense and defense with a healthy dose of speed, agility, and precision. So, I’d say her technique was simply superior here.
Princess fights like a barbarian. Maddie fights like an armored ninja priestess. Except without the armor this time.
There’s two kinds of people in this world: people without weapons and people who are smitten. Smoten? Wait, Derek has no weapon and is still smitten. Smoten. Smooten? Whatever.
No long-term problems. Just a temporary negative level while it’s wielded. And the targets were sufficiently outclassed that a little -1 didn’t mean much.
I love this so much. Also, I had too many reactions to each panel to note down, so I made a short list
#4 Calamitus is so self-loving, he’s literally head over heels for himself. That, or Maddie misunderstood the term “body blow”.
#5 Ohhhh, so she took the “Holy Strike” feat! *bowling pin noises*
#9 She’s gonna catch you on the flip-side!
#10 Sorry Calamitus, Maddies gotta split for now.
#18 Head’s up Calamitus!
And finally, after much deliberation, I came up with my own end to Calamitus joke: What do you call a Paladin without weapons? A hands-on approach to parenting.
If the in house (in universe (?)) rules allow the 3.5 “Improvised weapons proficiency” feat (from Dragon magazine if I recall correctly), then a liberal view of what may be considered an improvised weapon, combined with a bit of rules lawyering (distasteful though that may be), would not only explain Maddy’s success on this page, but her entire ability to turn anything into the deadliest weapon you could hope for!
Alternatively she’s just that good. (I’ll settle for that as well 🙂 )
I have many questions. I was thinking that maybe Maddie would turn Monk after she and Derek get married in about three days, but d20SRD doesn’t say anything about paladin celibacy. Have I been incorrect? Otherwise, might someone give me a source that confirms it? But wouldn’t Monks have to be single as well? D20SRD says nothing about that, either, but it’s right in the class name. Wait, wouldn’t a female Monk be called a Nun?
The monk class in D&D is sort of a mash-up of Tibetan monks and Chinese & Japanese martial artists, and has nothing to do with the secluded Christian monks of Europe. Whether or not a paladin or monk might be required to be celibate depends on so many different factors – whether it’s a default expectation of the class, whether it’s common to be celibate among paladins or monks in a given game world, whether any given character belongs to an order of paladins or monks that require celibacy, and so on.
Since the SRD has very minimal flavour/setting text, it would have almost nothing to say about this or that paladin or monk being celibate or not.
I would expect that the best default assumption is that celibacy is not required of a paladin or monk character in a D&D game world (or, say, a comic setting loosely based on D&D) unless the text explicitly says so of that character in particular.
“What d’ya call a Paladin without a weapon?”
—
It’s a trick question, fool.
There’s NO_SUCH_THING.
Paladins spend their entire existence surrounded by 2 things: WEAPONS, & their ability to IMPROVISE.
The nearest possible version of this … hypothetical “Weapon-less Paladin”, is just a Paladin who merely hasn’t picked-up their weapon … YET.
Improved Unarmed Strike is one feat in 3E rules. She hardly needs to be a monk. Particularly if the 4E “Extras” rule is being observed for the Calamitus Crew. But my favorite theory is that this is a 5E game, and Maddie got Inspiration from kissing Derek, and every other player in the party is giving their long-held Inspiration to her as soon as she spends one (or possibly she describes her smackdown in such loving detail that the GM keeps giving her inspiration again after every single attack). Thusly, any and all improvised-weapon penalties (which IIRC aren’t actually present in 5E rules to begin with) get more than counteracted by the single most intentionally-OP thing that exists in the rules (except for the Lucky feat, which gives you three of these at a time, instead of letting you earn just one at a time).
Rusty and Co. and rustyandco.com is not affiliated with, endorsed, sponsored, or specifically approved by Wizards of the Coast LLC. For more information about Wizards of the Coast or any of Wizards’ trademarks or other intellectual property, please visit their website at Wizards.com
What do you call a Paladin without a weapon? A monk, apparently.
Personally, I’d call her ‘Oh god please spare me!’. That’s just me though.
You must be evil.
Or just angelically challenged
Reminds me of a game session urban legend of a paladin who got seduced by a disguised devil – he realised the situation while in bed with her, unarmed, and unarmored, but managed to send her running with some quick thinking – let’s just say that was one smite evil she didn’t expect…
Thank you, AVR, for defining my particular brand of Chaotic Neutral. I’ll have to remember it.
Well, “hands” are the original farming implements?
Pal-a-don’t
More like pal-a-done in this case
Monks use weapons too.
http://arek.paranoya.info/wiz7/creatures/images/munk.gif
She was armed. Also legged and bodied.
No, it was those three who got bodied
My first thought was “deadly” but Ma’am works. =)
I also wondered if she took a few monk levels but who knows. Maybe her gloves are Gauntlets of Ogre Power.
Paladin uses “Lay on Hands” it is super effective.
So, what level is Maddie at this point (approximately), and how high (low) a level would those clones have to be for her to so thoroughly kick their a$$es?
Maddie’s level makes no difference — she can’t read her character sheet with her eyes closed.
And here I thought she did that to make it closer to a fair fight….
“You can’t see them, they can see you”
Lots of theories. No answers — which would, of course, cut down on the fun
If that was a “fair fight”, I’d hate to see what Maddie could do if she was REALLY serious.
Maybe she has “blindfighting +20” 🙂
I think Derek the Clerid answered that one. Her level is Ma’am.
A very good and wise answer. The next response might want to be “Please no more.”
I called her still a paladin.
I think it’s a prestige class. Guardian of the Mortal Realm.
This long arc is finally paying off.
This is where “Seigi Shikkou” starts playing.
I think you’ve used up your quota of sound effects… this has more wham bam pow than a classic Batman episode.
Has wham and bam, needs a “thank you, ma’am”.
Pretty sure Derek’s face takes care of that part!
Now we just need to get Dorilys out there. Combining her ability with Maddie’s skills will be epic.
Wow, Popeye just beat the syndication out of those Calamiti…
How many levels of monk does Maddie have?
It’s official. Maddie’s mojo has been returned to the upright fully locked position! This makes me very happy.
YEAH!
I sorta want that “SMITE” panel as a wallpaper.
I second that.
I prefer the first ‘WHAM’ panel – she looks so serine… (Maybe change the background color.)
Derek seems to be approving of the violence. Remember your vow, man?
Derek’s vow is for DEREK to do no harm; nothing was said about ‘allowing others to cause harm…even if just and righteous’ or ‘delighting in the harm others cause’.
He did object when Dorilys gave the troll that trouble, though she did counter that it was his oath.
To listen, to suffer, to entrust unto tomorrow~
Also damn, more clear than anything Maddie took a couple of levels in monk after that display
What do you call a paladin with no weapon?
An impowvowser.
Ah, I should have seen this coming, the only recourse in times of disarmament: dat-arm-ament.
Derek’s blushing! Also, YAY MADDIE!
I would say “armed and dangerous”. Maddie’s wielding the Fists (and Feet) of Justice, now!
Does this confirm Maddie to be a more badass fighter than the Princess? Or maybe it’s a case of “unskilled but strong” versus “weak but skilled”? “Weak” being a relative term here, of course. The Princess is without a doubt the more aggressive of the two, but she got beaten by Calamitus’ magic rather easily, while Maddie opened up a can of whoop ass with the grace of a ballerina.
So, who else hopes that Maddie and Derek eventually get hitched? I think they make a perfect couple.
Maddie doesn’t necessary need to be stronger – she had the moment of surprise on her side. Well … surprise … more like they underestimated her. They were prepared for Princess.
The Princess might have avoided Calamitus’ spells if she wasn’t all stoneskin at the time. But it’s not the first time her gung-ho fighting style has gotten her in trouble, either. Maddie knows how to dodge and weave. She balances offense and defense with a healthy dose of speed, agility, and precision. So, I’d say her technique was simply superior here.
Princess fights like a barbarian. Maddie fights like an armored ninja priestess. Except without the armor this time.
Yes! Maddie and Derek forever!
There’s two kinds of people in this world: people without weapons and people who are smitten. Smoten? Wait, Derek has no weapon and is still smitten. Smoten. Smooten? Whatever.
It’s swinter. Better wear your smittens.
well she’s certainly smitten with *him*
That’s our girl (woman)! Maddie just opened the Mighty Can of Righteous Whoopass!
How Maddie Got Her Groove Back
A paladin can wield an unholy weapon with no repercussions?
Technically, as a Paladin she has the blessing of her God/Goddess…making her body a holy weapon. So unarmed still counts as wielding a holy weapon.
Talking about GRAB-WHIP-THOK-WHAM there, I expect.
No long-term problems. Just a temporary negative level while it’s wielded. And the targets were sufficiently outclassed that a little -1 didn’t mean much.
Woooohooooo!!!
Go Maddie!
I’d call her a frigging badass.
Language.
😉
I love this so much. Also, I had too many reactions to each panel to note down, so I made a short list
#4 Calamitus is so self-loving, he’s literally head over heels for himself. That, or Maddie misunderstood the term “body blow”.
#5 Ohhhh, so she took the “Holy Strike” feat! *bowling pin noises*
#9 She’s gonna catch you on the flip-side!
#10 Sorry Calamitus, Maddies gotta split for now.
#18 Head’s up Calamitus!
And finally, after much deliberation, I came up with my own end to Calamitus joke: What do you call a Paladin without weapons? A hands-on approach to parenting.
Maddie gave us a true wham-slam-thank-you-ma’am!
::slow claps::
One is smiting: The other is smitten.
I am too, truthfully. Watching Madeline the Paladin kick all sorts of righteous arse always brings a smile to my face.
I think it’s safe to conclude that Maddy has the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. Even the princess could learn a thing or two here!
Aw, Maddy, what’d you have to go and do that for? Now we’ll never get to hear what his punchline was going to be!
If the in house (in universe (?)) rules allow the 3.5 “Improvised weapons proficiency” feat (from Dragon magazine if I recall correctly), then a liberal view of what may be considered an improvised weapon, combined with a bit of rules lawyering (distasteful though that may be), would not only explain Maddy’s success on this page, but her entire ability to turn anything into the deadliest weapon you could hope for!
Alternatively she’s just that good. (I’ll settle for that as well 🙂 )
Boots are a gardening implement, right?
I’m reminded of this:
(a little NSFW)
https://me.me/i/have-you-ever-been-so-angry-that-you-hit-a-12ba2e3cd5e44f4f8f7553c06480427b
Wow, that *is* a gratuitous amount of violence!
A literal “Holy mother of asskicking”
I have many questions. I was thinking that maybe Maddie would turn Monk after she and Derek get married in about three days, but d20SRD doesn’t say anything about paladin celibacy. Have I been incorrect? Otherwise, might someone give me a source that confirms it? But wouldn’t Monks have to be single as well? D20SRD says nothing about that, either, but it’s right in the class name. Wait, wouldn’t a female Monk be called a Nun?
The monk class in D&D is sort of a mash-up of Tibetan monks and Chinese & Japanese martial artists, and has nothing to do with the secluded Christian monks of Europe. Whether or not a paladin or monk might be required to be celibate depends on so many different factors – whether it’s a default expectation of the class, whether it’s common to be celibate among paladins or monks in a given game world, whether any given character belongs to an order of paladins or monks that require celibacy, and so on.
Since the SRD has very minimal flavour/setting text, it would have almost nothing to say about this or that paladin or monk being celibate or not.
I would expect that the best default assumption is that celibacy is not required of a paladin or monk character in a D&D game world (or, say, a comic setting loosely based on D&D) unless the text explicitly says so of that character in particular.
Monk sexuality is order dependent. Consult your GM for best results.
Interesting. So why does everyone think that paladins have to be celibate?
“What d’ya call a Paladin without a weapon?”
—
It’s a trick question, fool.
There’s NO_SUCH_THING.
Paladins spend their entire existence surrounded by 2 things: WEAPONS, & their ability to IMPROVISE.
The nearest possible version of this … hypothetical “Weapon-less Paladin”, is just a Paladin who merely hasn’t picked-up their weapon … YET.
Awww yeah, Maddie’s got her mojo back.
Improved Unarmed Strike is one feat in 3E rules. She hardly needs to be a monk. Particularly if the 4E “Extras” rule is being observed for the Calamitus Crew. But my favorite theory is that this is a 5E game, and Maddie got Inspiration from kissing Derek, and every other player in the party is giving their long-held Inspiration to her as soon as she spends one (or possibly she describes her smackdown in such loving detail that the GM keeps giving her inspiration again after every single attack). Thusly, any and all improvised-weapon penalties (which IIRC aren’t actually present in 5E rules to begin with) get more than counteracted by the single most intentionally-OP thing that exists in the rules (except for the Lucky feat, which gives you three of these at a time, instead of letting you earn just one at a time).
she has a weapon. you
*cue jocat SMITE sound effect*
I think they’ll be calling her “ow”