Analysing AD&D 1e’s Fighter, Cavalier, and Paladins

Published: 2026/02/21

Last updated: 2026/02/21

In AD&D 1e’s Player’s Handbook, the classes of Fighter and Paladin are introduced, with the latter being a sub-class of the former. In the expansion Unearthed Arcana, a new warrior, the Cavalier, was introduced, and due to thematic overlap the Paladin was re-classified as a sub-class of it instead. The existence of UA’s Cavalier, and to a lesser degree, of weapon specialisation, has caused no end of skub; however, it is my belief that some of this conflict stems from misunderstandings and miscalculations. Herein I’d like to look at the relative balance and implications of the aforementioned classes’ configurations, and address the intent of the role-playing aspects of each, with some words from Gary Gygax where necessary. Since the Paladin classes will build on their base class, please excuse the necessary redundancy; fully documenting each class is intended to help emphasise their full weight and make explicit various implications, especially in the case of the Cavalier-Paladin, and to aid those jumping around the article.

Basic Statistics and Abilities

First, let’s lay out each class and give an overview of their requirements, abilities, and basic flavour. It should be noted straight out that all four classes have the same THAC0 and Saving Throw progressions, with either flavour of Paladin getting +2 on all saves relative to their base classes, and that, although the descriptions don’t mention it outright, all classes get the ability to attack multiple times when fighting weak monsters, which makes a great deal of sense when you realise it’s possible for Cavaliers and both flavours of Paladins to regress back to being pure Fighters.

Fighters: Salt of the Earth

The simple Fighter is the backbone of both every party and this debate, so it would help to understand how it functions and what its intent is. Essentially, the Fighter is the fallback class, the default, the one anyone can be a part of (nearly) irrespective of Ability Scores or race: it is a man trained in the art of hitting and/or shooting things until they stop moving while avoiding the same fate himself. They can represent anything: a pirate, a mercenary, a plucky youth out for adventure, a noble’s scion, a warrior-king; their key attraction is their martial and thematic versatility.

Mechanically, they are the simplest class to play as and have the fewest bells and whistles. Let’s lay out a simple chart describing their basic stats:

In addition to this, the Fighter boasts several abilities:

Easily overlooked, being found only in one chart, is the ability to bully weaker monsters as noted above. The APR listed above is strictly for melee attacks; missile weapons have their own APR rules.

Unearthed Arcana does not alter Fighters except for one point: the optional ability to pursue “Weapon Specialization”, an ability that must be taken at first level; in exchange for an additional weapon proficiency slot (two for bows save the crossbow), it grants additional attacks per round and a bonus to both accuracy and damage. For all bows, it also introduces a “point blank” category, which gets additional bonuses to accuracy and double damage, as well as the possibility to fire before initiative is rolled if the weapon is already readied. A third slot may be expended at any time to further increase the accuracy and damage bonuses of melee weapons (except pole arms and two-handed swords). The actual charts for this are more complicated due to the missile weapons’ quirks, so for comparison we’ll focus specifically on melee attacks, and adjust the prior ability chart as follows:

When APR values conflict vs attacks against weak monsters, the conventional ruling is to pick the most effective one (i.e. they don’t stack). Another common ruling is that the normal APR takes priority if it’s possible to target a stronger monster, since their prowess makes them more immediately distracting and doesn’t leave the necessary openings to assault the weaklings in the same way.

For reference, the full APR chart for weapon specialization is as follows:

Fighter-Paladins: Crusaders For Law and Good

From a role-playing perspective, Fighter-Paladins differ from the Fighter in that they are not an Everyman type, but rather elite, higher-class specialists tied to a Human church. They differ from the already militaristic Cleric with more combat versatility and special powers in exchange for lesser clerical abilities and more stringent oaths. As paragons of Law, and exemplars of virtue, they are geared towards enforcing Good, Law, and Justice throughout the realm while their restrictions ensure they don’t get too full of themselves. Let’s take a look at their basic mechanics:

Restrictions:

• Forsaking Lawful Good alignment results in effectively becoming a Fighter, losing all special Paladin abilities forever. Given that intent is important, magically-enforced Alignment change is implicitly likely to be allowed a chance at repentance/restoration; see below.
• Knowingly performing a Chaotic act requires a Fighter-Paladin to seek out a Lawful Good Cleric of at least 7th level, confess their sin, and undertake penance as directed by the Cleric; failure to attempt this implicitly causes a loss of Paladin abilities until the penance is undertaken.
• Knowingly and wilfully performing an Evil act irrevocably causes a loss of Paladin abilities, with no penance possible.
• Unable to use Clerical scrolls, even after gaining spell-casting ability.
• Cannot own more than 10 magical items; these may not exceed:
  • 1 suit of armour
  • 1 shield
  • 4 weapons (missile weapons and their ammo stack(s) count as 1 item)
  • 4 magical items of any other sort
• 10% of all income obtained must be tithed to a non-Player-owned Lawful Good religious institution.
• Cannot retain excess wealth; a Fighter-Paladin is allowed to keep enough cash on hand to support themselves modestly, pay henchmen, men-at-arms, and servitors, and to construct and maintain a small castle. Money beyond that is given away to a non-Player-owned Lawful Good religious institution.
• Henchmen must be of Lawful Good Alignment.
• Fighter-Paladins may not associate with players or creatures of non-Good alignment.
  • Fighter-Paladins may not join a party with non-Evil Neutrals for more than the duration of a single expedition, and said expedition’s end must further the cause of Lawful Good in some fashion.
• If possible, Fighter-Paladins will seek to take service or form alliances with Lawful Good characters, Players and NPCs alike, who are Clerics or Fighters of noble status.

Now, as to their numerous special abilities:

Notice that weapon specialization is not among these abilities. This is because that rule was introduced in Unearthed Arcana, the same book in which Paladins were re-classified as a subset of the Cavalier, which we’ll address shortly.

As can be seen, Fighter-Paladins are a pretty big upgrade on the whole, being able to do everything a Fighter can in the base game, but balanced with higher Ability Score requirements, a slew of responsibilities to their alignment and requirements for modest living; I didn’t show it here, but they also have higher XP requirements. So far, there’s nothing terribly controversial here in terms of baseline mechanics; the conflict comes from role-playing considerations, which we’ll address a bit later.

Cavaliers: Elite Leaders

Now we come to the controversial Cavaliers. Conceptually, they are the sons of nobles, or especially gifted commoners under their sponsorship, raised from childhood in the saddle and the training hall; fighting isn’t just their occupation, it’s their life and all they’ve ever known, and they are determined to be the best of the best and leaders of men. Given this background, they come with a slew of powerful abilities, as well as potent requirements that can sometimes be a bit of a footgun. Let’s start with the basics:

Note that the HP for 1st level is unusual. This is because Cavaliers have unique starting HP balanced around the fact that it’s possible, depending on your Social-Economic Class (SEC), to start as a 0-level character. Such a character begins with 1d4+1 HP as a Horseman, then graduates to a Lancer and gains another 1d4 HP, and then finally becomes a Cavalier and gains a final 1d4. In contrast, a character that starts as a proper Cavalier begins with 1d10+3 HP. Further complicating it, HP bonuses from Constitution begin as a Horseman, skip Lancer, and then go back to normal. If you add it up, however, neither beginning is cheated out of any HP.

Note also that Cavaliers must start as Good but can freely change alignment up until 4th level without mechanical penalties.

Lastly, note that Cavaliers are entitled to both money and starting equipment based on their SEC:

A Cavalier has a number of restrictions:

• Aspiring Cavaliers of less than Lower Upper Class must have a sponsor of Lower Upper Class or higher, begin their careers as a 0-level Horseman (a retainer for a knight) with -1500 XP, graduate to a 0-level Lancer at -500 XP, and then finally become a Cavalier at 0 XP.
  • Elven and Half-Elven Cavaliers in particular must be part of, or sponsored by, a noble house at minimum.
• Cavaliers are required to have proficiency in specific weapons before they are allowed to branch out as they please, which takes until 17th level for Humans and 19th level for Elves or Half-Elves:
  • Lances (mandatory at 1st level):
    • Only one type of lance is required
    • When dismounted:
      • Heavy lances act as awl pikes in terms of damage and AC adjustment.
      • Medium and light lances act as spears in terms of damage, AC adjustment, and apparently throwing distance.
  • Knightly swords (broad sword, long sword, or scimitar must be selected by 3rd level):
    • Bastard sword
    • Broad sword
    • Long sword
    • Scimitar
    • Short sword
  • Horseback weapons (one must be selected by 5th level):
    • Horseman’s flail
    • Horseman’s mace
    • Horseman’s military pick
  • Front-liner missile weapons
    • Dagger
    • Javelin
  • If Elvish or Half-Elvish:
    • Short compound bows
• Most missile weapons, as well as pole arms and two-handed swords, call the personal bravery of the knight into question, so their use is discouraged by all except the most powerful Cavaliers; their usage may violate his oaths. Note that the allowed weapons are relatively short-distance weapons used opportunistically by front-line fighters, not weapons that are meant to keep one safely in the back rows or behind another warrior. Composite short bows were historically used from horseback as well.
• Flaming oil is not permitted except during siege warfare.
• Bare-handed pummelling attempts are made at -2 To-Hit, since they are unaccustomed to such crude pursuits.
• Armour appearance is of paramount importance, as it serves as a badge of station as well as a means of defence; no Cavalier will wear anything less than ring mail, and will insist on the highest-available category of armour irrespective of magical bonuses, and further insist that it be decorated if at all possible.
• An armorial bearing (a device worn on the shield to identify himself) must be presented when fighting any creature that understands the significance.
• From 4th level to 9th level, a Cavalier must be accompanied by his retainers unless commanded otherwise by his lord, and must both provide for their needs and take responsibility for their conduct.
• If his pennant is stolen, its retrieval must be undertaken lest he suffer a loss of honour.
• A Cavalier must serve someone or some cause, and adhere to a specific code of conduct and ethics akin to chivalry. Failing to uphold it may result in a loss of XP, or even knighthood, rendering the Cavalier a mere Fighter, though he cannot gain weapon specialisation and cannot lose his weapons of choice bonuses.
  • The virtues to be upheld are:
    • Bravery
    • Courtesy
    • Glory
    • Good Faith
    • Honour
    • Liberality
    • Pride
    • Unselfishness
  • The (default!) codes to be upheld are:
    • Noble service, cheerfully rendered
    • Defence of any charge unto death
    • Courage and enterprise in obediences to rule
    • Respect for all peers and equals
    • Honour to all above your station
    • Obedience and respect from those below your station
    • Scorn for those who are lowly and ignoble (including knightly limitations on weapons and armour)
    • Military prowess exercised in service to your lord
    • Courtesy to all ladies
    • “War is the flowering of chivalry”
    • “Battle is the test of manhood”
    • “Combat is glory”
    • “Personal glory above all in battle”
    • “Death to all who oppose the cause”
    • “Death before dishonour”
• In a field combat situation, the Cavalier is obliged to take the fight to the strongest creature possible, ideally via a charge; bystanders are advised to stay out of the way.

A Cavalier’s special abilities get a bit more complicated:

The “weapons of choice” increase in a similar fashion as the Cavalier gains further levels. The Cavalier must choose between the various swords and the horseman weapons, specialising in one of each so far as the bonuses go. APR for these caps at 3/1 at level 16.

The ability to “function” at negative HP is basically ability sufficient enough to stay conscious and leave the area; while they cannot attack, their movement rate is unhampered. Given that the negative HP rate can surpass the bleed-out boundary of -10, ranging as it does from -4 to -13, it can be surmised that they both automatically staunch their own wounds and that, for the lucky few who can go to -10 or below, going beyond that is instant death.

The Cavalier is obviously a monomaniacal powerhouse, though with a laundry list of restrictions to balance it. A practical comparison between it and the Fighter on the field might be instructive, but first let’s see how it affects the Cavalier-Paladins.

Cavalier-Paladins: The Ultimate Crusaders

A Cavalier-Paladin has most of the powers of Cavaliers alongside those of the Paladin, making for an extremely potent elite crusader, but he has all the responsibilities of a Paladin and many of the eccentricities of the Cavalier to contend with too. To start with, their basic mechanics:

Note that the HP for 1st level is unusual. This is because Cavalier-Paladins have unique starting HP balanced around the fact that it’s possible, depending on your Social-Economic Class (SEC), to start as a 0-level character. Such a character begins with 1d4+1 HP as a Horseman, then graduates to a Lancer and gains another 1d4 HP, and then finally becomes a Cavalier-Paladin and gains a final 1d4. In contrast, a character that starts as a proper Cavalier-Paladin begins with 1d10+3 HP. Further complicating it, HP bonuses from Constitution begin as a Horseman, skip Lancer, and then go back to normal. If you add it up, however, neither beginning is cheated out of any HP.

Also, note that Cavalier-Paladins are entitled to both money and starting equipment based on their SEC:

Restrictions:

• Aspiring Cavalier-Paladins of less than Lower Upper Class must have a sponsor of Lower Upper Class or higher, begin their careers as a 0-level Horseman (a retainer for a knight) with -1500 XP, graduate to a 0-level Lancer at -500 XP, and then finally become a Cavalier-Paladin at 0 XP.
• Cavalier-Paladins are required to have proficiency in specific weapons before they are allowed to branch out as they please, which takes until 17th level:
  • Lances (mandatory at 1st level):
    • Only one type of lance is required
    • When dismounted:
      • Heavy lances act as awl pikes in terms of damage and AC adjustment.
      • Medium and light lances act as spears in terms of damage, AC adjustment, and apparently throwing distance.
  • Knightly swords (broad sword, long sword, or scimitar must be selected by 3rd level):
    • Bastard sword
    • Broad sword
    • Long sword
    • Scimitar
    • Short sword
  • Horseback weapons (one must be selected by 5th level):
    • Horseman’s flail
    • Horseman’s mace
    • Horseman’s military pick
  • Front-liner missile weapons
    • Dagger
    • Javelin
  • If Half-Elvish:
    • Short compound bows
• Most missile weapons, as well as pole arms and two-handed swords, call the personal bravery of the knight into question, so their use is discouraged by all except the most powerful Cavalier-Paladins; their usage may violate his oaths. Note that the allowed weapons are relatively short-distance weapons used opportunistically by front-line fighters, not weapons that are meant to keep one safely in the back rows or behind another warrior. Composite short bows were historically used from horseback as well.
• Flaming oil is not permitted except during siege warfare.
• Bare-handed pummelling attempts are made at -2 To-Hit, since they are unaccustomed to such crude pursuits.
• Armour appearance is of paramount importance, as it serves as a badge of station as well as a means of defence; no Cavalier-Paladin will wear anything less than ring mail, and will insist on the highest-available category of armour irrespective of magical bonuses, and further insist that it be decorated if at all possible.
• From 4th level to 9th level, a Cavalier-Paladin must be accompanied by his retainers unless commanded otherwise by his lord, and must provide for their needs and take responsibility for their conduct.
• The extent of a Cavalier-Paladin’s knightly duties and restrictions are not touched on in Unearthed Arcana beyond those noted above. If we assume they include all Cavalier duties, then:
  • An armorial bearing (a device worn on the shield to identify himself) must be presented when fighting any creature that understands the significance.
  • If his pennant is stolen, its retrieval must be undertaken lest he suffer a loss of honour.
  • He must uphold the Virtues and the Codes.
  • In a field combat situation, he is obliged to take the fight to the strongest creature possible, ideally via a charge; bystanders are advised to stay out of the way.
    • It is my contention that the above are not part of the intended role of the Cavalier-Paladin, as they swear loyalty to a holy cause, not a national or tribal cause, and because the violation of these strictures costs one his knighthood, rendering him a common Fighter, which might well translate in this case to a Fighter-Paladin if breaking the Virtues or Codes weren’t necessarily done for an Evil reason. Furthermore, the pride upheld in the exercise of these duties seems to run counter to the enforced humility of the Cavalier-Paladin, who should not be in it for the usual reasons of personal wealth and glory.
• Forsaking Lawful Good alignment results in effectively becoming a Cavalier, losing all special Paladin abilities forever. Given that intent is important, magically-enforced Alignment change is implicitly likely to be allowed a chance at repentance/restoration; see below.
• Knowingly performing a Chaotic act requires a Cavalier-Paladin to seek out a Lawful Good Cleric of at least 7th level, confess their sin, and undertake penance as directed by the Cleric; failure to attempt this implicitly causes a loss of Paladin abilities until the penance is undertaken.
• Knowingly and wilfully performing an Evil act irrevocably causes a loss of Paladin abilities, with no penance possible.
• Unable to use Clerical scrolls, even after gaining spell-casting ability.
• Cannot own more than 10 magical items; these may not exceed:
  • 1 suit of armour
  • 1 shield
  • 4 weapons (missile weapons and their ammo stack(s) count as 1 item)
  • 4 magical items of any other sort
• 10% of all income obtained must be tithed to a non-Player-owned Lawful Good religious institution.
• Cannot retain excess wealth; a Cavalier-Paladin is allowed to keep enough cash on hand to support themselves modestly, pay henchmen, men-at-arms, and servitors, and to construct and maintain a small castle. Money beyond that is given away to a non-Player-owned Lawful Good religious institution.
• Henchmen must be of Lawful Good Alignment.
• Cavalier-Paladins may not associate with players or creatures of non-Good alignment.
  • Cavalier-Paladins may not join a party with non-Evil Neutrals for more than the duration of a single expedition, and said expedition’s end must further the cause of Lawful Good in some fashion.
• If possible, Cavalier-Paladins will seek to take service or form alliances with Lawful Good characters, Players and NPCs alike, who are Clerics or Fighters of noble status.

Including the abilities they inherit from becoming a Cavalier instead of a Fighter, their list of special abilities looks like so:

The “weapons of choice” increase in a similar fashion as the Cavalier-Paladin gains further levels. The Cavalier-Paladin must choose between the various swords and the horseman weapons, specialising in one of each so far as the bonuses go. APR for these caps at 3/1 at level 19.

This is admittedly pretty crazy, but that is the implication of making them an extension of the Cavalier. Note, however, the incredible Ability Score requirements, making characters like this very rare.

Comparative Analysis

Now, having all of these charts at hand and a good understanding of the basics of each class, it would be useful to compare the related classes and note their differences side-by-side, including the practical differences between “weapon specialisation” and “weapons of choice”

Fighter vs Cavalier

As we look at these two in particular, it is very important to keep in mind that, again, Fighters represent anything from commoners to kings of varying martial traditions, while Cavaliers are born and raised to be elite leaders in a specific martial, legal, and social tradition from childhood. That said, let’s put the basic stat blocks side by side:

Cavaliers are notably harder to qualify for, especially on a straight 3d6 system. They require 6 more Strength and 8 more CON than the average Fighter on top of everything else. This, their racial restrictions, and their weapon and armour restrictions help showcase their more elite status. The Fighter is not without advantages here, however: in addition to being easier to qualify for, they are allowed to be much more opportunistic about weapons and armour, since they are much more pragmatic, and they have a head start at general weapon usage, gaining an extra starting proficiency to start, and have a smaller non-proficiency penalty. How do those proficiencies work out, though? Let’s chart it out 19 levels and see:

Surprisingly favourable for both classes, though the Cavalier catches up at 5th level and starts surpassing at 9th level before decisively pulling ahead at 15th. Don’t forget one critical point though: Fighters have completely free, no-strings-attached weapon selection at all levels.

Fighters do fall behind by 1-3 slots if weapon specialisation is taken, though that is not possible to trivially chart given the specifics of how it works.

This seems like a good time to break down weapon specialisation vs weapons of choice, so let’s do that:

¹ Does not include pole arms or two-handed swords

Weapon specialisation is the immediate winner in terms of bonuses, especially at tier 2, though weapons of choice offer a bit of flexibility and superior melee APR at the high end. For someone that wants to rain hell upon the enemy at range, Fighter is blatantly the only choice.

And for a little further context, let’s consider baseline APR, including the Paladins, since I couldn’t resist adding them to the above chart:

Cavaliers do have the edge there. Interestingly, both Paladins follow the Fighter, either identically or closely; the Cavalier-Paladin beats out the Fighter at level 12, but constantly chases the Cavalier until level 19. Combining the two, Fighter APR rates are extremely impressive for specialised weapons, though in either case edged out by the elites late-game.

Fighter vs Fighter-Paladin

It’s worth considering the purely-PHB Fighter and Fighter-Paladin together too, to see what it requires to extend the Fighter’s powers:

Paladins are definitely, again, more demanding, though they at least get an XP bonus if they hit it big. 3 more Strength, 2 more CON, modest INT and WIS requirements, and a whopping 17 for Charisma make it notably tougher to qualify for, and it’s Human-only. Other than the loss of a proficiency, it seems the bulk of the balance for all of its extra abilities comes from the strict adherence to Lawful Good codes of morals and ethics. Surprisingly straightforward.

Cavalier vs Cavalier-Paladin

Although we’ve done the brunt of the work earlier, let’s compare the statblocks for the Cavalier and Cavalier-Paladin:

A Cavalier is already pretty hard to qualify for, so it’s not surprising the jump is a bit more modest: 3 more Wisdom and the usual 17 Charisma. Expect a ton of re-rolls if you’re intent on it. The Cavalier-Paladin actually loses a full HD relative to its base class this time, but is otherwise identical to start. As we saw above, their relative balance is mainly in the form of later APR progression, fewer followers, and vows of poverty, and their primary role-playing differentiation being the flavour and extent of their oaths.

Fighter-Paladin vs Cavalier-Paladin

Just for fun, let’s compare the statblocks of the Paladins too:

To balance its array of new abilities, it requires 3 more Strength, 15 Dexterity, 6 more Constitution, and 1 more Intelligence. Why not. It’s interesting that a Cavalier-Paladin can potentially start with 3 more HP than the Fighter-Paladin due to the more variable starting roll. The Fighter-Paladin does have it a bit easier in that any armour or weapons can be used. The proficiency rate and non-proficiency penalty flip around a bit, with the generalist being more accurate but slower to learn than the elite.

Objections, Misunderstandings, and Retrospectives

Now, having a strong understanding of how the classes operate, it’s time to address the role-playing aspects, objections, perceptual corrections, and perhaps a few suggestions.

Fighters

As mentioned already, a proper understanding of the Fighter revolves around the fact that it is an Everyman kind of class, able to accommodate any person of average strength and health, a reliable fallback whose strength is not just in its numbers, but in its simplicity. This should be kept firmly in mind as you consider the balance of the other classes.

Some would argue that this simplicity is upset a bit with the introduction of weapon specialisation, that it makes the Fighter too powerful. I would point out that in the vanilla PHB, every other class has some ability to increase their damage beyond the norm: Rogues have backstab, Mages have incredibly damaging spells, Priests have all sorts of buffs and debuffs, Rangers have access to two kinds of magic and thus both kinds of spells, and Paladins have a few buff and debuff spells at higher levels as well a permanent debuffing aura vs a number of evil creatures. Among the two additional classes, Monks get radically boosted hand-to-hand dice and two instant-kill abilities, and Bards have access to Druid spells and thus buffs and debuffs as well as backstabbing. In that light, I’d say throwing Fighters a bit of a bone there is well in-line.

Accepting the notion, it can be pointed out that this makes Fighters overly reliant on one type of weapon, which might not necessarily be to their benefit when considering the availability and spread of magic weapons, or particular combat situations, or whatever. This is, to an extent, true. However, nobody said a Fighter must only rely on that particular weapon, either. The simple realities of combat make a Fighter want a weapon capable of every type of damage, as well as something to use at range, and that’s not going to change with or without weapon specialisation. A good DM can also make use of weapon specialisation both positively and negatively; for instance, letting a struggling party find or otherwise use the specialised weapon during more difficult encounters or giving the party a bit of a handicap by using monsters that are resistant to the favoured weapon’s damage type. In practice, it seems to work out just fine.

It is also true that, by the book, Rangers get this same ability. This does not make Rangers in particular any better. Rangers using their specialised weapons are on-par with a Fighter doing the same, but their APR increases for all other weapons are still 1 or 2 levels behind, and they require more XP. Additionally, their potential specialised weapon list is considerably smaller.

If weapon specialisation is still deemed a bit overly powerful, The Heroic Legendarium (a work I personally esteem quite highly) has three suggestions:

1. Specialised characters attack as usual with their specialised weapons, but all other weapons attack on the Cleric matrix until or unless a proficiency point is expended, at or after name level, to “proof” their proficient weapons, allowing attacks on the Fighter matrix, with non-proficient attacks still falling under the Cleric matrix.
2. Increase XP requirements by 15% for characters specialised in anything but a bow, and 25% for characters specialised in a bow or double-specialised in a melee weapon; in the case of double specialisation, the increase is calculated as of the level the double specialisation is acquired.
3. Require specialised characters to take level-training with a character who is also specialised with their particular weapon. This does take more work on the part of the DM, but a side-quest to find an appropriate person has its uses.

I might also suggest, as I do in my own game at present, that weapon specialisation may only be undertaken by single-classed characters; this is already true of weapons of choice (I don’t allow, Rangers, Cavaliers or any Paladins to dual-class due to their vows and focus), and it gives a reason to play a single-classed Fighter.

Paladins

Paladins, particularly Fighter-Paladins, are generally a respected class, but they also have certain perceptions surrounding them related to their ethical and moral codes.

One common ploy of the more dickish DM is to try and organise a “gotcha” situation to “force” a Paladin to fall, usually based around an incorrect understanding of what a Lawful Good character, much less a paragon, is supposed to be like. Let’s look at a few exchanges between players and Gary Gygax, as recorded in Gary’s Clarifications (corrections for readability and grammar are my own):

I had a situation come up. The group had been ambushed by a group of Ogres and managed to fight them off and capture the remaining one. They questioned it (by tying it upside down and hanging it by its feet from a tree). They learned that it was part of the assault group that had just attacked a keep some days before, and this PC group was part of the defense of the keep. The Paladin in the group, once finding out that no more harm will come from this tribe, that this is the last Ogre, decides to execute the Ogre. Their mission is to get to the highfolk, and thus they don’t have time to drag an Ogre to authorities. It’s clear the Ogre will only slow them down. The Dwarf who was doing the questioning gets pissed at the Paladin for jumping in and finishing off his prisoner, walks over to the Paladin’s horse, and slits its throat, saying “Don’t tarry when you run to catch up with us. If you ever so much as interfere with my prisoners again I will gut you like a pig and feed you to my boar.” I explained to the player of the dwarf that this is not a good act. I am thinking that he needs an alignment change to CN from this act. Furthermore, killing a Paladin of Heironeous’s warhorse isn’t going to sit lightly with the Paladin, and likely a duel to the death will take place here. What would you do in this situation (the dwarf is CG)?

After further clarifying that the warhorse was mundane, not the Paladin’s special one, Gary responded:

That is wasn’t the Paladin’s warhorse makes the matter less serious, but only marginally so. The Paladin’s honor was besmirched by the dwarf, and as the DM I would call that to the attention of the player of the Paladin if there was less than great umbrage taken. To allow the incident to pass without punishing the offending dwarf would be a dark stain on the honor of the paladin.

Paladins are not stupid, and in general there is no rule of Lawful Good against killing enemies. The old adage about nits making lice applies. Also, as I have often noted, a Paladin can freely dispatch prisoners of Evil alignment that have surrendered and renounced that alignment in favor of Lawful Good. They are then sent on to their reward before they can backslide.

Lesson: Despite their humility, Paladins have both honour and authority, and the right to exercise both. Let’s look at a further example:

Since slitting the throats of prisoners is an evil act, and since I don’t like putting Lawful Good PCs in the position of having to make such choices, I let them off the hook by adding in: “You notice the ogre drawing a blade he secreted on his person — he is about to lunge at you!” or some such, giving them a justification to kill the ogre prisoner. This might seem overly contrived, but it’s better than imposing Sophie’s Choices on PCs. I remember Moore’s article, but I found it less than satisfactory. I agree that Good isn’t stupid, though.

To which Gary firmly responded:

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is by no means anything but Lawful and Good. Prisoners guilty of murder or similar capital crimes can be executed without violating any precept of the alignment. Hanging is likely the usual method of such execution, although it might be beheading, strangulation, etc. A paladin is likely a figure that would be considered a fair judge of criminal conduct.

Lesson: Law is Law, and equality under the law is applicable to all, with punishments meted out that match the crime not being itself a crime.

In response to the above, another asked:

Gary, seeing how you define Lawful Good, to what alignment would you ascribe the qualities of mercy, benevolence, and – dare I say – pacifism? Would you consider such traits Chaotic? Evil?

To my mind, the example you just described of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” represents Lawful Neutral. That is, for society to be viable, order must be upheld at any cost. Those who do not conform to the will of society forfeit their right to exist within it, and are subject to whatever punishment (death included) best serves the society.

Gary replied:

I am not going to waste my time and yours debating ethics and philosophy. I will state unequivocally that in the alignment system as presented in OAD&D, an eye for an eye is lawful and just, Lawful Good, as misconduct is to be punished under just laws.

Lawful Neutrality countenances malign laws. Lawful Good does not.

Mercy is to be displayed for the lawbreaker that does so by accident. Benevolence is for the harmless. Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves. They have no place in determining general alignment, albeit justice tempered by mercy is a NG manifestation, whilst well-considered benevolence is generally a mark of Good.

In response to another poster responding to the same question with “Lawful Stupid? >:^)”, Gary replied:

With regard to pacifism, that is apropos, also with regards to atheism in the FRPG where there are active deities. Only idiocy or mental derangement could explain such absurd beliefs in such a milieu.

He adds later in response to a question of monsters surrendering to LG characters thinking “they’re so goody-goody that we’ll get away and live to fight another day”:

If the foes of these humanoids are so foolish as to accept surrender and allow their prisoners to eventually go free and perform further depredations, your “Good” forces are really “Stupid.”

Further emphasising how he envisions various alignments handling that situation:

The non-combatants in a humanoid group might be judged as worthy of death by a LG opponent force and executed or taken as prisoners to be converted to the correct way of thinking and behaving. A NG opponent would likely admonish them to change their ways before freeing them. A CG force might enslave them so as to correct their ways or else do as the NG party did. CN and LN opponents would likely slaughter the lot. Evil opponents would enlist, enslave, or execute them according to the nature of the Evil victors and that of the survivors. Enlistment would be for those of like alignment, slaughter for those opposite the victors’ predisposition to order or disorder. Enslavement is an option for any sort of Evil desiring workers.

All of this works to demonstrate that Lawful Good is not an alignment of passive weaklings, but of stern, tempered justice as well as proactive valour; it is by no means ignorant of the nature of the world, but well-prepared to meet it on its own terms while simultaneously attempting to realise higher ideals. A Paladin acting under his oath must be judge, jury, and sometimes executioner in order to protect both Good and Law, the latter of which includes his duty to society as a whole.

Cavaliers

I have little doubt that Cavaliers are the single-most contentious class under consideration, perhaps more so than any other class in AD&D 1e. Not only is it seen as complicated in practice, but dangerously irresponsible and incapable of critical thinking, as well as illogically designed. That’s a heap of accusations, so let’s go through it bit by bit, considering both rationalisation and possible patches.

Abilities

Alignment-based Abilities

Alignment playing a role in the class beyond role-playing guidelines seems a bit odd on the surface. Good-aligned Cavaliers get more followers, the ability to (barely) function at certain negative HP levels, bonus healing at the weekly scale, and a Paladin-esque aura that protects from fear effects; the first ability is weakened for Neutral or Evil Cavaliers, while the rest are lost. The simple, overlooked answer to most of this is the fact that they are implied to be quasi-holy warriors by virtue of, well, their virtue. There is also a Clerical spell, Ceremony, that grants bonuses to both Cavaliers and Paladins who take up special vows (the nature of which apparently being at the DM’s discretion) at regular intervals; they are the only classes so named, and their grouping here is an important implication of a sort of equality, with Paladins being the more extreme end. It can then be implied that a Cavalier moving to Neutrality or Evil loses, by their lack of virtue, some of these divinely-gifted abilities (and that the Neutral and Evil gods don’t find it necessary to compensate them, as they gain certain implicit “freedoms” this way that Good will not allow them).

In light of this, it may seem a bit odd that Cavaliers have the freedom to shift alignment without mechanical penalties, other than losing those gifts, up until 4th level. However, one could argue that it is a grace period offered to these quasi-divine, but not divinely-devoted, warriors, knowing that Lawful Good chivalry is a very difficult path that not everyone can uphold; a final parting blessing, as it were.

Forced Retainer Accompaniment

The requirement of a Good Cavalier to travel with a retinue serves three purposes: building up the Cavalier’s leadership abilities, showcasing his status, and providing training for junior Cavaliers. Fairly practical, really, balancing privilege and responsibility. One’s liege may lift this requirement for a time, which can be a punishment, handicap, or responsibility as the situation warrants. Also, it should be noted that it in the old-school style, it was very normal to have a number of henchmen, so free followers that don’t even want to soak up your treasure hauls is very nice.

Men-at-arms are a different story; these are more like mercenaries, and thus only useful for overland travel or guarding a fortress. They’re pretty welcome when you consider the sheer numbers of creatures the Monster Manual throws at you in the wilderness — it’s not uncommon to encounter a couple of hundred kobolds in one go, for example.

It should be noted that all of these people do require upkeep, which requires a considerable amount of money each month, providing another bit of balance. The henchmen/retinue would normally require 100 GP/level/month, and the men-at-arms’ upkeep would be variable based on the type (see the DMG entry on “Expert Hirelings”), though given that none of these require a wage I expect the DM will need to make some stuff up.

Mental Immunities

The immunity to fear itself is probably more contentious than the ability to radiate it via the aura. One could argue it’s a result of pride and training, but it is notably lost if the Cavalier is forced to become a Fighter, which instead suggests it’s a divine benefit that persists even across Alignments. Of course, one could argue that in the former case, the demoralisation and suffering necessary to be “downgraded” is also enough to break their spirit enough to lose this benefit. Either justification works and makes sense, really.

Being protected from mind-altering magic 90% of the time is a bit harder to explain, but not impossible: you can go with “divine grace” again, combined with, or independently of, the iron will necessary to live as a Cavalier, and have again the same explanation for the downgrade removing it.

The hardest one to explain, though, is being able to save at +2 vs illusion magic. This sort of thing is normally a function of exceptional Wisdom, and the Cavalier only needs 10. You can again go with “divine grace”, but it seems to be rather stretching it — why this particular branch of magic? What’s the thematic relevance? One could make a good argument for an enhanced affinity for truth-seeking if it was a Good-only ability, but it’s universal. I personally cannot come up with a good justification for this one, or its use in the traditional battlefields they’re raised in.

Physical Prowess

There are many things here that lead to accusations of power creep, and probably rightly so. I would point out that, as discussed above, weapons of choice are only slightly more powerful than weapon specialisation at the high end, and the ability to gain multiple attacks vs weak enemies is shared by the Fighter too. The biggest issue people take is more with the percentile dice gains at each level. The question becomes “why can’t I say that Bob the Fighter isn’t doing the same thing?” The answer to this, however, is simple: Cavaliers don’t live it up as adventurers normally do, and they are absolutely fanatical about their routines, routines that they have been perfecting for their entire lives with elite training; they’re not just Bob off the street. Remember too that there’s a few details here:

• While STR can go up to 18/00, it has 5 different breakpoints there: 01-50, 51-75, 76-90, 91-99, 00. While the initial roll is 1d100, subsequent rolls on level-up are only 2d10, so it will likely take a while to climb this. A Cavalier has a floor of 15 Strength, and you don’t even see bonus damage until 16, and then not again until 18, so the direct impact on a game can vary greatly and also be offset to some degree with other characters via magic items and spells.
• With the exception of 18 Strength, percentile damage doesn’t have any effect until it hits 00, causing a roll-over.
• While Dexterity increases are a straight upgrade, Constitution bonuses to HP are not retroactive, since we roll a single new HD at a new level, not the entire stack.

Chivalry

This is probably the most misunderstood and polarising issue of the class. A casual reading of the entry in Unearthed Arcana would suggest that a Cavalier is obligated to essentially become a berserker in any combat situation, tearing through the lines to fight the strongest thing possible as soon as possible. That is not quite the entire story, however.

Note the kinds of creatures discussed and the language used in the relevant paragraph:

“Powerful monsters…serving enemy leaders, then the leaders themselves.”

“Opponent Cavaliers of great renown, enemy flags and standards”.

“Opponent cavalry of noble or elite status”.

“Levies or peasants”.

“The Cavalier’s charge will be made at a full speed, regardless of army cohesion, intervening friendly troops, or other such considerations”

None of those situations sound like what you’re going to encounter in a typical conflict in the dungeons or travelling in the wilderness. That’s because this is describing essentially domain-play combat. Gary confirms as much in a posting; he was asked:

I just remembered one I’ve been wondering…for the Cavalier, it says they’re uncontrollable in battles, attacking enemies in a given order. A lot of people interpret that to mean any combat, but I think it means large-scale battles. Am I right?

He then replied:

You are essentially correct.

In a combat situation where the Cavalier is nominally under the command of another, the Cavalier will ignore orders and attack whenever he is so moved. Any player with a Cavalier PC should read up on knights in combat so as to know how to properly play the role of such a character in such situations — and to do that in general social interaction as well.

Basically, it comes down to being elite troops out to gain glory with heroic displays…when there’s superiors to impress and a large field to play it out on. That’s often the role of a PC in such a scenario anyway. Yes, it can be a bit of a problem, but it’s not as huge a problem as it is often made out to be since it’s related to a specific scenario and not general play.

Matters of courage and self-preservation also come up when addressing the Codes, and understandably so. The relevant entry on violating the Code gives a troubling example:

A Cavalier who retreats from battle, even to save fellow party members, would receive half experience for the beasts slain in his retreat.

It is not no experience, however, nor is it intended to be a means of enforcing fanaticism in battle — consider that the ability to function at negative HP is purely provided as a means to escape an unwinnable combat in order to fight another day. It is intended that the DM take the overall situation into consideration when deciding on code violations. Was the retreat necessary because the PCs were being foolish? Did they simply get cold feet in a battle they had a reasonable chance of winning? The DM is also encouraged to tweak the code as necessary for his campaign as well. Gary also thinks it’s unnecessary for the Cavalier to die pointlessly, as he explains in response to question about the “unheroic” nature of the negative-HP rule:

I can’t understand your problem with a rule that calls for a thinking character to retreat post-haste when in imminent danger of dying. Being brave and chivalrous does not equate to being stupid and throwing away one’s life. It isn’t heroic to die for no reason, and that applies to all including Paladins.

The Cavalier has no obligation to waste his life in foolhardy posturing. When he is near death getting away and tending wounds is logical. As the DM I would allow the admonition to be tempered by circumstances such as saving the lives of others, but otherwise what the rule says it says, and I won’t suggest any contradiction ;).

The objections above also apply to the Cavalier-Paladin, since we’ve covered both Paladins and Cavaliers now.

Possible Patches

Gary also once said that common sense was more useful than any rule book; always remember that when dealing with something that seems odd or broken on the face. I find these classes to be fascinating, and I think with a little more thought about the intent and spirit of these classes that they could fit more snugly into play than people may otherwise consider, power creep aside — and much of that can be constrained by being a little less liberal with your roll-up procedure, too.

Nonetheless, I think it’d be good to suggest a few patches I think are well-considered.

One idea is to bring in the rather attractive weapon specialisation abilities to the base game without all the rest of Unearthed Arcana. Players of OSRIC might notice that Paladins (and Rangers) are given optional access to weapon specialisation, balanced by later APR advancements. My personal solution for the Fighter-Paladin (I theoretically am allowing both types in my campaign) takes more from the spirit of the Ranger’s restrictions in Unearthed Arcana (which I also implement) and melds them with the preferred weapons of Cavaliers; as such, in my OSRIC game, a Paladin may only specialise in the weapons they are now required to master before any other weapons can be considered:

• Lance (must be taken at first level; reflects their skill at horsemanship),
• Light mace OR light flail OR light pick (again reflecting their skill at horsemanship)
• Broad sword OR long sword OR scimitar OR falchion OR epee OR rapier (knightly weapons)
• Dagger OR javelin (weapon of last resort/backup)

This should look very familiar at this point.

The Heroic Legendarium, referenced earlier in relation to weapon specialisation patches, also has some ideas for the Cavalier, more fitting to his tastes (removing the references to Oriental variations):

• The activity of the Cavalier is such that it precludes any other profession — there can be no multi-classed Cavalier or dual-classed Cavalier.
• Add battle axe, bec de corbin, pole axe, epee, falchion sword, rapier, and two-handed sword to the list of preferred weapons.
• Add falchion sword, rapier, and battle axe as options for the second weapon of choice.
• Add composite short bow as an option for the second or third weapon of choice for elf and half-elf Cavaliers. Such characters have an increased rate of fire (3/1 at levels 6-10, 4/1 at levels 11+ (should they manage to attain such)) and are able to employ their full rate of fire even while mounted.
• Weapon of choice “To-hit” bonus is capped at 17th level (i.e. +3 for the third weapon).
• The Protection from Fear aura of good-aligned Cavaliers becomes a +2 bonus to saving throws against Fear-based effects, not a blanket immunity.
• The 90% resistance to mind-affecting magic and +2 saving throw vs illusions are deleted.

I think these are good ideas in general, though I would modify the preferred weapons and weapon of choice rules a bit, instead having one of the new valid options for weapons of choice replace a weapon of the same category in the preferred weapons list (of the player’s choice, to avoid crowding it further), and remove the bec de corbin and pole axe from the preferred weapons list for being pole arms (albeit ones with knightly precedent) and thus against the spirit of the code as-written.

Additionally, I would add:

• Elves and Half-Elves may not surpass their racial Strength caps via the Cavalier’s radical training, as those are biological caps, not cultural.
• A Cavalier who reaches negative Hit Points still requires positive HP and a week’s bed-rest to regain full functionality afterwards.
• While not a balancing action per se, logically a Cavalier’s alignment should be altered to “Lawful Good at start” and then amended to “any Lawful” afterwards; the intense discipline and hierarchy necessary for this class are overwhelmingly Lawful traits and violating the codes and vows is more of a Chaotic act; this finds a ready parallel in the Monk class.

Personally, I would also suggest that Cavaliers be exclusively male due to the biological caps on Strength (one reason why I suggest nerfing the training on demi-humans above, the other being a nudge of balance) and due to the strict honour culture being deeply rooted in the masculine psyche.

Concluding Thoughts

I realise this is quite a wall of ideas and figures, but I hope it helped you come to a more thorough understanding and appreciation of these various warrior classes. Even better, I hope it inspires someone to give the more neglected variants an honest try.

If you feel I am incorrect in anything, feel free to e-mail me, ideally with relevant citations, and I’ll be pleased to correct it.

Back to main page