
At a glance they both seem very similar, pious warriors in clanky armour, imbued with the ability to invoke divine magic striking down enemies of the faith.
However I've noticed that some people are very much drawn to the idea of playing a cleric, but not at all to playing paladins, and visa versa. Some people do like them both.
They obviously always run on different rules and had different roles in every edition, the cleric is the stronger spellcaster and the paladin is the stronger fighter, but have these differences felt so clear when conceptualising a character?
So
What is the difference, in your mind between the archetype of the Cleric and a Paladin?
Does one or both interest you as character concepts?
And
Do you feel 5E does a good job of mechanically supporting the identity of the Cleric vs/and/or the Paladin?
Also unusual directions that people have taken the concept of their clerics and paladins is interesting to.
For me:
The 2E AD&D PHB shaped my conception of D&D, even though I didn't play it much. I found it interesting that it specifically mentioned the Knights Templar were listed as inspirations for the Cleric, not the Paladin. And the 2E DMG mentioned that Paladins are too rare for organisations to exist bigger than the Knights of the Round table.
The Cleric is a priest, a holy man of a faith, even if that holiness is corrupted and decadent.
The Paladin is a knight or rather the Arthurian ideal of what a knight should be as a champion of honour, chivalry and virtue. For this reason a Paladin could not be a Paladin if they fell from grace.
With less emphasis on explaining concepts in relation to real world history and mythology, I think 3E making the paladin a more generic "holy warrior of their chosen god" drew the cleric and paladin closer together in concept. It was just that Paladins could fall... for some reason... despite seemingly having less divine mojo than the cleric.
Likewise in 4E with the concept of the "Divine Investiture" for both clerics and paladins meant they were primarily defined by their roles and powers, not concepts. The idea the gods couldn't actually strip a cleric or paladin of their powers if they misbehaved was one I actually rather liked.
Of course these archetypes can be taken far from their base, with Clerics being followers of abstract concepts rather than gods and paladins being Quixotic drunkards (literally perhaps!) or Holy Assassins.
In this way the concept of the Paladin's Oath I think greatly reinforces this, as it moves the paladins slightly further away from the gods of the world, whilst acknowledging that a paladin might well swear their Oaths before a god. Similarly I see the three Oaths as different takes on “Good” beyond Alignment: Crudely summerised as Honour (Oath of Devotion), Beauty (Oath of the Ancients) or Justice (Oath Of Vengeance).
The Cleric domains meanwhile provide a great deal of customisation such that the trickery and knowledge clerics feel quite distinct from a Tempest or War cleric, despite sharing a similar spell list and class abilities.
Oddly although the Paladin Oath and Cleric Domains are actually very similar in how they alter their primary class, this serves to make them feel quite distinct.
(Had fun in a recent short campaign with an Oath of Vengeance Paladin who was an ex-gang enforcer who received a divine vision from Saint Cynthia the Flayed as his family burnt alive for his crimes he committed and his service as her champion in a hopeless quest for redemption. The creed of his god is simply "Injustice exists because of weakness and cowardice" "No injustice is ever forgiven", so he is fully aware he can never find atonement by his god.)
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7prrWqKmlnF6kv6h706GpnpmUqHykuMSroJxlpqh6sa3Lmpuipl2YvK%2BvxKmrrGWRo7FuucScn5qmmZiurXnRnpiloaOWwaq7zWdrcHBoZX9w