Malor's page

Not to be bashing the Paladin. But if I were fighting demons or devils, I would rather be a high level Ranger with Favoured Enemy than a Paladin. It's nothing personal, I just think the ranger would be better, and that's wrong, seeing as demons and devils should be what the Paladin should be best at fighting at higher levels.

Why not just rename it Paladin Aura or Holy Aura or something like that.
It could still function as Aura of Good at first level but as you increase in levels it could get stronger by adding all the other Auras to it at level equal to the Fighters Armour Training bonus, ie:
1st: Aura of good
3rd: Aura of courage
7th: Aura of resolve
11th: Aura of justice
15th: Aura of faith
19th: Aura of righteousness
I realize that you would receive some of these powers at a later level but I don't see that as a problem.

I still like the idea of the aura working like a continuos protection of evil. I know it adds to the Paladins saving throws, but it could replace Divine Grace and Aura of Resolve at later levels. Or ust give the Paladin the same saves as a Monk in place of Divine Grace.

Why not make Aura of Good be like a constant Protection from Evil ability for the Paladin. it would help his AC.
Or you could make it that any real powers associated with it only kick in after a couple of levels. eg: good aligned weapon @ 3rd, prot' from evil @5th, prot' from evil 5' radius @ 7th level, prot' from evil 10' radius @ 9 th level, holy sword @ 11th level, etc…

As far as Divine Grace goes, why not just get rid of it all together and just give the Paladin the same saving throw bonuses as the Monk.
Also a constant Protection from Evil ability for the Paladin might help his AC. Maybe it can expand as he gains levels, eg: 5' radius at 5th level, 10' radius at 10 th level, etc…

The Paladin is a divine servant and is fixed into being lawful good. There just isn't that much themed flexibility you can give them.

The ranger already has two fighting styles and could always be given more if necessary.

Why can't the Paladin have access to abilities that allow him to protect the weak. Or inspirational abilities that utilize his high Charisma: like improved protection from fear for his allies or a rallying call like the bards inspiring song ability.

As for the Ranger I don't see why he should have combat style at all. Why is he good at two weapon fighting? Archery I can kind of understand if you're playing a Robin Hood character, but I still find it a little stereotypical to throw them into a one or the other situation: two weapon or archery. It's like what kind of Ranger are you? an Archer or Two Weapon fighter, and yes, I have heard someone ask this at the table.

it hink the initiative bonus should bein FavoredTerrain, because you understand how to move better... be it sand, snow or jungle (depending your FE)

i like the bonus to AC vs favored enemies

How about giving the Ranger the same sort of Defensive Training against their Favoured Enemy that Dwarves get against Giant types. But the bonus would match their favoured enemy bonus.

"Defensive Training: Dwarves get a +4 dodge bonus to AC against monsters of the giant type".

Malor wrote:

This is what I would like to see done to Favoured Enemy and Terrain.

Favoured Enemy:
The ranger gains bonuses on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks when using these skills against creatures of his selected type.
Likewise, he gets a bonus on initiative and damage rolls against such creatures.
It makes more sense to me to get an initiative bonus against your favoured enemy than it does to get it in your favoured terrain. (but that's just me). Having a bonus to damage but not to hit makes sense to me, because you aren't likely to hit your enemy any better, but your hatred of them might make you hit them harder.

The problem with getting an initiative bonus vs. a certain type of creature is that you often encounter mixed groups.

Say you meet a human wizard mounted on a dragon. You have favored enemy (humanoid (human)) but not favored enemy (dragon).

Do you get your initiative bonus or not?

It's not a very solvable problem with the 3rd Ed initiative mechanic, unfortunately.

The reason why it makes sense with terrain is that, you're pretty stuck with whatever kind of terrain you're in. You're not going to be mountains and plains simultaneously, and even if you're in one that could maybe be questionable (swamp vs. aquatic "on a boat" maybe), you can just use whichever is better. The terrain isn't making a roll opposed to you, so you can pick which one you like and go with that.

Not so easy when you have different monsters on the other side of the battlefield.

Point taken about the initiative bonus. How about a dodge bonus to AC when fighting a favoured enemy instead.

This is what I would like to see done to Favoured Enemy and Terrain.

Favoured Enemy:
The ranger gains bonuses on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks when using these skills against creatures of his selected type.
Likewise, he gets a bonus on initiative and damage rolls against such creatures.
It makes more sense to me to get an initiative bonus against your favoured enemy than it does to get it in your favoured terrain. (but that's just me). Having a bonus to damage but not to hit makes sense to me, because you aren't likely to hit your enemy any better, but your hatred of them might make you hit them harder.

Favoured Terrain:
The ranger gains bonuses on Knowledge (geography), Perception, Stealth, and Survival skill checks when he is in this terrain.
He also gets the equivalent of the ability Trackless Step (and possibly Woodland Stride) when in this terrain.
He has intimate knowledge of his favoured terrain and would be less likely to leave tracks or get tripped up while moving through it.

Barbarian, Fighters, Rogues and to a lesser extent Monks get to choose Rage Powers, Feats, Rogue Talents and again to a lesser extent feats for Monks (they get a choice), why can't Paladins and Rangers be more flexible when it comes to the choice of what they get. I think Rangers should get a pool of Talents to choose from (like the Rogue does) and Paladins should get a group of Divine Abilities to choose from.

That way it wouldn't feel like Paladins and Rangers are coming out of a cookie cutter.
eg. You get this ability at this level an that's that. Instead of, here's a variety of Talents or Divine Abilities you can choose to take.
Basically the Paladin and Ranger deserve more flexibility.

I disagree, that would ruin the point of making fighter-only feats.

All the classes have been revamped, including the pseudo-fighters such as the barbarian, ranger and paladin.
The idea is to give more peps to the Fighter.

But the Fighter still gets more feats than any of them and would still get the feat 3 levels earlier.

Why is it that the Ranger, who has been the Master of Tracking since 1st edition doesn't get Trackless Step? I personally think they should get this at an earlier level than a Druid does, or at the very least they should get Trackless Step as one of their Favoured Terrain bonuses.

I think that the Fighters's poorer cousins (Barbarians, Paladins and Rangers)should be shown some love by allowing them to take Fighter only feats at a +3 level adjustment (as feats are gained at odd levels). They are supposed to be warriors after all.

eg: a 7th level Paladin with Weapon Focus should be able to take Weapon Specialization as his/her feat.

The Fighter should still be better in a fight than them, but at least they shouldn't feel like second stringers in combat as much.