|
Well in the books I own, complete champion has a tactical feat that works with PA, a low strength pally could use PA every round since it'd be -1 +1, or -2 +2 at worse and choose between three rider effects to accompany smite.
This is a PA issue, and it has been severely weakened in its new form so I dont see it as much of an issue truly.
Um no it's not, the reason I said plus 1 or plus two is because I'm not using a single characters stats, but a paladin with a low strength score 13-15 would be able to always use his PA to take advantage of the tactical feat as it stands with the pathfinder version of PA. After all a -1 to attack rolls will be well negated by the always on bonus of smite, then being able to also attach a rider effect each round because I am taking no penalty for PA and smite is always on. This isn't an issue as it stands because smites are only one attack so even if I used it every time I smite, I'm going to run out of smites, but with your version it is an issue.
|
|
From reading your description of how you play i would not expect something like that from you. I am the same way, I enjoy playing a paladin for what it stands for, not what it can do. But...
Well I'm glad that you got that impression because I wouldn't, I litterally make a plan after almost every play session that reflects how my character is choosing to take his training based off of what happened in that session so I rarely wind up with twinky builds except at first level where I usually have the most twinked out first level character (wizards casting 4 1st level spells, bards able to use every skill in the game as a class skill etc.) but then as soon as level three hits they start homogonizing as they take feats that reflect the characters in game desires and actions. However when I design fixes or new class features etc., I always try to approach design as if someone were going to take what I design and try to break the game with it. I'm told that I balance my mechanics pretty well as a result, but how can I be sure.
I play much the same way you do. We do a lot of stuff on a forum for the things that our characters are doing while in town and such. We actually have to train for 6 days before we gain the benefits of any level we have gained, you dont just get your level. My character keeps a journal on him at all times and between each session I write in it about what we have just went through.
When it comes to playing a paladin I want a character that seeks out and defeats evil. When I look at the way the game mechanics actually work (not the fluff, the numbers) I would be better served (as I think Lastknight, has said before) to play a fighter with a paladin complex. I have not sat and ran the numbers much but I know that with some combination of the new feats and such a fighter can really throw out some tremendous damage. That is awesome for a fighter and I think they should have some great different builds. But the fighter can do this no matter what he fights. I would just like to see the paladin be able to do something CLOSE to this when he is fighting evil.
I am going to throw some numbers down and see what I come up with.
Comparing a 5th lvl fighter to a 5th lvl Paladin.
For the purposes of this test I just focused on Str. of 18. This assumes that the fighter and the paladin both have a Str of 18, which would probably not be the case because the paladin can probably not afford that with the other stats he needs.
A 5th lvl fighter with an 18 Str using a 2 handed weapon and power attack will have a bonus to his damage of 14 on each hit. Add to that his weapon training and that becomes 15. Then by lvl 5 he could have weapon focus and specialization giving him another +2 to damage for a total of 17. Take that through 10 rounds of combat and assume he hits every time that is 170 damage, not including the dice for the weapon.
Take a 5th lvl paladin with the same str mod, 2 handed and power attack = 14. No weapon training, and can not get weapon specialization. Take that over 10 rounds of combat like the fighter for 140. If his 2 smites for that day hit he is up to 150 (again that is 10 more damage against evil only).
So even at lvl 5 you start seeing other classes pull away.
I think this gap will continue to increase as the levels go up and the fighter can take things to augment his damage.
With my continuous effect the paladin would do 160 for the 10 rounds (half paladin level of 2 per round for an extra 20).
With the other options stated of paladin having the number of smites = to 1 + Char mod, at lvl 5 the paladin would have 2 + Char. Giving the paladin a 16 Char (assuming he took the 18 Str too). he would have 5 smites a day at lvl 5. This would bring his damage up to 165 and he would be done smiting while the fighter continued to do 170 for the next 10 rounds and the paladin is done and back to doing 140.
I almost thought that my figures would go against my idea but it seems the opposite. It looks like the idea of the splat books is the only thing that would cause any sort of problem for the continuous smiting (as Lastknightleft already said).
I am starting to think that this drive to keep everything backwards compatible is going to truly hurt PF. I personally dont feel like keeping it compatible is such a huge concern but I am obviously the minority in this case.
I may consider asking my DM if I could just make my character a fighter who acts like a paladin and follows the same code. I could come much closer to doing what I want to do with my character that way I think, and that is a shame :(
|
|
a lot of stuff
Okay, here is where you and I disagree, you see I don't think damage output is the most important thing about a paladin, all those immunities, auras, and special abilities do come into play and can become quite effective. the spells and immunities are all bonuses and I take those into account since the pally will in all likelyhood pass all saves and be immune to half of the effects of creatures in play.
The problem is in low levels those immunities and features aren't there on most creatures so the class has to limp through 4 levels to finally feel paladiny in combat. I'll be honest I'm really just focused on making the palladin levels 1-5 work better. since I haven't seen the problems with higher level play I can't really account for them, however I have experience running a game for and now playing a paladin at levels 1-5 so I can say with authority that the class is a red headed stepchild at those levels in comparison to every other core base class.
|
|
I am starting to think that this drive to keep everything backwards compatible is going to truly hurt PF. I personally dont feel like keeping it compatible is such a huge concern but I am obviously the minority in this case.Given the investment folks have put into their 'splatbooks', yes, I think it would be unfair to them to fail on Backward Compatibility. It is easier for individuals to house-rule on a few issues rather than force others to make new rules just to accommodate. I'm not finding fault with your position, only trying to be fair toward everyone's position. I hope you can forgive that. :)
I may consider asking my DM if I could just make my character a fighter who acts like a paladin and follows the same code. I could come much closer to doing what I want to do with my character that way I think, and that is a shame :(While I appreciate your concern, if you wanted to play a Paladin, perhaps you ought to take a few levels in Fighter first and then level as Paladin, if you cannot find another workaround the BC issues you are having with PF.
I'm not thrilled with the Paladin as written, and will likely simply add double damage and auto-confirm criticals versus Evil, for any Paladins that play in my games. > shrug <
funnily enough auto confirming criticals is what my character build currently centers around, I'm getting power critical and improved crit,
last session I rolled 3 nat 20's with my pick and couldn't confirm a single one, but if I had that extra +4 to confirms I would've been killing it.
a lot of stuffOkay, here is where you and I disagree, you see I don't think damage output is the most important thing about a paladin, all those immunities, auras, and special abilities do come into play and can become quite effective. the spells and immunities are all bonuses and I take those into account since the pally will in all likelyhood pass all saves and be immune to half of the effects of creatures in play.
The problem is in low levels those immunities and features aren't there on most creatures so the class has to limp through 4 levels to finally feel paladiny in combat. I'll be honest I'm really just focused on making the palladin levels 1-5 work better. since I haven't seen the problems with higher level play I can't really account for them, however I have experience running a game for and now playing a paladin at levels 1-5 so I can say with authority that the class is a red headed stepchild at those levels in comparison to every other core base class.
I am just using the #'s as an example. Looking at the rest of the class I absolutely love it. It is the smite evil ability that bothers me. It does not matter how "big" the bonus is, I just feel that it is something that the paladin should do with EVERY attack, not just a couple times a day. Even if it was just a +1 damage every couple levels against evil only it would be better because every attack would have your "divine" ability behind it. Now it just feels like you are just to weak to really strike evil down more than a few times a day :(
Please do not think that I just want to be able to do HUGE numbers of damage, that is really not the case. The class is GREAT in MANY ways. It is just the fact that the smite ability seems so restricted that bothers me.
I am starting to think that this drive to keep everything backwards compatible is going to truly hurt PF. I personally dont feel like keeping it compatible is such a huge concern but I am obviously the minority in this case.Given the investment folks have put into their 'splatbooks', yes, I think it would be unfair to them to fail on Backward Compatibility. It is easier for individuals to house-rule on a few issues rather than force others to make new rules just to accommodate. I'm not finding fault with your position, only trying to be fair toward everyone's position. I hope you can forgive that. :)
I may consider asking my DM if I could just make my character a fighter who acts like a paladin and follows the same code. I could come much closer to doing what I want to do with my character that way I think, and that is a shame :(While I appreciate your concern, if you wanted to play a Paladin, perhaps you ought to take a few levels in Fighter first and then level as Paladin, if you cannot find another workaround the BC issues you are having with PF.
I'm not thrilled with the Paladin as written, and will likely simply add double damage and auto-confirm criticals versus Evil, for any Paladins that play in my games. > shrug <
No, you are right. I respect the effort they put into the splat books but those seem like efforts to fix problems with what was wrong with 3.5. It would be nice if we could put all the things that were great about those books into PF and just have one big book. I respect your stance on the issue :)
Just talking about my game personally...house rules and such are not an option, I have a VERY strict DM. No house ruling, no cross classing (yet). But that is not totally my issue. I LOVE the paladin class for its fluff. I really like all the other aspects of the class, just the smite leaves a LOT to be desired. especially from someone who feels that smite is the defining ability. I would still argue for a change to SE even if my DM would allow some sort of change, but I guess that just adds to part of my frustration *sigh*
|
Okay, here's my two-cents...
Very nice post, Mav. It was full of good thought-provoking testimonials.
On a few points, I agree, and others, I must humbly disagree.
I agree with your assessment of the detect evil - we've never made it all that imperative to do so in combat just to make sure something is evil - if the party decides to attack something that may or may not, then it's used - but if a bunch of orcs or minataurs come running out of the tunnel to ambush the party, it's usually pretty safe to assume they are okay to be vanquished.
Here's where I disagree:
But don't take my word for it... see for yourselves: My group is currently in the first Pathfinder adventure path. We have a group that has a Paladin in it. The player runs a standard "sword n' board" pally (that's sword n' shield style in layman's terms) and usually is rear guard in standard marching order. Why? Because with his heavy armor, heavy shield and 14 Con, he can take a hit... 20 or 21 AC is nothing to sneeze at. Also, it puts him in a position to see what happens in battle before rushing in, to see if he needs to step up to fight, cast a spell, Lay on Hands, use an assist action or just pull back an injured party member who becomes paralyzed, KO'd, or otherwise out of the fight. From what I've seen, it's a very effective strategy.
Many, myself included - do not like to consider the paladin as a 'rear-guard' that waits for the things to develop; I can't imagine Lancelot or Superman chilling out in the back of the pack waiting to see if he needs to step up. I'm not saying its WRONG to play a paladin this way - just that many see paladins as a front-line leader-like lead by example lets get things done kind of guy.
Your paladin in the party is taking advantage of one of their best advantages - sword and board style to have good AC. It does, however, leave him further behind in the damage output in comparison to the Fighter with a 2 handed weapon - who really isn't too far behind in AC - bucklers are only one AC less than a Hvy shield, and with the Fighters Armor Training, their DEX based AC and automatic bonuses as they advance make up for it already - and the two-handed weapon exponentially increases damage thanks to both the advantages in from Strength and Power Attack-based damage.
Smite Evil seems to work just fine too... Yeah, it's no great shakes at low levels, but neither was the Fighter's Power Attack feat, since it now maxes out at either your Strength bonus or your BAB, whichever is lower. This put the paladin and the party fighter on more level ground, till they both gained a few more levels. Also, I let him "Hold the Charge" if he missed in combat, since the rules didn't mention losing your Smite attempt if you miss, only if you struck someone who wasn't evil after all. This makes sure you get to actually USE it those few times per day, unless you are particularly careless.
I don't feel that Smite Evil of a paladin is a fair comparison to the Power Attack of a fighter. Saying that they are both minor even at low levels is not a fair comparison. Even at levels 1-3, the fighter can afford to PA just about every round - and still have the same chance to hit as the paladin would while NOT using the PA; with the fighters ability to afford to spend a feat on Weapon Focus, and their focus on Strength far more plausible than a paladin who needs a significant charmisma to be a decent paladin, the fighter is thereby able to afford to use the PA every round - and still hit just as often. The smite evil by comparison allows at that point just ONE attack for the day to have the slight bonus to damage - IF it hits. Your generosity is "holding the charge" when it misses is not necessarily the way it is suppose to be - clarification has been asked for, for quite some time - in editions past that is not how it works, and it has not been specifically been overturned in the text. While I agree with that ruling - I dont know if it's according to the RAW, and in that case, you have to make a golden handshake in order to make the ability even remotely more effective - but as I illustrated - even one successful attack doing that extra bit of damage and allowing the PA to work for the paladin on that attack (since the bonus from CHA in their Smite attempt replaces the PA drain), it still is only ONE attack for the day - vs the fighters ability to do so every round and have the same chance to hit. Barbarians have typically higher strength and can rage for several rounds to assure they hit - even with their power attack. Finally - my retort needs to point out that ever round that the fighter power attacks and has the same chance to hit as the sword and board paladin, the fighters damage is twice what the paladin can do - and still more even when the paladin is smiting.
A quick comparison at 3rd level shows a Ftr with a 18 str two handed weapon - PA 3, doing 2d6 + 6 for Str and +6 for PA. Thats an avg of 19 pts; vs the sword and board paladin with a 15 str doing 1d8 + 2; avg 7. Even on that ONE smite hit using the PA it would be 1d8 + 7 = avg 11.
Once we hit 5th level (as your party has), the paladin does get one more smite - but the fighter now has weapon training and gets an extra +1 to hit and damage, and now has access to Weapon Spec gaining another +2 to damage, not mention maxes out his PA at 4, and still has the same chance to hit as the Paladin even when he's power attacking.
19 Str now, +4, +1 Weapon, BAB +5, Weapon Focus +1, Weapon Training +1 for +12 to hit -4 PA = +8 to hit.
Paladin 16 str now +3, +1 weapon, BAB +5, = +9 to hit 0r +6 when power attacking.
Damage for the two: Ftr: 2d6 + 6 str, +8 PA, +1 Weapon, +2 Weapon Spec, +1 Weapon Training = avg 7 + 18 = 25 per hit.
For the paladin without Power attacking: 1d8+4 = about 9. w/ PA and Smite evil: 1d8+12 = or about 17 for TWO attacks in that day = vs 25 just about every attack.
And when the fight comes to the BBEG with the great AC etc, the fighter can drop the PA and have that big +12 to hit, and the paladin has his +9 - or that one attack at +12 (if he hasn't already used it); so its not just a matter of doing a good amount of damage - its a matter of simply being effective and actually HITTING the BBEG! As it is he hits far less often and far less damage.
The best you can hope for with the paladin is for him to cast a Divine Favor at that point 1 time per day for a little boost - but that requires the first round for him to use a standard action to activate it - meanwhile the barbarian rages as a free action, the archer/ranger has rapid shot every round, and the fighter is doing that 25 points of damage without activating anything - all done in the first round while the paladin casts his Divine Favor to get an extra +1 to hit and damage for that combat.
And again - the AC for sword and board paladin is not higher than the two-hander w/ a buckler and armor training.
Their Lay On Hands does seem limited, I admit... but it's always been just 2 points per level up till now (3 or 4 in 3rd ed if you have an exceptionally high Charisma). This really doesn't change all that much. By the time they get to be higher level, they will likely have more powerful magics to help with healing, so Lay On Hands will just be a quick way to stop someone in the negatives from dying, just like it's always been. C'mon, you're not a cleric, so stop acting like one. At best, you're a more reliable first aid kit, good for a battlefield dressing at best. If you want all your hit points back at once, play a Cleric instead... that's what they're for.
I feel that expecting the paladin to be essentially relegated to using his lay on hands for going into the melee mix drawing potential AoOs, and using his round of actions to heal 5 hit points to stop someone from bleeding to death when the cleric of the party has the At-will unlimited Stabilize spell that can be cast at range instead; now if it was the cleric that was on his back bleeding to death, thats a different story. And I'm not saying that a paladin WOULDN'T put himself at risk in such a situation to save a dying comrade - but it just seems with LAY ON HANDS as it is, to be a mismanagment of a party's dynamics to relegate his actions for such a purpose whent he cleric can easily do it at will from range. And with this in mind, if the Lay on Hands are then to be used for actually getting someone back in the fight - or himself - it simply is too feeble as written to actually do that. 2 hit points per level is a good step in that direction; and having the ability to use it ALL at once is also something that needs to be considered - as it use to be.
The Divine Grace and Health - I completely agree with you; but even the fighters is now getting bonuses to resist fear - so does a halfling.
Finally - what I have been saying all along - the paladin is certainly still the best fit for someone that wants to be the last man standing when you consider his immunities, AC, and saves, and I feel that an always active Smite Evil would be too powerful - both that he already has the defensive tools in place with his good ACs and immunities; but a sword and board paladin still has no better AC than a 2 handed fighter - and a sword and board fighter will surpass him; so the paladin still is not the cat's meow in that department.
Thus, IMO, the Lay and Hands and Smite Evil both need to be broadened - as illustrated above the paladin is far below the curve - martially speaking - behind the other full BAB warrior classes. Not to mention the rogues sneak attack, and the clerics abiltiy to buff themselves both make for more capable combatants.
Robert
@Robert Brambley
Reading what you said about the paladin being in the front line I think if you read above I said the same thing so in that we agree (and as lastnightleft said, you did say it very eloquently).
Reading the comparison between the fighter and the paladin I believe that if you read above I also wrote much the same thing with almost the exact same results.
I think that your description of Detect Evil and Lay on Hands were pretty much dead on. Those abilities need work but I do not feel like they are as far behind the curve as Smite.
I respect that you do not think the always on ability is to powerful but could you explain why? If you run the same numbers with this effect the paladin is STILL doing less damage than the fighter, even when facing evil. He would roughly have the same +to hit (against evil) for awhile, until the fighter gets a few more levels and passes him there too. Again, other than backwards compatibility I dont understand where this would be to overpowered. Could you please give me your assessment of why?
Also, if this is not the answer what is? From your very example the smite ability is the weakest of all the melee damage types out there. Even with some of the other possible fixes it will fall short of the power curve. Even with my proposed fix it is behind the curve but it feels more like a paladin (to me) to have an always active ability.
I am happy that this thread is getting so much attention, I hope that the devs are paying as much attention and realizing what we see now. Hopefully one of our ideas will be the eventual "fix" for the paladin class and then they can shine like the holy warriors they are supposed to.
Keep the faith.
Hey, the "faith" is all we paladins have right now brother! Lets keep working here and maybe we will have the paladin we all want in a year! :)
Keep the faith.
Hey, the "faith" is all we paladins have right now brother! Lets keep working here and maybe we will have the paladin we all want in a year! :)
Keep the faith.
Hey, the "faith" is all we paladins have right now brother. Lets all keep working here and maybe we can have the paladin we all want in a year! :)
|
|
Just talking about my game personally...house rules and such are not an option, I have a VERY strict DM. No house ruling, no cross classing (yet).
That can be fun, is it just for this campaign or is it every time, cause I don't think I'd like it if it was every time.
Anywho please don't take my compliment to Robert as saying you haven't also made good points, you have and I have tried to encompas your point of view.
What I think the issue is is that we all are trying to reinvent the wheel in our own way and instead of changing course we make minor alterations.
So where can compromise be reached, I think there isn't a single person who argued against having at least a few more smites, but some of us don't feel that just adding a few would make enough of a difference.
So we at least all agree we need more. first lets find the sweet spot where those who think it should be always on and those who think it should only get a slight boost in # of times per day.
Question to those who want an all day duration, would you accept a limit of times per day if the smite were boosted in other ways to make it actually on par with a daily ability? and if yes then would the 1 + cha per day satisfy you, if not why.
|
|
So we at least all agree we need more. first lets find the sweet spot where those who think it should be always on and those who think it should only get a slight boost in # of times per day.
Question to those who want an all day duration, would you accept a limit of times per day if the smite were boosted in other ways to make it actually on par with a daily ability? and if yes then would the 1 + cha per day satisfy you, if not why.
Indeed he did make some good points; and I agree with his assessment indeed - just that I'm not on board with the one proposed fix for an "ever-present" smite ability. It just doesn't seem right; rage isnt always on, rangers favored enemy is situational, sneak attacks are situational etc.
My first choice would be a short duration with each use - to "mark" an evil target. As I've said - theres just something....mystical or supernatural about choosing a vile evil target and selectively destroying that evil - almost cinematic. Even without a the "mark" idea - having a short duration of a few rounds where all attacks against a single target to me makes the most sense. Such as a Glabrezu and his succubus minions......the paladin ignores the succubus for the time, and calls out the Glabrezu - knowing that IT is the BBEG with the horrible control and must be stopped.
A second choice would be a greater number of smites:
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 1+CHA mod at 1st level and additional 1 every three levels as it is designed currently. BUT ONLY if it also includes the specific caveat that the smite is NOT wasted with a missed attack roll.
Another option would be to have a smite pool like the Rage Pool and have a number of special abilities that can be done - costing points towards the daily pool.
Trip
Stun
Auto Crit
are three that come to mind. But this idea is far more of a stretch and not necessarily an easy fix.
Simply adding more is a better fix.
As for Lay on Hands - I think the 2 HP / Paladin level is a good compromise from what it is now (which is awfully low); so long as the caveat is that its not JUST 2 hp / pal level per use - but that its a total pool - and any amount of that can be used at once - the way it was in 3.5 - so that the paladin can if needed pump a good deal of healing in at once. On the other hand going back to Cha Mod x Paladin level which the 3.5 pool is, would not be a bad idea either - to just keep it the way it was.
Either way is a significant improvement.
Robert
Just talking about my game personally...house rules and such are not an option, I have a VERY strict DM. No house ruling, no cross classing (yet).That can be fun, is it just for this campaign or is it every time, cause I don't think I'd like it if it was every time.
Anywho please don't take my compliment to Robert as saying you haven't also made good points, you have and I have tried to encompas your point of view.
No no man, I did not think that was any sort of slam. He did say it well...I just hope he looked a little higher on the thread and saw that in a couple areas I said almost the exact same thing! hah! :) no sweat here.
As for my DM this is the first game I have ever played with him. He is good at it and puts a lot of effort into his game. He only wants to use the core books and I am fine with that but it gets very restrictive when you can not house rule anything no matter how much sense it makes *shrug*. As I said, just another reason (but not the main reason) that I am fighting to get a good change to paladin INTO the core book for PF. My character took a big hit with Power attack (I dont really like that change but I can live with it) and an even bigger hit with Combat expertise (this feat is worthless now except for needing it as a prereq). But oh well this is not about my woes, its about the paladin and how it should be fixed.
What I think the issue is is that we all are trying to reinvent the wheel in our own way and instead of changing course we make minor alterations.So where can compromise be reached, I think there isn't a single person who argued against having at least a few more smites, but some of us don't feel that just adding a few would make enough of a difference.
So we at least all agree we need more. first lets find the sweet spot where those who think it should be always on and those who think it should only get a slight boost in # of times per day.
Question to those who want an all day duration, would you accept a limit of times per day if the smite were boosted in other ways to make it actually on par with a daily ability? and if yes then would the 1 + cha per day satisfy you, if not why.
I think you are on the right track here. But I think where I have been misunderstood is the power level of the smite. yes it needs to be more powerful but that is not the biggest issue I have. I just dont feel that your smite should be limited to the biggest bad guys. Everything that is evil should be subject to the paladins holy wrath.
Would it be possible to do both? Combine the always on effect (that is weakened) with the more powerful smite that you would really focus your holy energy on the big guys for?
So say the always on effect, with the other effect being 1 + Char mod that eventually scales into counting as Holy and auto confirming criticalls at higher levels? Smite should scale, not just in power but in diversity. Maybe at hither levels it does a short stun, or has a silence effect (i kinda like that).
Indeed he did make some good points; and I agree with his assessment indeed - just that I'm not on board with the one proposed fix for an "ever-present" smite ability. It just doesn't seem right; rage isnt always on, rangers favored enemy is situational, sneak attacks are situational etc.
Thanx for the acknowledgment :)
I do have to disagree with you here though. Looking over Rage, it is not alway son but any barbarian with any sense is going to have a HIGH con stat, so eventually you could rage for every combat of every day with the way it works (or if not the WHOLE time then MOST of it for sure).
Saying favored enemy and sneak attack is situational is true, but is not ONLY smiting things that are evil also situational? I know we fight a LOT of things that are evil in most of our games, but a ranger gets a lot of bonus feats that will boost his damage and a good rogue will get their sneak attack most of the time.
I do not disagree with the mechanic of smites + char mod (and yes it should not be wasted on a miss) but that just seems like the paladin is only hunting down the worst of the worst and that just does not seem like what the paladin was built for to me. Lawful good, code of conduct, SMITE evil....not Smite the worst evil, leave the rest for fighters and stuff.
What do you think of the idea I said above about using both?
As far as LoH goes I do not think that it is very powerful but I dont feel that it needs that huge of a bump (I would like it yes, but I would prefer to see Smite GREATLY improved). It gets good once you can cast Heal for 90 pts, thats not bad but you dont get it until way down the road.
|
|
No no man, I did not think that was any sort of slam. He did say it well...I just hope he looked a little higher on the thread and saw that in a couple areas I said almost the exact same thing! hah! :) no sweat here.
I had looked higher - and I had seen you posts. We've both been saying the same thing over and over and definitely agree for the most part. In fact I merely reiterated all that I had been saying over several smaller posts throughout this thread since it started - and several more like it that preceded this one about the same topic; Nothing that I've been saying or that you've been saying is new - just reworded and re-itererated.
If you scroll through to the earliest posts in this thread you'll see that many of us have been saying pretty much the same thing all along.
That all being said - my friend who I had mentioned pointed out the "mark" idea of the smite sounds like 4th edition terminology prompted me to try to look through his 4E PHB - I was surprised to see how that term is used so frequently - even the fighter "marks" a target.
With that in mind, I'm not sure I would want to continue to endorse the idea of "marking" a target as a paladin for a smite in PF - not that I think it's a bad idea, or that anything 4E does is not worth mentioning (because in fact there are quite a few good ideas in there), its just I wouldn't want to worry about copyrights, or idea stealing.
I still like the idea (a lot) of a paladin marking an evil target to destroy; and if I could come up with a different term, I would do so - perhaps "challenge." Its just uncanny how my idea mirrored it so much, and I wasn't even trying.
Robert
|
|
No no man, I did not think that was any sort of slam. He did say it well...I just hope he looked a little higher on the thread and saw that in a couple areas I said almost the exact same thing! hah! :) no sweat here.
I had looked higher - and I had seen you posts. We've both been saying the same thing over and over and definitely agree for the most part. In fact I merely reiterated all that I had been saying over several smaller posts throughout this thread since it started - and several more like it that preceded this one about the same topic; Nothing that I've been saying or that you've been saying is new - just reworded and re-itererated.
If you scroll through to the earliest posts in this thread you'll see that many of us have been saying pretty much the same thing all along.
That all being said - my friend who I had mentioned pointed out the "mark" idea of the smite sounds like 4th edition terminology prompted me to try to look through his 4E PHB - I was surprised to see how that term is used so frequently - even the fighter "marks" a target.
With that in mind, I'm not sure I would want to continue to endorse the idea of "marking" a target as a paladin for a smite in PF - not that I think it's a bad idea, or that anything 4E does is not worth mentioning (because in fact there are quite a few good ideas in there), its just I wouldn't want to worry about copyrights, or idea stealing.
I still like the idea (a lot) of a paladin marking an evil target to destroy; and if I could come up with a different term, I would do so - perhaps "challenge." Its just uncanny how my idea mirrored it so much, and I wasn't even trying.
Robert
Yeah really I think the three of us all agree on the why's we just disagree on the hows and how much. I'm only really concerned with fixes for the low levels where I feel the issue is largest, Vult is more concerned with smite at all levels of play, and I think you are concerned with the underpowered nature of the paladin. That's why we keep stepping on each others toes. because we are trying to fix it with different goals in mind, mine are minimalist cause I'm just concerned with how poor the paladin gets shafted at lower levels. Therefore I'm trying to suggest the smallest changes possible that will tweak the class into playability. for me the suggestions I proferred allready solve my issues.
As it stands they are once again
a)1+cha smites at 1st level, spelled out that they aren't used up on a miss
b)lay on hands heals 2hp per level
c)detect evil concentrate as a move equivalent action.
Those really do solve all the issues I have. I understand that they don't solve your guys issues.
|
|
Yeah really I think the three of us all agree on the why's we just disagree on the hows and how much. I'm only really concerned with fixes for the low levels where I feel the issue is largest, Vult is more concerned with smite at all levels of play, and I think you are concerned with the underpowered nature of the paladin. That's why we keep stepping on each others toes. because we are trying to fix it with different goals in mind, mine are minimalist cause I'm just concerned with how poor the paladin gets shafted at lower levels. Therefore I'm trying to suggest the smallest changes possible that will tweak the class into playability. for me the suggestions I proferred allready solve my issues.
As it stands they are once again
a)1+cha smites at 1st level, spelled out that they aren't used up on a miss
b)lay on hands heals 2hp per level
c)detect evil concentrate as a move equivalent action.
Those really do solve all the issues I have. I understand that they don't solve your guys issues.
Actually they do solve mine; and I would quite satisfied with those changes.
It's not the most perfect (imo) but I would definitely be satisfied.
I'm not sure is 1+CHA is a lot. At 6th level that would be about 6 individual attacks per day. Meh; Who knows?
But I think your changes provide enough of a boost to live with.
My complaints overall are just the (as you said) overall inferior combat capability in comparison to the other warriors.
I'm hoping that playtesting with higher levels will provide evidence that the 8th level plus class abilities start to make a major difference and see telling advantages.
Robert
I'll let you know as we get there, this is my playtest report thread.
|
This is an interesting thread.
I've got a player in my AOW game, playing a paladin, and I suggested he use the Pathfinder version, partly because I share some of the concerns about them needing a bit of help, and partly so I can do my bit for playtesting (though we are using 3.5 rules and feat progression).
Does anyone think that there is a common, mistaken belief out there that the class is 'too good'? Mainly, because DMs see players taking dips into the class for (often) ooc, meta-reasons? (Divine Grace, anyone?)
(Which, paradoxically, shows the class needs a hand, since so few play one from level 1 through 20...).
@Robert
Yea you are right we have been saying a lot of the same things. I think all of us know where we stand now, so lets find a solution.
@Robert and @lastknight
The changes that you both suggest to Detect evil and Lay on Hands are great changes. Those abilities do need a look.
I guess I dont go after those two as much because my biggest concern is Smite. I have to agree with Robert here that simply adding 1+Char is a step in the right direction but it do not really give the "umph" it should. For DE and LoH i will totally concede to the ideas the two of you have proposed, they are good and needed. I am thinking that this is the way we should write smite.
Smite Evil: This ability has two parts. One is a passive effect that is always active. When a paladin KNOWS an enemy is evil he can activate this ability. While active he gains his Charisma bonus as a bonus to his attack role and half is paladin level as a bonus to his damage role (or possibly just Charisma bonus to both attack and damage). No added effects can change the way this passive ability works. I.E. feats that would add an effect to your smite do not work with this passive ability. They would however work with the times per day smites.
The other effect is a times per day effect. A paladin may attempt to smite evil with this effect a number of times per day equal to 1 + his charisma modifer and one additional time per day for every 3 paladin levels he gains. When he does this he retains his charisma bonus to his attack role and gains DOUBLE his paladin level to damage (negotiable). AT 7th level this smite ability is lawfully and good aligned for the purposes of bypassing damage reduction. At 10th level this smite is considered holy and does an additional 2D6 damage to evil creatures. AT 13th level critical hits rolled against evil creatures with this smite are automatically confirmed.
If at any time a paladin attempts to use his smite (passive or active) against any creature that is NOT evil this his smite ability is revoked by his god for 24 hours. If he continually does this he could loose all his paladin abilities and become an ex-paladin.
I know that SOUNDS over powered when you first look at it but take into account that it only works against evil, there is now a penalty for attacking something that is NOT evil. So you will have to spend time detecting (which inadvertently lowers you damage output). Also by the time the other abilities start kicking in, other classes already have huge bonuses that work all the time. By this time (lvl 13) the fighter could be at what +5 to hit +7 to damage on every attack from weapon training and weapon focus (spec) feats? The barbarian at this time is raging for well over 40 rounds with his huge bonuses. The ranger is at +4 +4 against one of his favored enemies and +2+2 against another and can do it from range. The rogue is at +7D6 for sneak attack and can do it from up to 30 feet away. No, this does not unbalance the paladin, this lets the paladin do what he should have been doing all along....smiting evil!
This is an interesting thread.
I've got a player in my AOW game, playing a paladin, and I suggested he use the Pathfinder version, partly because I share some of the concerns about them needing a bit of help, and partly so I can do my bit for playtesting (though we are using 3.5 rules and feat progression).Does anyone think that there is a common, mistaken belief out there that the class is 'too good'? Mainly, because DMs see players taking dips into the class for (often) ooc, meta-reasons? (Divine Grace, anyone?)
(Which, paradoxically, shows the class needs a hand, since so few play one from level 1 through 20...).
Do other classes really think that dipping into the paladin class, of course they have to be lawful good and then accept the paladin's code of conduct is worth what they would get from divine grace? Also how many other classes are going to put enough points into Charisma to make it worth their while? Could this be a problem? yea I guess. But any DM that sees people doing this should make it very hard for that person to play their character. Because now they have all the restrictions the paladin has and none of his REALLY good abilities that come at higher levels. If someone can do this and NOT break the code and become an ex-paladin then I would say more power to them that is a pretty cool character. But I think it would be hard.
|
|
Do other classes really think that dipping into the paladin class, of course they have to be lawful good and then accept the paladin's code of conduct is worth what they would get from divine grace? Also how many other classes are going to put enough points into Charisma to make it worth their while? Could this be a problem? yea I guess. But any DM that sees people doing this should make it very hard for that person to play their character. Because now they have all the restrictions the paladin has and none of his REALLY good abilities that come at higher levels. If someone can do this and NOT break the code and become an ex-paladin then I would say more power to them that is a pretty cool character. But I think it would be hard.This is an interesting thread.
I've got a player in my AOW game, playing a paladin, and I suggested he use the Pathfinder version, partly because I share some of the concerns about them needing a bit of help, and partly so I can do my bit for playtesting (though we are using 3.5 rules and feat progression).Does anyone think that there is a common, mistaken belief out there that the class is 'too good'? Mainly, because DMs see players taking dips into the class for (often) ooc, meta-reasons? (Divine Grace, anyone?)
(Which, paradoxically, shows the class needs a hand, since so few play one from level 1 through 20...).
Actually I've seen it happen alot.
Clerics, Bards, and Sorcerers are all offenders on this.
A re-written paladin that I proposed a long time ago, had the Divine Grace break up the bonus to saves over several levels instead of all at once - this has curtailed the class dipping in my games.
As for your idea of a smite Evil type bonus that's always in effect - it too promotes level dipping. The same classes specifically can take a level of Paladin and get their charisma modifier to attack rolls all the time.
That was one of the main concerns I had with it being too lucrative. Having the number of smites increased by class level tends to make it more of a reason to stay the course. Another thing is that with the right tinked out feats progression and multi-classing, that ever-present bonus can get quite sick, and stacks.
MOST encounters (about 80%) are against evil combatants.
Robert
|
|
Actually I've seen it happen alot.
Clerics, Bards, and Sorcerers are all offenders on this.
A re-written paladin that I proposed a long time ago, had the Divine Grace break up the bonus to saves over several levels instead of all at once - this has curtailed the class dipping in my games.
As for your idea of a smite Evil type bonus that's always in effect - it too promotes level dipping. The same classes specifically can take a level of Paladin and get their charisma modifier to attack rolls all the time.
That was one of the main concerns I had with it being too lucrative. Having...
You know I understand that some DMs wouldn't allow that because of the whole paladins loose powers if they stop being paladins, but I've also known DMs that consider classes as toolkits and allow, even promote level dipping to hit your character concept and I've gotta agree with Robert here, now that I think about it. a lvl one pally dip would be a big boost, go to level 2 and you have kick ass saves and always get your cha to an attack.
Ok, then we could make the always on effect not kick in until say lvl 5? Or we can say that you loose this ability if you take any levels in classes other than paladin.
I do not mind cross classing or even a give take type thing. Give up one class ability to gain another. It think this makes your character your own. But I really dislike level dipping, it seems wrong especially if you decide to dip into paladin. A paladin is not a class that you should "dip" into....it should be all or nothing.
How can you ever possibly balance everything against people that are going to abuse it? You cant, so if DM's will allow this sort of thing then their games are going to be broken, no matter what we do.
I dont think worrying about what someone who wants to abuse the system will do is the way to fix our immediate concerns. We are worried about the Paladin as a class, we could make the Code of Conduct say something about level dipping or anything. This is my favorite class, i hate it when people try to abuse and bastardize it! :(
What do you guys think about making the always on effect start at lvl 5 or be lost if you take a level in another class? By this measure then Divine grace should be a higher level ability as well.
|
|
Ok, then we could make the always on effect not kick in until say lvl 5? Or we can say that you loose this ability if you take any levels in classes other than paladin.
It'd have to kick in at level 5, if you say the second option then Pallies won't be able to PrC out with older supplements.
And as to your per day mechanic, I think that it needs alteration, as it is it steps on the divine bonds toes by giving you weapon enhancement abilities. I have no problem with beefing up smite, but the way you do it I think starts encroaching on the bond ability.
|
|
I do not mind cross classing or even a give take type thing. Give up one class ability to gain another. It think this makes your character your own. But I really dislike level dipping, it seems wrong especially if you decide to dip into paladin. A paladin is not a class that you should "dip" into....it should be all or nothing.
But the reality is you are not the only person that would be playing the game. Just because class dipping is something YOU wouldn't do - many others would and do. Furthermore, the reality is that although your opinion is a paladin should be all or nothing is not something that is simply going to be adhered to. If people can - they will; regardless of one's opinions of the sanctity of the class.
How can you ever possibly balance everything against people that are going to abuse it? You cant, so if DM's will allow this sort of thing then their games are going to be broken, no matter what we do.
Well, you can't. But wherever you can, you should.
I dont think worrying about what someone who wants to abuse the system will do is the way to fix our immediate concerns. We are worried about the Paladin as a class, we could make the Code of Conduct say something about level dipping or anything. This is my favorite class, i hate it when people try to abuse and bastardize it! :(
Its my favorite too, and I don't like it either - but making some draconian blurp about the class never being something that should be 'class dipped' in the final product is just silly. If the class is balanced, no comment like that should be needed.
What do you guys think about making the always on effect start at lvl 5 or be lost if you take a level in another class? By this measure then Divine grace should be a higher level ability as well.
I appreciate your tenacity in trying to work this in. Starting it at level 5 would prevent some of the class dipping; but it doesn't help LastKnight's concern for the paladin's lack of oomph in 1-4 levels.
All in all, many of the suggestions on this thread are good - some of yours have been good, and some of your insights and observations are spot on; but the ever-present bonus against all evil just isn't practical for this system IMO.
Robert
|
|
You know I understand that some DMs wouldn't allow that because of the whole paladins loose powers if they stop being paladins, but I've also known DMs that consider classes as toolkits and allow, even promote level dipping to hit your character concept and I've gotta agree with Robert here, now that I think about it. a lvl one pally dip would be a big boost, go to level 2 and you have kick ass saves and always get your cha to an attack.
@Lastknight
I know your concern with making a smite last for X number of rounds would be too lucrative when combined w/ feats that allow you certain maneuvers with the smite.....How do you feel about the use of a Smite affecting all attacks on a given round.
It's not like you can trip a guy more than once in the same round....
I'm thinking combining the greater number of smites, along with the idea that it affects all the attacks that round may be a magical combination....?
Robert
|
|
How do you feel about the use of a Smite affecting all attacks on a given round.
I'm thinking combining the greater number of smites, along with the idea that it affects all the attacks that round may be a magical combination....?Robert
Actually I was going to suggest that but I wasn't sure based on the terminology if smite was supposed to already do that and I was just misinterpereting it.
I want smite to affect every attack in a round. Iteritave attacks for a pally are usually wiffers anyways, So yes that for me would be more than enough to be the magical combination.
Ok, then we could make the always on effect not kick in until say lvl 5? Or we can say that you loose this ability if you take any levels in classes other than paladin.It'd have to kick in at level 5, if you say the second option then Pallies won't be able to PrC out with older supplements.
And as to your per day mechanic, I think that it needs alteration, as it is it steps on the divine bonds toes by giving you weapon enhancement abilities. I have no problem with beefing up smite, but the way you do it I think starts encroaching on the bond ability.
Dont PrC's have to say something like their levels work with paladin levels, else the paladin would never be able to gain paladin levels again because you are not allowed to class OUTSIDE of paladin? Something like that. Though I am fully fine with it kicking in at 5th.
How would you alter the per day? Take out the Holy effect, leave in the bypass to damage reduction and auto confirm crits? or just leave those additions out all together?
@Robert
Looking over my post it really does look like I was saying that is the way it should be. I am sorry, that was more of a rant than anything, I know that the rules could not be changed to work that way. I was just trying to state how I feel someone should play the class.
With my suggestion for smite having two distinct parts it would still work for lvls 1-4 because lastknightleft's fix is there from level 1, with smites 1+Char mod...so that is a boost. And then at level 5 the always on mechanic could kick in.
Also when you guys talk about every attack in a round are you saying that one use of a smite should work on every attack that you have for that round? Like at lvl 11 you have 3 so if you use smite on the first one it works for all 3? That is definitely a good change and I really like that for the per day effect.
I think the per day effect is working its way out but I am still going to argue for the always on effect because it feels so right to me (no evil is to small, evil is evil and I shall smite it!). No matter how you do the per day you are not going to be able to get it to a point where the paladins damage is comparable to that of the other melee classes unless you have an enormous amount.
Now I want
A) snites = to 1/day + cha mod at level one
B) lay on hands = same as now only healing 2 hp per level
C) Detect evil = move equivalent action to concentrate, maybe a swift action to activate.
Now this question is directed to the people who think the paladin plays fine as is, especially gorum and maverick, are any of these changes that you feel would push paladin abilities over the top? Do you think this manages to fix low level play and keep the paladin feeling like the same class? And if not then isn't this a good compromise to keep yourselves happy and the people who actually want a little improvement?
----
Actually I've seen it happen alot.
Clerics, Bards, and Sorcerers are all offenders on this.
A re-written paladin that I proposed a long time ago, had the Divine Grace break up the bonus to saves over several levels instead of all at once - this has curtailed the class dipping in my games.
As for your idea of a smite Evil type bonus that's always in effect - it too promotes level dipping. The same classes specifically can take a level of Paladin and get their charisma modifier to attack rolls all the time.
That was one of the main concerns I had with it being too lucrative. Having...
You know I understand that some DMs wouldn't allow that because of the whole paladins loose powers if they stop being paladins, but I've also known DMs that consider classes as toolkits and allow, even promote level dipping to hit your character concept and I've gotta agree with Robert here, now that I think about it. a lvl one pally dip would be a big boost, go to level 2 and you have kick ass saves and always get your cha to an attack.
Sorry for my slow response, been hectic at work and haven't had time but concerning your suggestions:
A. Your suggested change to smite sounds good but I'm a bit worried about dipping. With some sort of control it could work but can't think of anything at the moment.
B. This change looks great.
C. I'm ok with the move equivalent to concentrate, not sure about the swift to activate though.
I also have an issue with other classes dipping into paladin to get the saves but don't know if I would actually change the ability or not.
|
|
@RobertAlso when you guys talk about every attack in a round are you saying that one use of a smite should work on every attack that you have for that round? Like at lvl 11 you have 3 so if you use smite on the first one it works for all 3? That is definitely a good change and I really like that for the per day effect.
Yes that's exactly what we mean. All attacks made that round; two weapons, haste, any attack of opportunity that are provoked that round etc.
I think the per day effect is working its way out but I am still going to argue for the always on effect because it feels so right to me (no evil is to small, evil is evil and I shall smite it!). No matter how you do the per day you are not going to be able to get it to a point where the paladins damage is comparable to that of the other melee classes unless you have an enormous amount.
As I've said before - I'm not even worried so much about the damage as I am in the ability to HIT.
My previous illustrations show the other warriors have on average a much better chance of hitting with attacks. The barbarian and fighter for instance can still hit the same AC even when full Power Attacking as the paladin can when he's NOT. And god forbid the paladin actually put a 13+ on the INT just to get Combat Expert for some extra AC and simply make that a wasted effort by lowering attacks even further.
No, my concern is not with damage - it's simply the ability to hit.
MOST of the truly evil BBEGs that Paladins are the archetypical nemesis of: the triple D's (Dragons, Devils, Demons), along with evil Clerics all have typically some of the best ACs in the game! Most of the time only Fighter and Barbarians ever even have the slightest chance of being effective against them.
I've been looking at Smite Evil from a standpoint of being able to hit targets better - more often - when their ACs are simply too high, and the fighter and barbarian (and arcane ranged touch attacks) are the only thing hitting the creature. That's when they need that boost in attack bonuses.
That was the crux of my comparison with the barb and fighter - their better chances to hit are usually far more omnipresent than those few attacks a day that the paladin can hope to be effective with.
Doing the damage is just gravy - it's an afterthought. And having even a +50 to damage is nothing if you can't hit it!
Sure the Paladin MAY be the one who is the hardest to hit, won't run in fear, and will resist most of the effects better than everyone else, and I guess that's okay if you don't mind just standing there being a meat-shield telling the fighter player, "You kill it - I'll just stand here and hope all the attacks are directed towards me...."
Selfless, perhaps. Can be part of the paladin heroism....but it sure doesn't make it seem that way when you can't even hurt your enemy, and you leave it up to others to do it.
Now - that all being said - as I mentioned before, I'm not sure how a 10th level paladin will match up to our 4th level playtesting we've got going on here with LastKnight and myself - and it may be a vastly different picture once we get there - considering the abilities that come later, and the holy bonded sword, etc. But that remains to be seen - and my initial thought is the paladin will always be way behind (on average) the other warrior classes in the ability to hit the BBEGs - the guys the paladin is aesthetically the ones the paladin should be the one to battle them (except for those few attacks of smite each day).
I would say that the paladin's forte' is AC then, but even that is a fallacy considering a fighter has Tower Shield feat for free, and even with a two-handed weapon, a buckler is only 1 AC pt less than a hvy shield that the paladin is using, and the Fighter gains Armor training times 2 by the time we hit 10th level!
Put the two side by side AC (I've already done the ridiculous attack difference - and damage)
Paladin 10th with Full Plate and Hvy Shield with Max Dex: 21
Fighter 10th with Full Plate and buckler with Max Dex: 24 (and thats with a two-handed weapon doing double power attack and str and a half bonus damage!!! With a better attack roll by about 30%, and 250% of the paladin's damage!
Switching the fighter to tower shield the AC is 27 - and still has a better chance to hit.
This is NOT an attack on the fighter - I LOVE the new fighter and he's what he SHOULD be! The paladin - martially - is not.
Robert
@Robert
Again man I could not agree with you more. I also love the new fighter and think that the changes to it are AWESOME. We are both saying the same thing as regards to how well the paladin should be able to fight what it is SUPPOSED to fight.
I agree totally with you assessment of the situation, all the other melee classes do it better, even when fighting evil and that is wrong.
My question is what is YOUR solution? What do you think that we should do? It is not going to level itself out at higher levels.
If having an always on effect (with whatever restrictions) that gives the paladin his charisma bonus to hit (which addresses your issues with the paladins not being able to hit) is not the answer, what is? If we are only going to be able to HIT a Dragon, Demon or Devil a few extra times per day then what good did it do? With close to or over 1000 HP's most of the time it is still going to be the barbarian or fighter that is doing the damage because once we are out of smites it is still standing and we are watching the other melee's do what we were trying to do but ran out of ability to do :(
I feel my solution would work perfectly. But I am willing to listen to other ideas that solve our issues that we have brought up. As you said, these other classes are going to hit better than we are and do more damage than we are...consistently and even against the things we are built to fight....its just not right :(
|
|
maybe change smite evil from cha bonus to hit, level to damage. Make it level to hit and level x 2 to damage. At low levels it's not that great but since you'll have 4 or 5 a day instead of one its better off, it prevents level dipping as no one is going to level dip for a +1, +2 4 times a day, and it will grow better at level 20 when you smite it's like you get a free true strike with +40 damage and that is just enough at that level for the paladin to be competative without being overpowered.
Edit: when thinking about it, its even good at lower levels, right now I have a +3 to hit and +2 to damage when I smite once a day, if we incorporate this with my extra smite suggestion I would have +2 to hit, +4 to damage. My to hit goes down till level three, but since I would have 4 (1 + my cha bonus) a day in the end I go from an extra 2 damage a day to an extra 12 a day. I think I really like this idea. and once again no one would level dip 1 level of paladin to get a +1 to hit and a +2 to damage 4 times (assuming they have a 16 cha) a day. It would be foolish, I can think of a dozen ways to get that without level dipping at all.
|
|
Edit: when thinking about it, its even good at lower levels, right now I have a +3 to hit and +2 to damage when I smite once a day, if we incorporate this with my extra smite suggestion I would have +2 to hit, +4 to damage. My to hit goes down till level three, but since I would have 4 (1 + my cha bonus) a day in the end I go from an extra 2 damage a day to an extra 12 a day. I think I really like this idea. and once again no one would level dip 1 level of paladin to get a +1 to hit and a +2 to damage 4 times (assuming they have a 16 cha) a day. It would be foolish, I can think of a dozen ways to get that without level dipping at all.
This was actually something I was just thinking about - to address the level dipping.
I was thinking a bonus to hit and damage equal to half-paladin level, (min 1).
This would only be feasible if the number of attempts went up drastically - and the # of smites would be based off of the cha mod.
You know the more I think about it - the more I think that such a bonus being active all the time - vult might be on to something - though not as a "smite" but just as a divine bonus as a class feature - against evil - to give them their needed boost in comparison, and then have "Smite Evil" that does something different - perhaps auto crit- or double the bonus, or stun, trip, or leave them shaken or godsmacked or something!
a constant bonus vs evil (not smiting) of increasing at say the levels that the number of smites are increased (1st +1, 4th +2, 7th +3, 10th +4, etc) (done this way to prevent dipping), and Cha Mod to damage doesn't sound overbearing considering the number of lackluster comparisons we've illustrated.
A 10th level Paladin would have a bonus of 4 pts to hit against evil and about a +4 or +5 about that time to damage on every attack vs evil.
If we compare that to a fighter at 10th (same BAB); Weapon Training x 2, weapon Focus, greater weapon focus, 4 pts of better str gives them a +6 vs all targets, (compared to +4 for the paladin against evil) and still doing more damage w/ specialization and the option of greater specialization later.
This makes the gap a lot smaller between them.
The barbarian with their superior normal strength and now greater rage capability making a gap in strength about 10 pts still has a good ability to keep pace, if not, better, against all targets.
Robert
|
|
Yeah I see where you guys are coming from and I'm not against you guys suggesting it, if it got picked up that would be great, I'll just be honest though and say that I don't think there's a snowball's chance that any large changes will be made to the Pally, I think any changes have to be minor ones that affect things that are already there and don't break backwards comp if they are going to have a chance to be picked up. That's just my impression of how things stand right now, and I could be completely wrong, but that's also why I try to keep any fixes minor.
I think suggesting it the way Robert has might get a little more positive reaction.
So it would not be a "smite" but a standard paladin ability that adds a divine blessing of sorts to the paladins ability to fight against evil. I like this idea, and I dont think it would do anything to backwards comp because it would be a completely new class ability (like many of the others) and those things that we mentioned before that would break the class would not effect it.
Someone earlier did suggest this idea though. That this particular bonus be like the # of times per day is now though. Dont want to take credit away from them, but I cant remember who said it and dont have time to look.
I do have to say I am with you guys, I hope this is being looked at. Robert, you said "we are not looking at classes right now" was that some sort of slip? are you a dev or something? If so that would be awesome, not because you actually agree with us (but thats cool too) but because one of the devs is spending a lot of time in this board :)
Ahh well, I guess now if we could make this new paladin ability against evil and then fix "smite" how lastknightleft has suggested I would be happy, actually very happy!
I was just thinking about your suggestion Robert. What about just giving paladins favored enemy? It is a lot like what we were talking about but gives the bonus to perception and sense motive, which fits with the paladins "knowledge" of his enemy. It would of course be limited to evil, in all its forms.
I am not sold on this idea, just sort of throwing it out there to see what you guys think.
|
|
I would suggest some minor changes to smite.
1) Make it last for more than one attack. Lasting for Cha mod attacks, for example.
2) Don't make it expended on a miss! I mean, seriously, your god sends you down the power to smite this foe, but if you don't hit him he takes it back?
3) Make the bonus damage holy damage so it bypasses DR.
4) Double, or even treble, the damage against creatures with the [Evil] Subtype. Who else should Paladins be smiting if not the embodiment pure evil?
To be honest, all four could be added and it wouldn't overpower the Paladin while making smite more useful.
Edit: Missed one.
5) Smite is added for free against creatures of the [Evil] subtype.
|
|
I was just thinking about your suggestion Robert. What about just giving paladins favored enemy? It is a lot like what we were talking about but gives the bonus to perception and sense motive, which fits with the paladins "knowledge" of his enemy. It would of course be limited to evil, in all its forms.
I am not sold on this idea, just sort of throwing it out there to see what you guys think.
No thanks. I don't think that's the right approach.
As for my comment about not looking at classes: I'm not a dev, and that wasn't a slip; I was merely commenting that "we" (meaning the paizo community) are not officially reviewing the chapter on classes yet - so far just ability scores and races.
Once we move on to classes - the developers will hopefully review our ideas.
Robert
I would suggest some minor changes to smite.
1) Make it last for more than one attack. Lasting for Cha mod attacks, for example.
2) Don't make it expended on a miss! I mean, seriously, your god sends you down the power to smite this foe, but if you don't hit him he takes it back?
3) Make the bonus damage holy damage so it bypasses DR.
4) Double, or even treble, the damage against creatures with the [Evil] Subtype. Who else should Paladins be smiting if not the embodiment pure evil?
To be honest, all four could be added and it wouldn't overpower the Paladin while making smite more useful.
Edit: Missed one.
5) Smite is added for free against creatures of the [Evil] subtype.
All of those are good additions. I think they should all be considered on top of what Robert and I have said about a new always active ability.