this , while true, made me laugh my arse off* The only difficult aspect of playing a paladin (aside from the antics of other players) is the purely role-playing aspect. This takes no rules knowledge and requires the player to have simply a mature mindset and know how to think morally and ethically. Unless they are a psycho in real-life, that shouldn't be too hard either.
...
Heh, you said arse. ;)
Wait, what was I saying about maturity? Dammit!
|
And what about people like me CharlieRock? I'm playing a paladin with an 11,10,12 in that order as my physical stats. And because of my experience and a reliable (though very downplayed) min/maxing ability I get by just fine. My issue is that the abilities I have, I could increase my stats all I want, it doesn't make the abilities more valuable. Smites damage boost won't increase no matter what stat I take. Lay on Hands doesn't increase in healing per single use no matter what stat I boost. So I have abilities that are underwhelming leaving me to choose every round of combat to swing my weapon like an NPC warrior. How is saying only play with good stats an answer when the stats have nothing to do with how poor the abilities I'm pushing to change perform.
I'm not saying every paladin has to get good stats all the way around- I'm saying it makes them a better paladin. And that if you are going to create a balanced paladin it has to be balanced whether you are in a moderate or high point buy. (extremely low point buys hose the paladin, regardless of what we do. It does that to any multi-stat character).
For example.
If we balance the paladin's melee abilities based on you having 10,11,10 for Str Con and Dex then a paladin who chooses to arrange his physical stats differently will not only still get your boost, but he'll have the high stats to boot. This isn't especially problematic in a normal game, since in a relatively moderate point buy he's going to absolutely *suck* at saves and spell casting.
But not every game uses moderate point buy. Quite a few use what most would consider "high" point buy, or even dice rolling. When you have a paladin who does have decent scores all the way across then your "balancing of the scales" propels him too far. This is especially true if they Also take into account some of the ideas this thread has come up with for bumping up Smite.
So how can we help them out without breaking them? Without breaking the fighter?
Some of you have said some things about devils and demons and undead and whatnot (the forum was being weird, seems it wouldn't let me more than glimpse some of the posts before they were gone.. may be me, may be the net, may be the forum.. i dunno, is much weirdness though). At any rate if someone said this already then I deeply apologize- but what about not only increasing the use of smite (through the LoH mechanic) but also allowing it to act as Holy against any "Evil outsider" or "Undead" types creatures?
Against those it would not Only be a regular smite (cha to hit, lv to dmg) but would add the obligatory +2d6.
In fact that makes me wonder if an Excellent 16th level ability (from the chart on one of my previous posts) would be a "Bane" effect which granted any weapon the Paladin wielded the effects of "Bane" vs their choice of Undead or Evil Outsiders. (chosen as a standard action, changed as often as the paladin had need to change it).
(bane being +2 to hit and damage and +2d6 to that creature).
That all combined Would make the paladin come out ahead vs those creatures paladin are known to fight well. Demons, devils, undead, while still leaving the "normal melee" folk in charge of the normal melee.
Thoughts?
-S
And what about people like me CharlieRock? I'm playing a paladin with an 11,10,12 in that order as my physical stats. And because of my experience and a reliable (though very downplayed) min/maxing ability I get by just fine. My issue is that the abilities I have, I could increase my stats all I want, it doesn't make the abilities more valuable. Smites damage boost won't increase no matter what stat I take. Lay on Hands doesn't increase in healing per single use no matter what stat I boost. So I have abilities that are underwhelming leaving me to choose every round of combat to swing my weapon like an NPC warrior. How is saying only play with good stats an answer when the stats have nothing to do with how poor the abilities I'm pushing to change perform.
I did say lay on hands was too weak. A paladin is usually striving for a leadership role within the party so some sort of group bonus would not also be out of character. Like Bard's get. They do give bonus to fear saves, but ... yeah, thats a bit underwealming. Like protection from evil for the whole team.
But most of the issues brought up are comparing them to fighters, which only do one thing. Weapon swinging armor wearing tanking. The paladin is more like a jack of all trades and shouldnt come as close to tanking ability as the fighter.|
|
stuff
but once again the things I'm changing aren't based off of stats, so you change the stats and the abilities I'm dealing with still don't change.
I was actually responding to charlie rock who was saying you could only play it with a high stat character, which my playtest has thouroughly disproven.
and honestly, the changes I've pushed for only add a few more smites per day and lightly boost the damage and allow it to apply to every attack made in the round.
on another thread someone else had the idea that smites ignore DR and I said that was a good idea and if implemented then you don't want smites to be top loaded at level one. So I am keeping very much an eye out for variable stats, and not stepping on the fighters toes.
The lay on hands definitely needs some kind of boost. but once again these are abilities that are largely independant of stats.
|
For example.
If we balance the paladin's melee abilities based on you having 10,11,10 for Str Con and Dex then a paladin who chooses to arrange his physical stats differently will not only still get your boost, but he'll have the high stats to boot. This isn't especially problematic in a normal game, since in a relatively moderate point buy he's going to absolutely *suck* at saves and spell casting.But not every game uses moderate point buy. Quite a few use what most would consider "high" point buy, or even dice rolling. When you have a paladin who does have decent scores all the way across then your "balancing of the scales" propels him too far. This is especially true if they Also take into account some of the ideas this thread has come up with for bumping up Smite.
So how can we help them out without breaking them? Without breaking the fighter?
Some of you have said some things about devils and demons and undead and whatnot (the forum was being weird, seems it wouldn't let me more than glimpse some of the posts before they were gone.. may be me, may be the net, may be the forum.. i dunno, is much weirdness though). At any rate if someone said this already then I deeply apologize- but what about not only increasing the use of smite (through the LoH mechanic) but also allowing it to act as Holy against any "Evil outsider" or "Undead" types creatures?
I dont know how to communicate my thoughts on this without sounding snarky, but I'll try....
Are you seriously suggesting that we design all classes on the notion that one person could luckily get a better set of dice rolls during character creation and in such unlikely event the class needs to still be as dumbed down as those who didn't......? That's the message I'm getting from your comments.
ANY class/character will be better with better stats. Any player who's stats after rolling is avg of 15 is going to be far better than he who avg 12! Thats just simple math! A wizard with great stats will have the dex for ranged touch attacks, AC, Ref, and initiative, on top of maxing out his DCs on his spells, and CON for the best Hit points available. - AND still have a good stat to put on STR for touch attack spells, or WIS for better will saves. A fighter would not only max out his str, but have optimal DEX for his Armor training ability, and CON for his hit points, and either have an INT enough to take Combat Expert and the cool sub-feats there-in, or a WIS score to help make up for his poor Will saves. A barb could max out his CON, and STR still have enough on his DEX to make up for his lack of AC. A Cleric could optimize his spellcasting WIS and channeling CHA and still have decent scores in the physical stats for being a war-priest......on and on and on.
You continue to belabor the possibility that if we make the avg paladin on par with the other character classes and compare the avg version of those classes to it - then what are we to do in the eventuality of a paladin with good stats gets rolled vs a different character class? |
Simple: all things scale. If you're doing point buys, and all classes are created equal, and all character classes have equal points to distribute, then the paladin and/or the fighter, or wizard or cleric, etc, will be all equal, because those characters will also have the advantage of better stats! If you're rolling stats, then some character class will be lucky with their rolls, and some are NOT.
Unfortunately, as it stands, all classes are NOT created equal at this time. The paladin as I have continued to illustrate is behind the curve of every character class at this point except for the bard perhaps.
THAT is what we're trying to correct. As it stands even when using the Smite Evil ability - the single-most effect offensive ability of the paladin, he's still far behind the simple math mechanics during the initiative and lasts mere rounds per day. Sure he can be buffed with spells etc, spending rounds getting competitive, while other character classes are using always on abilities, and on-demand capabilities.
How about the inverse? What is to happen if the player of the paladin is unlucky and winds up with low-rolled stats? While the player of the fighter gets good rolled stats? Is your suggestion that we weaken the fighter to avoid such possibility?
Your suggestions with the "bane" or whatever it was towards undead is a good idea - but it's myopic at best. It's not addressing the overall issue, and the over-all all-around sheer fact that on a normal daily basis in most instances, the paladin does not have the capability to have his combat abilities close to those of other character classes. He does not have the feats or skills that a ranger has, he does not have the abilities and sheer focus on strength and attk/dmg based talents that the barbarian has, or the rage that lasts for several rounds per day, he does not have the power of the buffs that a cleric or druid has, the damage capability of a rogue, the number of attacks of a monk, the spell lethality of sorcerers/wizards, and doesn't have the combat modifiers or even close to them of a fighter who is also augmented by a score of feats.
That is the gap, the issue at hand that i have been illustrating and tyring to close with my ideas such as Divine Might, and some ideas for AC enhancing ideas as WELL as making Smite Evil have more of an impact for those fights and BBEGs that its truly needed on - those triple-Ds (as I've alwasy called them), the evil high-clerics, the liches and other powerful undead - all of whom have either insane ACs, or good damage reduction or both!
Finally, since i'm sure you're passionate about your opinions, just as I am, I am willing to humor you if you can provide me the data to back up your concerns. This thread is filled with concise illustrations from my point of view of the typical paladin vs the typical figther/ranger/barbarian in combat. Your concerns of someone playing a paladin and focusing ONLY on the strength aspect of it making such a character (assuming my proposals are in play also) would be too over-bearing were duley noted, to which I countered would make such a paladin a complete boob in all other areas that the paladin's abilities are used.
So provide me a realistic paladin build that reflects what you're afraid of by using the PF point buy (which is what....20 points?) but go ahead and make it 25! Really power it up! Lets say the DM is a glutton and allows his players to really power-game.....make me a paladin with your concerns and even with my suggested alterations using a PF rules for their core races etc. Lets see what we come up. So far you have expressed concerns, with possibilities, suppositions, and hypothetical situations.... but I would like to see just where your concerns are on paper if you will.
Robert
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'm not saying every paladin has to get good stats all the way around- I'm saying it makes them a better paladin. And that if you are going to create a balanced paladin it has to be balanced whether you are in a moderate or high point buy. (extremely low point buys hose the paladin, regardless of what we do. It does that to any multi-stat character).
For example.
If we balance the paladin's melee abilities based on you having 10,11,10 for Str Con and Dex then a paladin who chooses to arrange his physical stats differently will not only still get your boost, but he'll have the high stats to boot. This isn't especially problematic in a normal game, since in a relatively moderate point buy he's going to absolutely *suck* at saves and spell casting.But not every game uses moderate point buy. Quite a few use what most would consider "high" point buy, or even dice rolling. When you have a paladin who does have decent scores all the way across then your "balancing of the scales" propels him too far. This is especially true if they Also take into account some of the ideas this thread has come up with for bumping up Smite.
So how can we help them out without breaking them? Without breaking the fighter?
Some of you have said some things about devils and demons and undead and whatnot (the forum was being weird, seems it wouldn't let me more than glimpse some of the posts before they were gone.. may be me, may be the net, may be the forum.. i dunno, is much weirdness though). At any rate if someone said this already then I deeply apologize- but what about not only increasing the use of smite (through the LoH mechanic) but also allowing it to act as Holy against any "Evil outsider" or "Undead" types creatures?
Against those it would not Only be a regular smite (cha to hit, lv to dmg) but would add the obligatory +2d6.
In fact that makes me wonder if an Excellent 16th level ability (from the chart on one of my previous posts) would be a "Bane" effect which granted any weapon the Paladin wielded the...
I might even allow a larger choice of banes. I personally favor "Chaotic outsider" as one, but an iconic paladin foe is also the dragon, and I'd like to see dragons as a list of potential bane-able foes.
Perhaps something like this:
Baneful smite (Su): Beginning at 10th level, a paladin may expend one of his smite evil uses in order to grant a weapon she uses the bane property against one of the following foes: dragon, outsider (chaotic), outsider (evil), or undead. The weapon retains this property for a number of rounds equal to the paladin's Charisma modifier (minimum 1). This replaces the normal effects of smite evil.
Personally, I would also add another note to this effect:
A paladin using baneful smite may expend other uses of smite evil with their normal benefits; the effects stack.
What do you think?
I actually like the ability to double-dip by stacking up 2 uses of the power (come on, at 10th level he only has FOUR smites a day, so it's not like he can do this all day long). I can understand how some would have reservations, but come on, look at the abilities other classes are getting at 10th level (how about cone of cold, righteous might, slay living, wall of force, dominate person, feeblemind for starters) and see if it still seems overpowered.
Thoughts?
|
|
actually your double dip isn't very good no offense, but with a total of 7 smites in his career using 2 for one hit is an aweful choice unless you know that what you are fighting is the BBEG and is it for the day.
With only 7 in the day it would need to have both of those abilities at once to have me stop pushing for more smites. Plain and simple, unless smite becomes downright awesome, it doesn't have enough uses.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
actually your double dip isn't very good no offense, but with a total of 7 smites in his career using 2 for one hit is an aweful choice unless you know that what you are fighting is the BBEG and is it for the day.
With only 7 in the day it would need to have both of those abilities at once to have me stop pushing for more smites. Plain and simple, unless smite becomes downright awesome, it doesn't have enough uses.
Whatever you do with SE itself (and I've posted many variations of extended durations for that), the "baneful smite" ability suggested above happens to use an SE, but it lasts 1 round x CHA bonus. As in, for all attacks you make during that time period. So, for that number of rounds, you get +2 to hit, +2d6+2 on damage vs. that foe.
You get in a new battle with a different kind of foe, fire it up again and get that bonus for that number of rounds. If you want to burn other SEs to add to that, you can.
I was going to say it's not using 2 for one hit, because I was under the impression you thought the baneful smite only lasted for 1 hit.
But, if SE itself only lasts for one hit, then conversely, no matter how long "baneful smite" lasts, the SE would only be good for one hit.
If you really had to try for a takedown shot with one hit, I suppose you could do it (say our paladin has 20 CHR at 10th level, he could pop one attack at +7 to hit, +2d6+12 damage), but otherwise you'd be better off spending your SE attempts on longer-lasting "baneful smites" - smaller overall effect but lasting multiple rounds, than wasting it on single-attack smites.
Which just points back to the inherent silliness of the single-attack smite and the absolute need to make it last at least a full round (including AoOs before your next turn).
Simple: all things scale. If you're doing point buys, and all classes are created equal, and all character classes have equal points to distribute, then the paladin and/or the fighter, or wizard or cleric, etc, will be all equal,
But that is exactly why the paladin has to be sub-par at their jobs. Because they do so many. If you rampup the damage they do your stepping on the fighter for the benefit of the pally , who can already do so many things the fighter cant (buffs and healing). And if they healed/buffed on a par with clerics then your again giving the edge to pally's since they have other edges (martial weapons, 25% higher BAB).
So, no the pally isnt the equal to a fighter on any one task the fighter can do. And they shouldnt. That is the give portion of the give and take they do to be the tank/mage/healer class.|
|
Then consider giving them a few extra points to make the pally. Explain to the other players it is to compensate for trying to role play a difficult character (code of conduct and all). Because it is a "special" class for role play reasons that will never see the light as a set of mechanics.
The paladin shouldnt be available to every player anyway. Only the ones that have had a bit of pratice playing RPGs. They may want to play a paladin as their very first character ever. just say 'No'. You dont let someone with a learner's permit to drive a semi or a tank. Why throw a new player into one of the most difficult classes.
This may have been a legitimate arguement in 1st edition - maybe even in 2nd edition. 3rd edition and beyond has tried to do away with min. ability score requirements that used to have a paladin needing a 17 CHA among other things - clearly the hardest class to qualify for - which is why paladins were in fact so rare in earlier editions.
This is no longer true. All character classes are assumed to be created equal. All character use the same XP chart and advance equally - something that was different in earlier editions.
Your idea may work for a handful of DMs and play-groups, but I'm willing to bet it's less than 5% of the 3rd groups out there who would make such interventions.
League play is very popular and in that arena all characters are built in the exact same fashion and with the same set of standards for creation.
Thus - making the class 'balanced' by allowing players a few extra points to create their character with is simply not congruent with the methodology of character creation and development for 3rd ed and beyond.
Therefore, we are forced to come up with more pragmatic resolutions to the imbalance in the classes in order to make all classes equally playable, with the notion that each class can be played with the same level of frequency.
Robert
|
|
Simple: all things scale. If you're doing point buys, and all classes are created equal, and all character classes have equal points to distribute, then the paladin and/or the fighter, or wizard or cleric, etc, will be all equal,But that is exactly why the paladin has to be sub-par at their jobs. Because they do so many. If you rampup the damage they do your stepping on the fighter for the benefit of the pally , who can already do so many things the fighter cant (buffs and healing). And if they healed/buffed on a par with clerics then your again giving the edge to pally's since they have other edges (martial weapons, 25% higher BAB).
So, no the pally isnt the equal to a fighter on any one task the fighter can do. And they shouldnt. That is the give portion of the give and take they do to be the tank/mage/healer class.
You're right, they shouldn't do damage equal to a fighter. They shouldn't buff as well as a cleric. And they don't. And my suggestions don't do that, either. What I am advocating is closing the gap to a small to moderate one - as it stands it's a signifant gap. It shouldn't be that large of a disparity. I'm not asking to do more damage than a typically built fighter. I'm asking to not be embarrasingly behind in the ability to hit my opponents. Do you actually read the whole posts on these threads? Tank/mage/healer class? What in the world are you talking about? As a healer, they're a joke, as a tank, sure they're good - the fighter is better tank, even the cleric is a better tank. And a mage? Honestly I have no idea what you're talking about. I fail to understand nearly every one of your posts.
Robert
|
|
Simple: all things scale. If you're doing point buys, and all classes are created equal, and all character classes have equal points to distribute, then the paladin and/or the fighter, or wizard or cleric, etc, will be all equal,But that is exactly why the paladin has to be sub-par at their jobs. Because they do so many. If you rampup the damage they do your stepping on the fighter for the benefit of the pally , who can already do so many things the fighter cant (buffs and healing). And if they healed/buffed on a par with clerics then your again giving the edge to pally's since they have other edges (martial weapons, 25% higher BAB).
So, no the pally isnt the equal to a fighter on any one task the fighter can do. And they shouldnt. That is the give portion of the give and take they do to be the tank/mage/healer class.
So what your saying is that paladins should suck at everything compared to the other classes and then we should make up for it by giving them better stats.
You didn't put it in so course a language but when you break it down that is exactly what you are saying.
The paladin could be buffed in a bunch of ways. Keep in mind that if smite made a paladin = to the fighter when smite is used that still doesn't make the paladin better than the fighter or even equal to the fighter because he can only do it at the most 7 rounds at 20th level.
Have you actually made any suggestions for boosting the paladin or have you just been saying give them good stats?
No, here is what I'm saying.
Your proposal closes the gap if we assume a certain amount of attributes for each stat. One method you chose was a flat out increase to attack and damage based on the level of the paladin.
This works out well, and closes the game without overcoming it, assuming the paladin uses a relatively low point buy and favors his spell casting and charisma over his melee. Not a bad assumption to make, but its problematic because not all paladin will choose that way.
All fighters will have a primary stat and con. That'll either be strength or dex, but I've been assuming for This discussion strength- since the dex based fighter really isn't in the running for alot of damage.
The Barbarian is in the same boat. He maximizes strength and constitution.
It doesn't Really matter what point buy you use for those two classes because regardless, they are going to *pump up* those two stats, and the numbers for the rest will largely fall where the excess points fall.
I've yet to see a barbarian put Int or Cha over his Str or con. The reason is because they have no reason to do so. (not that they make int or cha dumpstats, but the Main stays of the class are Str and Con).
Paladin NEED high scores in all their attributes except Dex, and even Dex needs to be 10- preferably 12 if they can possibly afford it.
If you give Paladin +4 to attack and damage over their level-life to make up for the fact that the have Insane-Attribute-Problems then you have a problem when people choose a proposed point buy that has More points than standard. Mind you, I'm not talking about some theoretical person rolling all 18's and griping that it'll be too strong. I'm talking about the very real possibility that a DM might choose a point buy that doesn't meaningfully increase the power of a fighter or barbarian- since it just gives them more points for stats they don't really need anyway- while giving the Paladin the ability to use your bonus And high strength to not only make up the gap, but skirt it or surpass it. In such a scenario- a very real scenario- the Fighter becomes nigh on obsolete because not only is the Paladin doing the same damage, he has better overall defense, spells, and all the other goodies the Paladin gets.
I completely absolutely agree that it thoroughly sucks to be a class who's primary ability is to defend. I, however, did Not design it that way. And the only way to remove it, is to have him trod on the toes of the other classes. That is the real problem. As much as we want to keep the Paladin and make them fun to play, we can't buff them to the extent that they make playing a fighter pointless. Replicating the Fighter's new bonuses to attack and damage isn't the answer.
We need to build on what already exists to make them not better fighters- but better holy warriors. Whether that means adding damage and uses to Smite, or building up Lay on Hands or giving them Bane or Lawful in addition to Holy for their weapons- or a combination of them all, I don't know.
When it comes to fighting in general the fighter has to be the best. If he isn't, we've deleted him. The Paladin in combat needs to be towards the vile and evil and outsider, what the Ranger is with his favored enemies (though with a different mechanic). Not better in general than the other melee combatants, but better in his chosen field. Better, because that is what he is and what he does.
And please don't mistake me- I'm not a designer :) I have no decision making power.. And I'm fairly sure I wouldn't want it. But I also think we have to try to come up with ideas that they are likely to implement. Giving Paladin the fighter bonus, with a different name- even if slightly weaker- isn't something I personally believe they will do. Maybe they will, I dunno. But I think altering Smite and the LOH mechanics are more likely than them granting an entirely new ability out of thin air.
-S
|
|
Maybe they will, I dunno. But I think altering Smite and the LOH mechanics are more likely than them granting an entirely new ability out of thin air.
For the most part you and I butt heads on the paladin issue, but this one line is where you and I are in perfect agreement. That's why I'm only trying to work with existing mechanics and keeping them in line with their established durations.
Maybe they will, I dunno. But I think altering Smite and the LOH mechanics are more likely than them granting an entirely new ability out of thin air.For the most part you and I butt heads on the paladin issue, but this one line is where you and I are in perfect agreement. That's why I'm only trying to work with existing mechanics and keeping them in line with their established durations.
Thirded.
Paladins already have an impressive array of words on their level chart.
If we can only back up those words with some powers, they will be a formidable class.
|
|
Hello everyone,
Although I am still considering options for increasing the power of smite evil, the duration is likely to change to at least 1 round, making it useful on all your attacks instead of just one. Although I can see the usefulness of "holding the charge", I think an expanded duration is more valuable and allows you to get more use out of the ability.
Just thought you guys might want to hear this, I know it made me burst out in tears of joy :)
|
|
It doesn't Really matter what point buy you use for those two classes because regardless, they are going to *pump up* those two stats, and the numbers for the rest will largely fall where the excess points fall.
I've yet to see a barbarian put Int or Cha over his Str or con. The reason is because they have no reason to do so. (not that they make int or cha dumpstats, but the Main stays of the class are Str and Con).Paladin NEED high scores in all their attributes except Dex, and even Dex needs to be 10- preferably 12 if they can possibly afford it.
If you give Paladin +4 to attack and damage over their level-life to make up for the fact that the have Insane-Attribute-Problems then you have a problem when people choose a proposed point buy that has More points than standard. Mind you, I'm not talking about some theoretical person rolling all 18's and griping that it'll be too strong. I'm talking about the very real possibility that a DM might choose a point buy that doesn't meaningfully increase the power of a fighter or barbarian- since it just gives them more points for stats they don't really need anyway- while giving the Paladin the ability to use your bonus And high strength to not only make up the gap, but skirt...
Once again, you chime in, and belabor the same point, you give all these apocolyptic type omens that could potentially come about if we made the paladin better. You can continue to spout doom and gloom and oh woe to thee till we're all blue in the face.
What I have asked you to do is to prove your theory. I've illustrated ad naseum the most likely scenarios to occur. Now I want to see this proposed issue you're talking about.
You propose a problem will occur if/when a DM allows for a power build. That was part of my challenge to you - I suggested using a 25 point buy as opposed to the 20 standard of the PF system.
Show me I'm wrong. Obviously myself and others on here completely disagree with your assessments. You're making observations that I cannot fathom. Illustrate what you're concerns are, so that I am better able to make adjustments to my methods of fixing this class. So I'm asking you for the sake of argument and for the sake of helping me create a better and more balanced class if my methodology is indeed skewed - humor me - illustrate your supposed fear and design this game-breaking character that you continue to brow-beat us about. Please. I asked that you do this in my last response to you - I'm not surprised it was ignored, however, for I feel it's just a phantom concern, and down in deep, you don't honestly see the problem that you think you see.
And for the record, a DM that allows power-gaming monster point buy builds should expect that characters will have super-powerful characters. Thats not only logical, but just pure simple common sense. Its a matter of cause and effect. If I spend all my money on liquor, I shouldn't complain that I'm drunk and broke!
Robert
|
|
Just thought you guys might want to hear this, I know it made me burst out in tears of joy :)Hello everyone,
Although I am still considering options for increasing the power of smite evil, the duration is likely to change to at least 1 round, making it useful on all your attacks instead of just one. Although I can see the usefulness of "holding the charge", I think an expanded duration is more valuable and allows you to get more use out of the ability.
yes; at least we're getting somewhere. The problem is going to then lay in the 42 other rounds of combat encountered that day that the paladin is still grossly ineffective.
Robert
I am not going to design a "broken paladin". I am not, because no such thing exists. Just like you can't break the fighter. They are unbreakable.
If you make a build of a paladin though that has a base 18 or 16 strengh however, with a similar though likely reduced con- then whatever the rest of your stats are, you are getting relatively close to what the fighter can do When you add it on top of a fiat bonus based on level.
Why? Because that is what the figher already gets. Now- I grant you, and never denied, that the fighter would still be marginally better. He will continue to get his wep spec bonuses and that from imp spec/focus, which the paladin can not gain access to. This will keep the fighter ahead in that regard- but we're talking about +1 to hit and +4 damage.
A fighter gets +4 attack and damage from Weapon Training.
Your proposal from your first post (if you've amended it since then, please forgive me- i'll amend my math accordingly) gives the paladin +7 at 20th level to attack and damage, against all evil foes.
"all evil foes' is an extremely broad category- one that the vast majority (but not all) of the PC's enemies will fall into.
If we assume the Paladin and Fighter have put equal weight into their physical ability scores this yields a paladin actually doing More than the fighter against any enemy that is "evil", and even more so if he chooses to smite.
Again, +4 wep training, +1 from imp wep focus, and +4 from wep spec.
This leaves the paladin hitting /more often/ and doing 1 less damage than the fighter.
Armor is less of an issue, but in the "high point" system it bears pointing out that the fighter will actually do alot better in AC- since he'll have the points to spare on Dex to actually take advantage of the -4 dex reduction his armor training receives, which serves to widen the gap from 4 to 8. 8 AC is nothing to sneeze at, but the paladin still has saves out the wazoo and the fighter doesn't. (assuming a high point buy. A low point buy with the paladin in melee leaves his saves lack luster, slightly less lack luster in medium point buy, and fairly decent to kick-arse in high point buy scenarios)
Again, I'm not talking about an "over powered paladin". I'm talking about a paladin who mechanically makes the fighter not really attractive to take. We can't really make a statement like "no one will ever choose fighter" because folks don't strictly make choises based on class mechanics but it is fair to say that +7 to attack and damage on top of what the paladin already does gives rise to the question of "why do we have a fighter when the paladin is better?".
I agree completely that the paladin is lacking. If you read through my posts, you'll find that I say so more than once. I also offer other ideas for fixing it. I am not against giving power to the paladin- I am against offering them a "fix" that in essence removes the fighter from the game, as a mechanical creature. This includes giving them a better primary bonus than the fighter gets- when all the fighter does is fight. It includes not creating brand new mechanics that the designers are, in my personal opinion, not likely to adopt.
I Am in favor of beefing up Smite. Either using the options those in this thread have come up with, or as Jason said- to extend it to a full round per use, a combination of something we haven't thought of yet. I'm in favor of beefing up their spells and making some if not all of the more useful ones swift actions and/or increasing their durations to make them more attractive. I am in favor of increasing the CL to Paladin Level rather than half. I am in favor of a good many things that make the paladin a better paladin, that don't cross over into making him into a fighter with spells and much better magical defenses.
I do not hate or despise the paladin. I am not the enemy of the paladin. I simply do not agree that they require a flat out +hit/damage in order to fix them. I think doing that to them would do them a disservice, would blur the line between the paladin and the other classes, and if adopted I personally think it would force the designers to do that Instead of improving the other paladin class features that actually make them feel like being a paladin.
Giving characters alot of points to buy their character attributes with should build powerful characters. You are right. However, no matter how many points my rogue gets- he's still not a fighter. No matter how good the ranger gets, he's still a ranger. the barbarian remains a barbarian and the wizard doesn't suddenly become a cleric just because he gets high wisdom.
If they implement your suggestion to give +7 attack and damage over 20 levels, And the DM uses a moderate to high point buy, then the Fighter gets a boost to alot of stats he doesn't need, and the Paladin gets boosted in such a fashion that he's suddenly a better fighter than the fighter. And he's also a better defender because he can afford for his charisma to remain high with his physical stats, and so on.
The Paladin does need a boost. No doubt about it, I am not arguing against it. They do not need a flat out boost to their attack rolls and damage, however. They need their existing class abilities to be improved.
-S
x
Ok.. you stumped me.. I can't argue against the X.
*hangs head*
(another forum error I assume?)
|
|
Yeah, there has been a real problem of late with people posting and when you go to view it they aren't there. Posting makes them reapear, so I post an x and I can see the invisible post, I usually go back and edit in response, but I got called away to go fix my mothers flat tire *rolls eyes* well I may be 26, but you're never too old to go rescue your mom :)
Agreed.
I think I'll be cooking my mom supper soon. Luckily we both tend to like the same things. :)
I still just see an x for you, however.. hrm.. maybe I shouldn't have quoted it?
-S
Guess I failed my reading check on that one- sorry.
You may try going to "my account" link at the top of the page and viewing your last posts.. Several times when mine have disappeared, i've found them hiding there.
-S
|
Selgard the reason for the fighter is all those extra feats he gets allow for built up feat chains and quite a few of them, a Paladin is only going to have 1 or two of these if he's totally optimised for beat down neglecting his other abilities. These kick fighter damage into a whole new stratosphere if set up for it as well as allow for a whole load of fairly nifty little tricks.
Most of the extra feats though don't really set up extra damage, just extra options. A very few do, but not in a "you get more damage per attack" way, but in a "if circumstances are right, you get more attacks" like Whirlwind, or in a "You can do X without an AOO" or "you can do Y with a better CMB" or whatnot.
Now I will grant that this discussion is made harder by the fact that Jason and crew have repeatedly said that the fighter isn't really being looked at until the Feat section- when all the rest of the classes are really being looked at hard in the "class section".
It's entirely possible that they'll get some truly kick arse feat that'll make this entire discussion moot. And I hope so- it's just hard to discuss from the point of "well they could do this or that", when in fact they could make fighters perfect, or even worse than they are. We just don't really know anymore than that they are going to look at the fighter more closely when they get to the feats.
Maybe we should ask jason to hold off on some of the melee class reviews until the Feat chapter is done, so the 3 main melee guys in the discussion can be discussed in totality, rather than with one of them having their main class ability undiscussed?
(i mean, realistically I could see Wep focus/imp/wep spec/imp getting boosted and if that were to happen it would change this discussion quite abit. The same goes if they add feats to give fighters more magical protection and such. The idea of "well paladin are the magic defenders" could potentially go down the drain when they talk about feats. We'll just have to see)
-S
|
|
The progression of feats really do make quite a difference, look at my build which won't be complete till level 11 that i could have done with a fighter by level 5. See I say we make the improvements to the class that way we know what we need to do when we get to the feat section to make fighters unique. If we hold off now and the feat section comes the fighter'll get a pleasant boost and the pally will be stuck in his same bag of incompletence. I do like that word. it's almost as good as the current quizibuk we have with the paladin right now
Knight, is my last full post (the one immediately before your X) invisible to you?
If so, let me know, and I'll repost it.
-S
|
|
I am not going to design a "broken paladin". I am not, because no such thing exists. Just like you can't break the fighter. They are unbreakable.
If you make a build of a paladin though that has a base 18 or 16 strengh however, with a similar though likely reduced con- then whatever the rest of your stats are, you are getting relatively close to what the fighter can do When you add it on top of a fiat bonus based on level.
Okay so I'm inclined to believe that you haven't gotten a way to dispute my claims.
Allow me to indulge then.
Using a base 3.5 DMG point buy build - std is 28 pts. Lets take a 34 points thanks to the gracious DM power build you're talking.
The paladin player decides to make a ball-out combat strength-monger Paladin congruent with your concerns....
As a human, he puts the +2 to STR.
S 18 (16 pts) total 20 with the +2
D 12 (4 pts)
C 14 (8 pts)
I 8 (0 pts)
W 10 (2 pts)
Ch 12 (4 pts)
At 5th level he's got BAB 5, 23 STR +6 mod (w/ +2 str enhancement item), and +2 Divine Might = +13
The fighter in the party takes the same build - human for +2 to STR
S 18 (16 pts)
D 16 (10 pts)
C 14 (6 pts)
I 8 (0 pts)
W 12 (12 pts)
Ch 8 (0 pts)
At 5th level he's got BAB 5, 23 STR +6 mod (w/ +2 Str enhancement item), Weapon Focus, Weapon Training = +13
Okay - so they have the same to attack rolls.
AC
Paladin Full Plate 8, DEX 1, Hvy Shield 2 = 21 AC
Fighter Full Plate 9, DEX 2, Tower Shield 4 = 25, OR 23 to avoid the -2 to attacks with the tower shield.
Summation: at least 2 points better for the fighter.
Damage:
Paladin: 1d8 +6 str, +2 Divine Might +5 Power Attack (1d8+13)
Fighter: 1d8 +6 str, +2 Specialization, +1 Weapon Training, +5 Power Attack (1d8+14)
OR for a 22 AC - still 1 pt MORE than the paladin, the fighter goes nuts and uses a greatsword - cuz that never happens!
Dmg:
Paladin: 1d8 +6 str, +2 Divine Might +5 Power Attack (1d8+13)
Fighter: 1d8 +9 str, +2 Specialization, +1 Weapon Training, +10 Power Attack (1d8+22)
1 pt of AC more, 9 pts of damage more PER hit!!
Saves
Thanks to the focus on Str, the paladin has only a 12 CHA and gets a +1 to saves - of course the Ftr has 4 pts better in Dex, and 2 pts better in Wis - netting 1 better in Ref, 1 worse in Fort, and even in Will - advantage neither.
Fast forward to 11th level
Attk:
Paladin
BAB 11, Str 26 (w/ +4 enhancement item to str) +8, Divine Might +4, = +23
Fighter
BAB 11, Str 26 (w/ +4 enhancement item to str)+8, Weapon Focus, Gtr W.Focus, Weapon Training x2 = +23
Advantage neither. But how many feats does the fighter now have - many of them allow for additional attacks, Cleave, Great Cleave, Whirlwind, Backhand Swing, etc. How many do the Paladin get in comparison? Obviously the fighter is better off with the number of things they can do with equal attack rates.
AC
Paladin Full Plate 8, DEX 1, Hvy Shield 2 = 21 AC
Fighter Full Plate 11, DEX 3, Tower Shield 4 = 28, OR 26 to avoid the -2 to attacks with the tower shield.
Summation: at least 5 points better for the fighter!
Damage:
Paladin: 1d8 +8 str, +4 Divine Might +8 Power Attack (1d8+20)
Fighter: 1d8 +8 str, +2 Specialization, +2 Weapon Training, +8 Power Attack (1d8+20) (one level removed from Imp W.Specialization upping it two more!)
Even steven! Which of the two do you think will be more likely to have Imp Critical by that point doubling the chance of a critical???
OR for a 25 AC - still 4 pt MORE than the paladin!!!, the fighter goes nuts and uses a greatsword - cuz that never happens!
Dmg:
Paladin: 1d8 + 8 str, +4 Divine Might +8 Power Attack (1d8+20)
Fighter: 1d8 +12 str, +2 Specialization, +2 Weapon Training, +16 Power Attack (1d8+32)!!
For 4 pts of AC more, the fighter hits JUST as often as the paladin, gets more feats maneuvers, more crit frequency, bonus attacks with cool feats, and an avg of 12 pts of damage MORE per hit!!
Lets look at saves - okay by now, the Paladin on top of his +4 STR item, probably has a +2 CHA item - giving him a +2 to all saves.
But the Fighter uses the same money on his CON, thus has 11 more hit points on top of the +4 to AC translating to about 20% less likely to be hit)
Saves on Fort still +1 to the Paladin, Ref now even, Will +1 Advantage now to the Paladin.
Advantage - slightly for the paladin - certainly not the SAVE master that everyone argues is the paladins' forte'!
But the fighter has enough feats to spend em on Iron Will, and Lightning Reflexes making up for his deficiencies.
Advantage back to the fighter.
So the paladin has buffs that can make his attack better.....okay so I cast Divine Favor at my 5th level casting to increase my chances to hit - now I'm better than the fighter. But I just wasted a round while the fighter just did 70+ points of damage that round.
So I can smite evil gaining that +2 to attack (only +2 thanks to me ignoring my Cha in place of better str, and even that's only enhanced magically) - but I can only do that 4 attacks today (4 rounds may be coming down the pike). How many rounds can you use the Imp Critical? How many rounds can you get extra attacks such as Cleave, Great Cleave, Backward Swing? or others? I know I know...unlimited.
Out of 5 combats today - avg 8 rds per combat, thats 40 rounds - I can smite 1/10 of them today - you can get a critical, extra attack etc as often as luck and circumstance gives you.
Now lets fast forward to where I get my +7 to attacks
Paladin
BAB: 20, Str 30 (w/ +6 str item) +10, Divine Might +7 = +37
Fighter
BAB 20 Str 30 (w/ +6 str item) +10, WF +1, GWF +1, Weapon Traing x4 = +36
oooh, the paladin finally has him beat by 1! Not the game-breaking leaving the fighter undesired to be played that I kept hearing about for sure!
Fighter has added +2 DEX into his item of Str, Pal adds +2 CON into his item of STR. Hit points are now equal, Fort Save is still in the favor of the paladin - by +2 now - of course by 20th level, the fighter could have afforded Great Fortitude - back to even steven, and fighter still outpacing the paladin on the other two.
AC
Paladin
Full plate: 8, Hvy Shield 2, Dex +1 = 21
Fighter
Full Plate: 12 Tower Shield 4, Dex +4 = 30! 9 pts HIGHER! AND Damage Reduction 5/- all the time - sure the paladin has DR also, but it isn't unbeatable unlike the fighters. The Devils and Demons and anything with an evil aura will still get through it.
OR as I said with a Hvy Shield to avoid that -2 to hits, its still 7 points higher - but if the fighter doesn't want to be hit that tower shield and +9 to AC over the paladin far outweights the -2 to attacks.
Damage:
Paladin: 1d8 +10 str, +7 Divine Might +10 Power Attack (1d8+27)
Fighter: 1d8 +10 str, +2 Specialization, +2 Grt Spec. +2 Weapon Training, +10 Power Attack (1d8+26) (1 point less!)
But again, which of the two do you think will be more likely to have Imp Critical and other feats to allow so many extra attacks; by that point doubling the chance of a critical, doubling the chance for damage, etc. AND now, they don't even have to confirm that better critical chance, and the multiplier on the damage is one higher!!!
OR for a 26 AC - still 5 pts MORE than the paladin!!!, the fighter goes nuts and uses a greatsword - cuz that never happens!
Dmg:
Paladin: 1d8 + 10 str, +7 Divine Might +10 Power Attack (1d8+27)
Fighter: 1d8 + 10, +2 Specialization, +2 Gtr Spec +4 Weapon Training, +20 Power Attack (1d8+38)!!
Sure in the above examples, the paladin could have gone 2 wpn fighting for more damge, more commensurate to what that fighter was doing - for even LOWER AC than what was presented.
Now the feats are being discussed as being even MORE lucrative going foward once we get to the feat section - feats that will make the fighter even MORE kick-ass.
I'm still quite confident that the above although does illustrate that paladin can now keep up with the fighter closely in combat attack, dmg, and saves, not AC however - so advantage still fighter - feats and number of tricks and options in combat - adv fighter. Paladin can buff etc, spending rounds doing it, or can smite evil and do better than the fighter for 7 rounds a day - if we discount the effects that all the extra feats the fighter has can do.
Have I missed anything.......??
Oh yes......the above examples was against EVIL!
What happens we we fight a construct, an ooze, a plant, dire animals, dinosaurs, neutral NPCs with a grudge, and god forbid many undead!
I'll tell you what happens, that attack and damage bonuses afforded the fighter just dropped by 7. AC still significantly lower, saves the same, feats, maneuvers, attack bonuses, damage now far inferior!
Now I am quite confident that fighter has not been replaced, nor have I made him obsolete with my suggestions above!
Robert
There are a few small issues. And I'm still not going to "build a paladin" for you.
As an aside- Beta has its own Point Buy table and costs that is different from that in the DMG.
Saying that "some things aren't evil" is like saying "some things will have damage resistance against the fighter's main weapon". It's true, yes, but as a statistical number it's relatively low. Most things PC's face are evil. If they aren't evil they are usually either animals or mindless. As such, they (typically) aren't numerous as a campaign number. Most BBEG's have the big E for a reason. They are evil. Their mooks tend to be, as do their minions, mooks, and guards.
As to the math. I am going to ignore each instance where you compare one class using a shield to the other using a 2h weapon. They, unsurprisingly, show that the fighter clearly does more damage while when the Paladin does so he clearly loses his "big thing"- namely his AC. In fact he would lose more AC than you show, due to the fact that he would have an enchanted shield. (whether tower or large).
Also unsurprisingly- the paladin who focuses on offense loses most of his defense. This is not so much a new thing as it is something most people would expect. I never stated that a paladin who focused his abilities on being a front line fighter wouldn't suffer in his defenses.
Since the paladin in this example is focusing on combat, I am also going to assume that he has access to the combat feats that aren't fighter only, that don't require some extremely long chain. Saying "who do you think has X" generally yields an answer of "both" unless two feats have the same level or Bab requirement, in which case the fighter would probably have one of them sooner. I think it fair to say that a paladin concentrating on melee will have imp crit ASAP and Wep Focus ASAP. They would also seek to take advantage of Cleave or Great Cleave if the campaign situation warranted their addition to the tree.
Saving throws.
While at low level this isn't true, as moderate levels (10'ish) and later are acquired it is safe to assume that the paladin will get access to something the fighther can't. Charisma boosting items. (well, they can get them- but You know what I mean). Even if we give them the exact same item- a cloak granting both charisma and resistance to saves, the paladin comes out ahead. (done strictly to keep money even, since the fighter really has no need for the charisma boost). This puts the Paladin 2 points higher than the fighter. The fighter can burn 3 feats to make that up if he wants to, but the paladin doesn't have to. He just has to spend a little cash.
Now, Again, I'm going to say. The paladin is not the fighter. He shouldn't be coming close to the fighter. I'm sorry that you feel otherwise, but WHO given Your own examples would choose the fighter?
You mean I can do near or the same damage, with saves that don't require feats to acquire, with spells, LOH and smite?
I keep responding to your posts. I have again and again. I don't mind doing so as I consider our conversation constructive- but I do ask that you go back through the thread and read some of the other posts that have come up. Myself and others have presented numerous other options for the paladin that build on their existing abilities rather than to create a brand new one- a brand new one that surpasses the similar ability given /to a primary melee damage class/. I would ask that you read through them and tell us what you think.
We have suggested:
that smite be tied to LOH, for more uses.
that smite be given the bane vs undead/evil outsider/and some other stuff.
that smite be considered Holy.
that paladin-only spells be cast as swift actions.
These are just 4 ideas that have been presented here that if you commented on, I honestly missed it.
You are very informed about paladin and I'm curious what you think on the various other proposals that have been put forward to help beef up the paladin to where they should be.
-S
While we're mentioning stepping on toes--let's not forget the Barbarian's Powerful Blow. It's pretty much a smite (level damage, add the +2 from rage to hit), just not limited to alignment or aura--and tied to rage points.
Not only does the barbarian get a better smite (and smite being one of the paladin's iconic features), he does it better and more often, without the limitations a paladin has.
He gets quite a few other features, too, that make him even better in combat. Which he should be.
But, well, damn. ;) Better at smiting? +level damage, +2 to hit (equivalent to a 14 Cha), could do it more often, and no alignment restrictions? Bonus damage applies to anything you'd use it against?
While I'm at it, I could mention Renewed Vigor, also. A needed ability, but tied to one of the Barb's strongest stats: con. It's a d8+Con heal. Similar to LoH as LoH is used now if employed in combat.
Which well, few do anymore. It just doesn't do much.
You are right about powerful blow, it does seem to be a smite-copy but without some of the restrictions.
As to the healing.. well, neither healing option is particularly useful. the cost for the barbarian heal is fairly high for what you get- while as it currently stands LOH is low, but you aren't really using LOH for anything else except in special circumstances.
Not much of a "defense" to be sure. Maybe they need to take a look at te barbarian's rage features and compare them to the paladin's abilities and see what's been copied and made better by the paladin.
Maybe Beta already wrote us a guide on how to improve LOH and Smite :)
-S
I am not going to design a "broken paladin". I am not, because no such thing exists. Just like you can't break the fighter. They are unbreakable.
If you make a build of a paladin though that has a base 18 or 16 strengh however, with a similar though likely reduced con- then whatever the rest of your stats are, you are getting relatively close to what the fighter can do When you add it on top of a fiat bonus based on level.
Okay so I'm inclined to believe that you haven't gotten a way to dispute my claims.
Allow me to indulge then.
Using a base 3.5 DMG point buy build - std is 28 pts. Lets take a 34 points thanks to the gracious DM power build you're talking.
The paladin player decides to make a ball-out combat strength-monger Paladin congruent with your concerns....
As a human, he puts the +2 to STR.
S 18 (16 pts) total 20 with the +2
D 12 (4 pts)
C 14 (8 pts)
I 8 (0 pts)
W 10 (2 pts)
Ch 12 (4 pts)At 5th level he's got BAB 5, 23 STR +6 mod (w/ +2 str enhancement item), and +2 Divine Might = +13
The fighter in the party takes the same build - human for +2 to STR
S 18 (16 pts)
D 16 (10 pts)
C 14 (6 pts)
I 8 (0 pts)
W 12 (12 pts)
Ch 8 (0 pts)At 5th level he's got BAB 5, 23 STR +6 mod (w/ +2 Str enhancement item), Weapon Focus, Weapon Training = +13
Okay - so they have the same to attack rolls.
AC
Paladin Full Plate 8, DEX 1, Hvy Shield 2 = 21 AC
Fighter Full Plate 9, DEX 2, Tower Shield 4 = 25, OR 23 to avoid the -2 to attacks with the tower shield.Summation: at least 2 points better for the fighter.
Damage:
Paladin: 1d8 +6 str, +2 Divine Might +5 Power Attack (1d8+13)
Fighter: 1d8 +6 str, +2 Specialization, +1 Weapon Training, +5 Power Attack (1d8+14)OR for a 22 AC - still 1 pt MORE than the paladin, the fighter goes nuts and uses a greatsword - cuz that never happens!
Dmg:
Paladin: 1d8 +6 str, +2 Divine Might +5 Power Attack (1d8+13)
Fighter: 1d8 +9 str, +2 Specialization, +1 Weapon...
Im gonna be totally honest, I only read through about half of this before I had to post. By that time I was screaming, "cant you all see hwo obvious this is"!!! OMG...I am tired of trying to be polite and nice. This is just simple FACT!
If you do not understand this, when it is put in as simple a form as possible then it is not that you cant it is because you WONT!
For once would all of you please read what is being said before you start posting about how the paladin is to tough! How many times have we said it, we do not want to be BETTER THAN THE FIGHTER!!! We just dont want to be shown up in EVERY aspect of combat against EVIL!
Right now if a fighter and a paladin...with ANY BUILD you want go up against anything EVIL, ANYTHING!!! the fighter or barbarian, or ranger or rogue!! (ROGUE!!!) will actually have MORE of an effect on that combat than a paladin (other than his FEW times that he gets to step up there and smite).
Someone said they want to fix smite instead of adding a new ability "out of thin air"....*sigh* So where did Weapon and armor training come from? I dont remember seeing those ANYWHERE in 3.5.
This one ability, this "always on" mechanic would not in ANY WAY! make the fighter obsolete. It would not in ANY WAY! make the paladin a better combatant than the fighter. Though it WOULD allow the paladin to stand beside the fighter and take a legitimate stance in battles against evil.
HOW do we make it more simple for you?
If you give Paladin +4 to attack and damage over their level-life to make up for the fact that the have Insane-Attribute-Problems then you have a problem when people choose a proposed point buy that has More points than standard. Mind you, I'm not talking about some theoretical person rolling all 18's and griping that it'll be too strong. I'm talking about the very real possibility that a DM might choose a point buy that doesn't meaningfully increase the power of a fighter or barbarian- since it just gives them more points for stats they don't really need anyway- while giving the Paladin the ability to use your bonus And high strength to not only make up the gap, but skirt it or surpass it. In such a scenario- a very real scenario- the Fighter becomes nigh on obsolete because not only is the Paladin doing the same damage, he has better overall defense, spells, and all the other goodies the Paladin gets.
We can't really design the game around what house-rules individual groups are going to use though. The maximum standard point buy in PfRPG is currently 25-points. If a DM chooses to give out more points than 25, they are effectively house-ruling which is the same as signing a waiver for any responsibility Paizo could take for things getting out of whack.
Given 25-points as a max then, and given an 18 costs 17 points, there is no way that (at the same number of points), a Fighter or Barbarian will be able to max-out their two primary stats to the point where they are then spending points on "nice but not essential" stats like Int — even a pair of 17's would still be 26 points.
I suspect that this is why some of us are contending that it's a phantom concern to say that increased point-buys will advantage the Paladin more than other classes. Within the scope of the rules, there simply aren't enough points to do so. We also can't "idiot-proof" every rule against what DM X is going to come up with that goes against RAW. If we try to, then we'll not only fail, but we'll waste a lot of time and effort too — energy that could be better spent fixing what we can within the scope of the rules.
FWIW, I like Jason N's idea of the Baneful Smite, and I've been a proponent of combining & improving the LoH/Channelling/Smiting mechanics in more than a couple threads.
|
|
As an aside- Beta has its own Point Buy table and costs that is different from that in the DMG.
Please dont tell me that this is a valid arguement that dismisses my post. Regardless of the point buy system, the illustration was showing both characters on the same point buy system, and both with a 20% increase on the number of points allowed.
.
Saying that "some things aren't evil" is like saying "some things will have damage resistance against the fighter's main weapon". It's true, yes, but as a statistical number it's relatively low. Most things PC's face are evil. If they aren't evil they are usually either animals or mindless. As such, they (typically) aren't numerous as a campaign number. Most BBEG's have the big E for a reason. They are evil. Their mooks tend to be, as do their minions, mooks, and guards.
Fair enough - I wont deny that 3/4s of the combats are going to be vs evil - but during those fights the combatants are near equal in attack and damage and saves - still not AC, and still not in feats/tricks/maneuvers etc.
During the other 25% of the encounters however, the fighter loses nothing.
Furthermore, saying that having smite do bane damage against undead and/or evil outsiders is like saying 4 rounds today, your fighter can apply his Weapon Focuses, specializations, and weapon training against a specific type of target that you fight 10% of the time.
We have suggested:
that smite be tied to LOH, for more uses.
that smite be given the bane vs undead/evil outsider/and some other stuff.
that smite be considered Holy.
that paladin-only spells be cast as swift actions.These are just 4 ideas that have been presented here that if you commented on, I honestly missed it.
You are very informed about paladin and I'm curious what you think on the various other proposals that have been put forward to help beef up the paladin to where they should be.
My thoughts were then what they are now: Making spells swift actions was something that I suggested in this thread in the original post to be one way to make them bettter. it helps. Its doesn't solve it completely.
Making Smites tied to LOH to give more uses - not going to happen - jason already indicated he is not interested in adding more uses of them.
As for simply making Smite Evil do more damage via holy or bane - my opinion hasn't wavered. You can make smite evil do 100 points of damage - it makes no difference in the long run! The paladin doesn't have under normal circumstances the ability to keep pace in attacks, damage or AC.
I'm getting tired of people thinking "just add some more damage to smite" or "oh just make smite do more damage against X," or "oh just let smite do critical damage" etc. It doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter!
The 11th level version of the character I've presents have 4 smites thats it! Thats four attack (or rounds if it's changed as per Jason's musings....) that that paladin can cut the gap in attacks and damage of the fighter in half! CUT THE GAP IN HALF! my numbers dont lie. I've presented it my way, your way, the proof is in the pudding.
Stop the madness, please. Stop deluding yourself. Adding more damage in their 4 rounds of smite will not fix the problem. It's putting a band-aid on the broken femur! That's all.
In your response to my most recent comparisons, you asked rhetorically "who would want to play the fighter when I can...."
Hey - the fighter will draw the same people they always do - those who want to kick ass with a lot of options, weapons, style, feats....and NOT be limited to an alignment, a code of conduct, etc, that ALL can be stripped away as soon as I screw up!
Do not forget that on top of all these disparities that I've illustrated, the paladin is still the single-most restricted class from all angles. Do not blow smoke up my arse and tell me that "just add bane damage for you smites" will make a difference. Thats just recockulous!
The suggestion I made for smite was allow it to target one creature with its use and ALL attacks for several rounds gain that benefit - then and only then could 'smite' be considered potentially able to close the gap. Right now it's used for a half-dozen rounds a day - and still doesn't make up that +7 attack difference on avg, or the +16 difference on damage on avg. There's no other way to explain it. My examples are concise from many angles, and you simply can't ignore its veracity.
Not only are the other martial character more apt to hit - when you have a 33% better chance to hit your chance to do the damage - which on avg is already 50% better - is exponentially increased.
I'm a simple man, I do not possess an engineering degree - but even I can figure out that more frequent and more quantity with that frequency is obviously a grave difference. A dozen extra points of damage for a half-dozen attack a day is NOT going to fix that.
the paladin needs the tools to hit his foes often - more often than just using the smite. The barbarian, the fighter, and the ranger all have those tools. The paladin simply cannot compete as is without his 5 rounds of smite. The paladin needs ways to hit. He simply cannot keep up. Each round he spends buffing, the cleric and druid can buff themselves just as often, and their buffs are better - thus he still is sub-par on hitting his foes.
Robert
|
|
I suspect that this is why some of us are contending that it's a phantom concern to say that increased point-buys will advantage the Paladin more than other classes. Within the scope of the rules, there simply aren't enough points to do so. We also can't "idiot-proof" every rule against what DM X is going to come up with that goes against RAW. If we try to, then we'll not only fail, but we'll waste a lot...
well......at least someone gets it. :-)
Robert
I am not delusional, and I am not blowing smoke up anyone's ass.
I would also appreciate no more personal attacks. Keep the posts constructive or you'll get your wish- I'll leave, and you'll "win" the discussion.
Where did the Fighter's bonus come from? Simple. It came from him needing to be the primary warrior in the group, able to compete in both damage and defense.
Do you honestly believe they created it, tacked it onto the fighter, just to also tack it onto the paladin? Honestly?
The fact that people don't like the niche that the paladin has been forced into, doesn't mean that they are likely to suddenly come and change it.
And quite frankly- yes. Making several alterations to the smite mechanic do make the paladin alot more formidable. If you want to hand-waive several d6 in damage multiple times (or rounds) a day against the foes paladin are designed to deal with then that's your business but it's really nothing to sneeze at.
I, and others, are not just trying to brainstorm ideas. We're trying to come up with ideas they are likely to implement.
Do you really believe they'll import the fighter's new main class feature and tack it on to the paladin? If you do- there really isn't much I can say. It's very difficult to discuss pure opinion and that's all it really would be. My opinion saying they won't, and your opinion saying they will.
Extending smite to multiple uses per day, especially at lower levels where "most" campaigns tend to be (so folks keep saying) and adding on extra damage for those smites against foes paladin are supposed to be good against can't really be seen as anything but a good thing.
Again, and I'll say it again as I've already said it repeatedly. I am NOT AGAINST BUFFING THE PALADIN. Please quit implying or saying that I am. I'm not the enemy, I'm just trying to be practical here.
It Does Suck to be a defense based character in a game where everyone else is focused on offense. You aren't going to change one without changing the other however and I think you'll find that if they take away the defense then the paladin will be alot less playable as they'll have no niche at all.
The melee offense niche is already filled. It's filled by the barbarian, by the fighter, by the rogue, and by the ranger. Each one does so in different ways using different methods. The paladin, built for offense, fails at defense and offense both. The paladin built for defense does an excellent job at it- with good AC to mitigate melee damage and good saves to mitigate magic damage with some magic to help shore up the melee. Not alot of shoring I grant you that, but some- yes.
An aside about the swift-action. I honestly missed you saying that in your first post and I apologize for that.
I look forward to your constructive posts.
-S
I, and others, are not just trying to brainstorm ideas. We're trying to come up with ideas they are likely to implement.
Do you really believe they'll import the fighter's new main class feature and tack it on to the paladin? If you do- there really isn't much I can say. It's very difficult to discuss pure opinion and that's all it really would be. My opinion saying they won't, and your opinion saying they will.It Does Suck to be a defense based character in a game where everyone else is focused on offense. You aren't going to change one without changing the other...
Wouldnt it help to actually cause some change if we all rallied behind a change? No matter what that change is, the designers have said that they are going to listen to what we have to say. So if you feel that an always on effect to paladin damage would actually "buff" the class? If you believe this is the case then why not stand with the rest of us, instead of just going against us because you "believe it will not be implemented". This is the kind of thinking that is going to keep us away from the changes that are necessary. If ALL of us stood for this change then it would have a much better chance of being accepted. So lets not use that argument anymore that, "i wont argue for this because they wont do it"....
On the note of being defensive. Yes the paladin COULD shine at that if this game had a "taunt" mechanic. There is NO reason for your baddies to actually attack the paladin right now. The only way that you can draw attention to yourself is by being a threat...since the paladin is NO threat at all how can his defensive abilities play into the game at all?
Incidentally, the point buy different is relatively large.
Paladin as you wrote it
S 16 = 10
D 12 = 2
C 14 = 5
I 8 = -2
W 10 = 0
Ch 12 = 2
= 17
Fighter as you wrote it
S 16 (10 pts)
D 16 (10 pts)
C 14 (5 pts)
I 8 (-2 pts)
W 12 (2 pts)
Ch 8 (-2 pts)
= 23
"Epic Fantasy", the highest listed, is a 25.
This puts the paladin 8 points behind.
For that, you can increase his charisma to 16 for 8 points.
This increases his saves in all cases from +1 to +3. more than the feats give.
Now I'll grant you that it isn't an "omg huge!" thing- but if it was your character you were playing I think you would disagree.
(as an unconnected aside- I hadn't realised before just how much the point difference made between 3.5 and Paizo. I knew it had changed but thought it was a minor adjustment. Its turned out to be not so minor)
-S
I'm not standing behind it because I don't care for the mechanic. I think tacking on the fighter's main ability in an attempt to shore up the paladin's melee deficiencies does the paladin a great disservice. It's a bandaid when what the paladin really deserves is an honest and true fix.
Your idea, while a solid idea, is really just a bandaid. "The paladin isn't strong enough, lets give it attack and damage!".. I personally would much rather see their existing abilities boosted to the point of usefulness than I would for the designers to tack on a mechanic that just makes their autoattack more .. autoattack.
Why do I want smite fixed? Because smite gives the paladin a choice. Right now, smite is a -crappy- choice. It's crappy because you can use it so seldom but the boost it gives is so minor. For the amount of effective use you get from it, it should be a MAJOR THING. it should be where the folks around the table say 'holy bleep, he's SMITING!" and the DM pales knowing his bbeg is about to get blasted back to the Heck from whence he came.
Instead the paladin rolls, tacks on a relatively small amount of damage, yawns, and keeps going. And even that- he gets to do it a very very small amount of time. That really, really sucks! Adding attack/damage to their autoattack doesn't change that fact.
Smite needs to deliver. It either needs alot more uses per day at its current strength, or a great big heaping helping of uber steroids and kept at its current uses per day.
A 20th level paladin can use it twice per encounter (average).
A 1st level paladin can use ti *less often than a 1st level wizard has first level spells per day* and its supposed to be their main combat ability! That's absolutely terrible.
A 1st level smite does a whopping 1 point of damage. Big friggin deal.
It needs a boost and it needs it badly. And the class as a whole would be better for it.
Why should spells be fixed? Because right now they are a waste of time. The casting time is too big, the durations are too low, and with the CL as it currently exists their spells are just BEGGING someone to dispel them. To be honest- they aren't worth casting. And they should be worth it. The CL needs a boost.
Everything about the paladin's current mechanics need a solid boost so he can stay in the game- but I do not agree that it includes a flat out increase to damage and attack rolls just so their auto attack is better.
Lets please not relegate the fixing of the paladin to a better auto attack. We want the class to measure up both in playability and fun in play and simply having a bigger + to the autoattack really isn't it. Not to me. The paladin has options. Those options need to be stronger, faster (We have the technology, We can rebuild him!).
If they fix the paladin the way you want, the paladin will stay boring and his "special abilities" will stay crappy. I don't think anyone, including you two, really want them to just stick some +'s onto their autoattack and walk away.
-S