I have been away from the boards for a few days only having time to stop in periodically between work. I was hopping to see a lot of positive discussion but it seems that there has been a lot of bickering. I can understand where this comes from because if the rest of you are as passionate about the paladin as I am then of course you are going to get upset when someone so easily disregards your ideas and how YOU see the class.
There are those of you that see the class as more martial (like I do) and those that see it as more caster (where the discussion is leaning). We have to see this class from both sides, because quite frankly he is both!
I also think that many people forget the paladin's restrictions when they start to scream "that is over powered" or that steps on so and so's toes. I dont care if your DM's care to make the paladin alignment and code of conduct a part of YOUR particular games. The fact is they are there and they are there for a reason. The paladin SHOULD look a little over powered at first glance, but there are things that balance it out.
I have read through all the paladin posts and there are a lot of people complaining that many of the proposed fixes "step on the fighter's toes". Then as I read on people are wanting him to be able to channel better, LOH better, and cast spells better. I am not against these changes as I feel them necessary as well. But I have not read anyone saying "wow that steps on the cleric's toes". Why is this?
I think it comes down to balance. People feel that the cleric is good and the fighter is bad. I would argue against this but it will do me no good. My argument is for the paladin. If you feel that the paladin, with all the changes that have been proposed would be a better fighter than the fighter against evil and you can deal with the restrictions that come along with it...then play a paladin! If you feel that he is a better cleric than a cleric against evil(though none do) and you can deal with the restrictions than play a Paladin!
I think this was the point of the class. Im gonna take off the kid gloves here. The paladin SHOULD be the guy that stands up against evil and says "You shall not pass!" He should be the guy that looks into the eyes of the oncoming horde and says "it looks like were in for one wild night." When it comes to fighting evil he should be the man. No one should fight evil as well as him, no one.
I say all of this knowing that for most I am wasting my time. Many of you will not budge on your stance that the paladin should be more caster, not more fighter. Because if we make him more fighter then the poor fighter will feel stepped on, but the cleric is so good that if we make him more cleric then no one is hurt. So those of us who want to play a Holy WARRIOR, not a Holy healer/caster get our feelings left in the dust.
So I say yes, give the paladin all of the caster stuff you feel necessary! But as you do it remember that many people who play paladins do it for the martial side. Remember that the paladin has a code of conduct that was added to the class FOR A REASON! So as you justify giving him a better Caster level, better LoH, and better channeling (all of which he deserves)...stop arguing AGAINST a better smite, or an always on effect, a good will save, or Mettle. Dont forget that the paladin is part fighter as much as he is part cleric. One side should not have to be sacrificed for the other! He is BOTH, let him be both!
I have to say, I agree with you wholeheartedly. The paladin in 3.5 was really a nerfed fighter with amazing saves, some infrequently usable melee attack boosts and some insignificant healing abilities. That said, I am baffled by what seems to be the paladin's new party role - healer. I personally am not play-testing a paladin at this time, and I am happy to defer to anyone who is, but in my past experience those who played the paladin didn't even consider healing anyone but themselves in combat, and took on the role of melee powerhouse, as well as the class was able to, which unfortunately was not all that well and with limited frequency.
Fine, give the paladin some extra healing ability, I'm sure he will use it when he can, between swings of his greatsword. Sure, give him some more spellcasting ability, what was available to him in 3.5 was nothing more than a bad joke. But most of all, the paladin is a crusader for justice, a killing-machine fueled by righteous indignation, destroying all evil in sight with extreme prejudice. At least that is the concept, and how paladins were encouraged to play by the class description in the PH, if unfortunately not quite borne out by his actual abilities.
Yes, to all you who decry the drop in power of the fighter at higher levels, you are right, the fighter needs some high-level capstone abilities to help him catch up with the casters. But just because the fighter is broken doesn't mean that the paladin doesn't also deserve to be fixed, because at those same high levels, the paladin is suffering even more than the fighter is.
Welcome back to the boards!
As a singular entity, I love the paladin. I love the *idea* of it. Who as a kid hasn't sat around with this very image in their head? The knight in shining armor, battling evil. Very cliche- but in a good way.
In building that "cliche" in D&D we have some problems. Those problems mainly stem from the fact that every class needs a niche. One class shouldn't overwrite another. (go read the druid threads- that's folks problem with the animal companion.. the druid class feature makes having a fighter useless).
The "niche" the Paladin needs to fill is that of Holy Warrior. Both parts! The problem is that we already have a warrior. In fact, we have *three* of them- and that's even discounting the Rogue. (who isn't one, but acts like one if the conditions are right).
One way to "balance" them has been to declare that most of their abilities only work "against evil". The problem is that- and I think you will agree- most foes of the Paladin are evil. Note- most. Please don't reply all the creatures that aren't evil. I know they exist and I know Paladin fight against those too. No one is proof against all foes. But their "primary" foe is also a very common type. Note that not even the Ranger can declare "evil foes" as their enemy type. Why? It's too broad. As such, it acts almost like a false modifier. Saying they "only" work against evil- when nearly everything is evil. That's like a wizard making a staff that only works for humans to make it cheaper, when he himself is Human.
For that reason, the buffs to that part (that part which is "evil only" Can't actually be *strong* enough to cover the "weakness". Because that weakness is in fact, extremely common.
Imagine if you will a monster that got a cut on its CR because its main ability only worked on living creatures. Fair? Not hardly. Why? Because most PC's are alive.
The Paladin is a Good Guy (and I don't mean alignment) but we can't just apply the false modifier of 'against evil" and use that as a means to make him too powerful in order to make up for it. Why? Because then he's too powerful in all but a small handful of encounters.
So what are our options?
The options I've proposed, and that others have proposed, are to strengthen the abilities they already have. The Dev's apparently are against giving alot more smites per day (which is what they -really- need) so instead we have to look elsewhere. 7 rounds a day isn't enough unless you seriously make it *kick butt*. By Kick Butt I'm talking "double DC mace of disruption against all Evil creatures" tough. I'm talking powerful enough so that when the paladin declares Smite Evil the DM curses and *prays* for a miss. I'm talking a smite that makes the Fighter groan in Envy. They NEED it if smite is gonna be kept at the extreme limit that it has now on use frequency. (obviously- SOD isn't the only route. but it has to be that impressive. it has to be the royal OM*G smackdown ability, or it just doesn't have any effect. Currently- it has no effect).
However, that really only covers the "warrior" part of the Paladin. Lets assume that they buff smite significantly. That only covers half the cliche. The other half of that is "Holy".
the Holy half of the Paladin takes 2 main parts. 1) Spell casting. 2)LOH.
Now I haven't seen anyone argue yet that they should be spell casters on par with the cleric- but they need to be spell casters who don't lose their spells automatically in an equivalent CR dispel, either.
For me, this mainly requires increasing the CL to their actual level. Even if only for the purpose of dispelling- it would go a long long way towards fixing their spell casting. The second way- that really only helps if used with the first- is for them to cast their spells as swift actions. Myself, I'm in favor of *all* paladin spells being swift actions- but even having it a certain few times a day would help alot. (cha mod/day maybe?). A few extra spells wouldn't hurt either. Bane Weapon a core spell? That would be nice.
LOH.
I'm fully swiping someone else's idea here- Psychic_Robot deserves all the credit for it.
LOH healing should = a Cure spell of the paladin's full level. (i.e. if he's 5th level, look at 5th level cleric, find the highest level cure spell, and that's what LOH does). Clearly the rule would be worded better (and probably the elevant info tacked onto the chart to make it easy) but I think that gets the point across. Making it a swift or immediate action wouldn't hurt life either. (too much? maybe. dunno..thoughts?)
Finally: At 20 they should get DR 10/Good. Yes. *good*.
Why? Because all their relevant enemies are already evil! What good is DR every demon and devil can overcome it just by being a demon or devil? Or hey just make it 10/-. Those sworn to fight evil need the edge.
-S
Mabven thank you for being the first to step up to agree with me. I have been doing some paladin play testing and I will take some time to post that up tomorrow.
Selgard thanks for the welcome back and I am very happy to be taking up the fight again.
The basis of my post is this. I think it has gone beyond the point of the paladin stepping on the fighters toes. Not it is at the place where the fighter is stepping on the paladin's toes. When it comes to fighting evil I am sorry but the fighter needs to get out of the way so the paladin can go to work. If you want to be the man when it comes to that kind of fight (even if it is most) then you should be willing to suck it up and play with the limitations that the paladin plays with. Right now the cry that the paladin can not be BETTER than the fighter is HURTING the progression of the paladin...im sorry, that is not the paladin's fault that is the fighter's fault!
Here is a group of posts that I pulled from one of the fighter design forums.
However Fighters should be the best all-round melee combatant, except when the other guy is in his element. A Ranger should be able to outshine a Fighter with his weapon style in his favoured terrain or against his favoured enemy. The Paladin should outshine fighters when fighting the forces of pure evil. Barbarians should outshine them when raging. But the rest of the time, Fighters should be the superior melee combatant.
BTW, I strongly agree with the breakdown of who should "shine" at specific moments of the game. This really helps define the different roles of the various melee oriented characters.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
However Fighters should be the best all-round melee combatant, except when the other guy is in his element. A Ranger should be able to outshine a Fighter with his weapon style in his favoured terrain or against his favoured enemy. The Paladin should outshine fighters when fighting the forces of pure evil. Barbarians should outshine them when raging. But the rest of the time, Fighters should be the superior melee combatant.I agree with this notion. However, unfortunately the paladin fails to shine at any of them (yet).
Not the right forum as of yet, but I intend to take up that crusade when the time is right.
Robert
I think this pretty much says it all. The paladin needs a place to shine, that place can ONLY be when fighting evil. I am trying to get the point across that we need to stop arguing FOR "caster" type changes if sacrificing his martial abilities is the cost. He is a holy WARRIOR as I said before and we are getting away from that :(
I want what you want with smite evil, but for some CRAZY reason the devs will not allow more smiting which probably translates into a big HELL NO to the always on effect that some of us have suggested. I do not understand why people want the paladin to attempt to ONLY smite the big bad guys. I guess the little evil guy that just murders babies is not evil enough so the paladin should just fight him, not SMITE him like he would a demon...*sigh*
I respect all the work that is being put forth in the paladins name, but I am getting upset that so many want to see him sacrifice so much so that he can become more cleric than warrior! We do not have to sacrifice both...we should GAIN both. He has to play by a code, this limits him enough!
Honestly, am I the only one that would rather see the paladin bring down divine wrath than be a BETTER healer? Yes he should heal better, but he should fight evil MUCH BETTER....
Well, as far as evil goes, wouldn't you say there is evil, and then there is EEEEEVIIIIIL!!!!
Perhaps for your run-of-the mill evil, such as the butcher who when faced with a meat shortage, highers a group of local thugs to murder and bring him their victims and sell it as 'pork', the paladin should have some sort of always-on ability which would scale and keep up with the fighter's 'Weapon Training' ability. That would not step on the fighter's toes, because he is still the only class that can take the Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization feat tree, yet it would help the paladin to keep up to some extent when run-of-the-mill evil shows its rat-like little head.
Then there is that which is animated by pure malice - the Undead. Well, he has Channel Energy for that. Perhaps an option to burn a channel energy to do an undead-specific smite-like attack on a single undead foe is appropriate here as well.
Finally, there are those abominations of creation, birthed in evil and destined to it by birthright - Evil Outsiders and Aberrations. For them only is reserved a Smite Evil ability with per/day uses and massive damage boosts. Now his bonus for every-day mundane evil would still apply, but a much larger, expendable use bonus would stack on top of it. I even wouldn't mind some sort of 'smite points' system for the paladin to decide just how much of his righteous fury he wishes to unleash against this particular enemy of all that is good, but I won't hold out hope for it, seeing as what has happened to what I thought was an elegant mechanic for barbarian 'rage points.'
I think going even further may be appropriate, but I don't have any ready suggestions for what those further combat abilities might be.
Well, as far as evil goes, wouldn't you say there is evil, and then there is EEEEEVIIIIIL!!!!
Perhaps for your run-of-the mill evil, such as the butcher who when faced with a meat shortage, highers a group of local thugs to murder and bring him their victims and sell it as 'pork', the paladin should have some sort of always-on ability which would scale and keep up with the fighter's 'Weapon Training' ability. That would not step on the fighter's toes, because he is still the only class that can take the Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization feat tree, yet it would help the paladin to keep up to some extent when run-of-the-mill evil shows its rat-like little head.
Then there is that which is animated by pure malice - the Undead. Well, he has Channel Energy for that. Perhaps an option to burn a channel energy to do an undead-specific smite-like attack on a single undead foe is appropriate here as well.
Finally, there are those abominations of creation, birthed in evil and destined to it by birthright - Evil Outsiders and Aberrations. For them only is reserved a Smite Evil ability with per/day uses and massive damage boosts. Now his bonus for every-day mundane evil would still apply, but a much larger, expendable use bonus would stack on top of it. I even wouldn't mind some sort of 'smite points' system for the paladin to decide just how much of his righteous fury he wishes to unleash against this particular enemy of all that is good, but I won't hold out hope for it, seeing as what has happened to what I thought was an elegant mechanic for barbarian 'rage points.'
I think going even further may be appropriate, but I don't have any ready suggestions for what those further combat abilities might be.
You are on the same page here. No evil should be "not evil enough for a smite" That is why there should be an always on effect. As I have looked at it more I do not think the bonus should be that big. I am leaning to +1 to hit and damage every 4 levels. This gives the paladin a constant effect against evil that stacks against all things evil. This would also only be a +5 to hit/damage by lvl 20, not that huge.
Then as you have said and many others, you use your smites on the really really bad guys...or just the biggest baddest evil you see that day...
Like I said, I just really dislike the idea of the paladin not smiting something that is evil because it is not evil enough. It should ALL get "smitted" but he should not have to use one of his FEW smites per day on the pseudo evil (the diet coke of evil) when around the next corner is DOCTER evil (sorry I had to).
Thats one of the reasons I threw the permanent divine favour option in, small enough bonus and gives the whole "My heart is pure therefore I fight as ten" feel.
I would be ALL for that idea, I think it works perfectly!
Let's see, the Paladin... a half-baked fighter, half-baked cleric... and a class that, since its 3.0's lack improvements, it no longer even has a role to fill in the game, as:
a) There's nothing the Paladin can do that the cleric can't do better.
b) Since early 2E, the cleric was modelled after orders like the Knights Templar (model still in use) so Holy Warrior... check.
To top it off.. a code of conduct that contradicts the class' own alignment: The 'Paladin Code' of destroying evil and such is rather suited to an inquisitor (as in the Spanish inquisition), job which can only be done by a LN character, not a LG.
Sure, I wouldn't mind empowering the class a good deal, make it reflect what it was meant to be in the first place... actually, I'd make the Paladin into a PrC for the Cleric in order to eliminate redundancy from the game. However, such empowering ought to come with a more rigid code (remember 2E's Paladins who were also subjected to poverty vows?). If that code was also coherent for the LG alignment, all the better.
Also... those who say 'most enemies are evil' really need to flip through the Monster Manual more often. Just what alignment is a Golem? What about a Basilisk? And an Inevitable? A zombie? An Elemental? A Dire Bear? Really, there's a lot more to fantasy tales than Drow and Orcs. I wouldn't like to play in any of those guys' campaigns, they must be so mind-numbingly boring.
Dogbert
Thanx for the reply. I do not know the history of the paladin much through the additions as I just started playing durring 3.5. But you are right, there is nothing the paladin can do that the cleric can not do better.
The point here is that we need to give the paladin an honest look. Ive read enough of this "boo hoo" crap about other classes worrying about who's toes are being stepped on. The paladin is a class to and he deserves some attention. Like I said before, if you want to do as well against evil as a paladin should and you can live with the restrictions then you should play a paladin. If not then play a fighter or cleric.
Making the paladin a PrC class would be ok but I dont think that is necessary. Lets just give the paladin a honest look without restricting ourselves to worrying about upsetting fighters. I would add upsetting clerics but it is obvious that the clerics are secure in their power level, we all know that the paladin is not going to get to THAT level so we dont have to worry about upsetting the clerics.
|
I'll throw in with the idea that we need to stop worrying about stepping on the fighters toes. The fighter has become quite decent in his own right. The Paladin however is subpar on every level except saving throws. woo hoo. Oh and even then hope you don't have a monk in your party cause his saving throws scale better so eventually you'll only have him beat in fortitude saving throws.
So far it seems we are all in agreement here - we all agree that the paladin needs more. I have suggested a few things, as have a few others. Since there is no opposition, what do you all think could be some more ways the paladin could be powered up, since we all think he needs a lot of it?
Marty1000:
Please don't apologize for the length of your post, as I found it to be the singularly most enjoyable thing to read on this entire message board, and equally educational (or re-educational as the case may be, because with every word it was like I was re-living my childhood playing AD&D).
You are absolutely right, the paladin should be everything the fighter is, and more. So much so, that if a player is planning on playing a LG melee class, and wishes to protect the weak and destroy all evil, that the only logical choice for him should be the paladin. As it is now, the LG fighter who swears to protect the weak and battle evil is just better at it.
Perhaps there are restrictions other than ability score restrictions and slower xp advancement that could be required. Perhaps bringing back the vow of poverty, requiring the paladin to posses only a non-magical set of armor and perhaps a maximum of 3 non-magical weapons. Then the paladin is given abilities that bestow upon his equipment the most optimal enchantment effects for specifically fighting evil appropriate for his level. I understand that at the moment the 'divine bond' ability for the paladin's weapons is along these same lines, and perhaps doesn't need to be changed at all except for it not being a choice between divine bond and a mount, but that they get both. An ability along the same lines would need to be created for his armor.
The vow of poverty would also necessarily prevent the paladin from owning such items as gauntlets of ogre power, periapts of wisdom, amulets of natural armor, etc. He should also gain benefits equivalent to these items from class abilities, scaling with level in some reasonable progression. Thus he would always have optimal enchantment effects for fighting his evil foes, but does not have the versatile choices the fighter gets simply from being able to choose which types of items to fill which body-slots.
Then, also give them access to all the fighter bonus feats, including the full weapon focus/weapon specialization feat tree. The fighter would naturally still have the most feats, and be able to perform a larger variety of combat actions against all foes. But when facing evil foes, the paladin should have the absolute best damage output from the simpler hack-and-slash approach to combat. Maybe the fighter shines in the battle against an evil wizard because he is able to push him around the battlefield, drop him on his bottom, grab and restrain him, destroy his fireball wand as he pulls it from his robe, etc.; but if the fighter and the paladin just stand together and hack away at said wizard, the paladin should put out more damage.
With all of these changes, the paladin becomes a fighter optimized for fighting evil in a straight-forward fashion, however when fighting non-evil foes (which every paladin must do at times), he becomes a fighter with half the feats of a normal fighter and all mundane equipment. I think this is utterly appropriate, since the correct thing for a paladin to do when those who are not evil oppose them is to try to convince them of his cause, and exhaust every non-violent option possible before resorting to armed conflict. And the simple fact that he has failed at avoiding conflict with those who are not evil is justification enough for his patron deity not granting him his powers for the combat.
Marty1000
Hey, thanx for the praise and the great history on Paladins. I never played those early editions of the game but I knew about the paladin, how he played and his restrictions. I still play much that way because I think that is how a paladin should play. I still tithe and put my group members before myself, its just what a paladin should do. A fighter can take what he wants and self preservation is one of their class abilities even if it is not listed there.
I really appreciate your post and I think we are in agreement. Lets keep the fight going! We only have a few more days to finish making out case for paladins in PF. This is probably the only chance I am ever going to get to play the paladin I see in my vision, and I bet the same is true for many of us! We have to make a stand here or the paladin will be relegated to your aforementioned "limbo" forever....that just wont do! He deserves more.
@the PF developers. Thank you for making 3.5 so much better, in almost every area you have done this and that was a HUGE task. But please do not leave the paladin in the "Ill just stand back here and buff, i already did my evil fighting for today" role! I know you are trying to get away from the 15 minute adventure day (this is a GREAT thing) but in doing that it further weakens the paladin, yes I am directly referring to his extremely limited use of smite, his defining ability! Many people may flame me for saying this but even if you have to do away with some of his CASTING, please make his FIGHTING better.
|
...in my past experience those who played the paladin didn't even consider healing anyone but themselves in combat...
The old LOH ability was very useful after combat, since it was totally customisable. A few points here and there would hit the spot, when a full cure light would be a waste.
And two consecutive 1hp cures would get anyone back on their feet, no matter what negative hp they were on. They may not be up for fighting, but they could stagger to safety or cast their own healing spells.
I am admittedly not a fan of Paladins. Ever since 3.0 I thought they should have been a Prestige Class instead of Base. Even so, I have argued in favor of improving Smite Evil, Lay on Hands, and adding additional benefits. If they are going to be a base class they should not be ineffective.
I think there is too much emphasis on offense here. I have suggested in other places increasing both the effects of Smite Evil and the number of uses per day. I have even proposed a new per battle ability that gave a bonus against a designated evil creature that would stack with Smite. There is a limit to how much you can add offensively before Paladins become Fighter+.
Perhaps a new direction. Defensive capabilities that work to keep a Paladin in the fight longer. For example at 8th level give them Spell Resistance 15 + Paladin Level (the base of 15 is because I am considering house ruling Fighters getting 10 + Level at 11th and felt there should be some difference between them). Also, starting at 5th level give them Fast Healing 2 increasing to 3 at 10, 4 at 15, and 5 at 20. They would no longer need out of combat healing leading to "Tend to the others, they need it more than I". These two changes would give the Paladin better staying power (arguments about fights not lasting more than 3 rounds aside).
These plus improvements to the existing abilities would bring the Paladin more in line power wise and give him a unique direction from the Fighter.
I would not be against giving the paladin some more defense but NOT at the sacrifice of giving him some more offense! Currently after his VERY FEW smites are burnt (with little effect at all!) then he is the WEAKEST guy in the group. He wont heal like the cleric (he shouldnt!) and he wont fight like ANY of the other melee guys! This is a problem! He should be able to stay in the fight right beside them all even AFTER his smites are spent. He needs something to help him do this!
The paladins defense is not horrible at the moment, it is not very good but it is WAY better than his offense. He needs both but please stop asking for the paladin to sacrifice MORE melee ability for anything else...he has sacrificed enough!
As I said about if ANYTHING, sacrifice some of his casting to give him more MELEE!!
I want to see the paladin get a good will save and the addition of Mettle (which makes so much sense!!!).
I want to see him have a slightly better LoH maybe just paladin lvl x2 per use.
I think giving him Protection from evil via his Aura of Good would be a good addition.
I think Smite should do more damage per hit and last for the whole round, then also have some form of stun/dispell effect tacked on.
He should get caster lvl -3 (just like channel).
Then on top of all of that, give him some form of constant damage effect like ALL THE OTHER MELEE CLASSES HAVE!!!
There is Lightbringer = + char mod to hit and half paladin lvl to damage (all the time)
Or Robert Brambley's version, Divine Might..which scales with a + to hit at first and then every three lvls after that (= to the progression of smites you gain) with half paladin lvl to damage.
Or we could just give him a constant divine favor effect that only works against evil!
All of those changes do NOT increase the paladins damage ABOVE the fighter/barbarian/ranger...even ROGUE. They just let the paladin stay in the fight with the rest of those guys after he has done his smiting for the day.
Come on everyone, jump in here! We only have a few days to continue this fight for the paladin. Please stop worrying about stepping on toes, and how much BETTER of a CLERIC that the paladin should be. He is not that poor of a caster/healer right now...he does NOT need to be amazing at that, he needs to be amazing at fighting evil!!!
|
OK, in my opinion the Paladin is more nerfed than the fighter!
I agree he is supposed to be the ultimate force against evil, whether as warrior or caster. But I think his abilities make him just a slightly better than the average joe road block to evil. I want SMITE EVIL to mean something from level 1 to level 20. I want his very presence to cast fear into the hearts of evil. I want him to wade into combat and cast his divine spells to blast away evil in all its myriad forms.
But against non evil he lacks that overwhelming power...
I want the Paladin to look into the Abyss and turn to his comrades and say "Stay close and keep up, this is going to interesting." I want the Paladin to look at a bunch of constructs and say to his comrades "Looks like rocks to me, Barbarian you go first." I want the Paladin to fight through the evil kings palace and go through the harem and have to seek absolution.
Instead I get a holy warrior who more resembles an NPC warrior at low levels and some dude able to resist diseases and stuff later on. That's cool... course I don't know many evil critters that spread disease as their primary shtick... I mean I guess it's really cool and awesome to have an ability that has no real use in the game... but it sure seems like crap to me.
OK, in my opinion the Paladin is more nerfed than the fighter!
I agree he is supposed to be the ultimate force against evil, whether as warrior or caster. But I think his abilities make him just a slightly better than the average joe road block to evil. I want SMITE EVIL to mean something from level 1 to level 20. I want his very presence to cast fear into the hearts of evil. I want him to wade into combat and cast his divine spells to blast away evil in all its myriad forms.
But against non evil he lacks that overwhelming power...
I want the Paladin to look into the Abyss and turn to his comrades and say "Stay close and keep up, this is going to interesting." I want the Paladin to look at a bunch of constructs and say to his comrades "Looks like rocks to me, Barbarian you go first." I want the Paladin to fight through the evil kings palace and go through the harem and have to seek absolution.
Instead I get a holy warrior who more resembles an NPC warrior at low levels and some dude able to resist diseases and stuff later on. That's cool... course I don't know many evil critters that spread disease as their primary shtick... I mean I guess it's really cool and awesome to have an ability that has no real use in the game... but it sure seems like crap to me.
RIGHT ON! yes, we need more comments like this...lets show the Dev's what we think and tell them what we want!! Thank you for the post, you are right on track!!
Please, more people post...let the call to arms never die!! Keep it up guys!
Oh yeah, one more thing... if the Paladin stays like he is, just take him out of the game entirely and make a prestige class later on...
Right now he is a waste of space.
God I wish this was not true but shamefully it is....We have to keep speaking up here or we are not going to get any of the changes we want to see!
We need everyone who cares about the paladin to post their feelings, that is the only chance he has!
|
|
So in my game yesterday we fought some Kythons, for those of you not in the know Kythons are zergling like creatures from the Book of Vile Darkness
Let me repeat that, the Book of Vile Freaking Darkness.
it was a swarm of small beasts coming at us and what happened, the Knight in the party stood in front of the door because of his difficult terrain ability and while they swarmed through we could hit them with AoOs.
Let me repeat that, the Knight, not the paladin, stood in front of the door, while my character stood to the side making AoOs and providing support.
Against a swarm of creatures from the Book of Vile I.E. terribly evil, scare children and eat babies Darkness, and the paladin wasn't the one guarding the door because the knight did a better job. Shameful, my one smite missed, and I was mr NPC warrior while the knight was using his feature to the max benefit. I begged my DM to let us get the 2000 xp to level up. My favorite levels to play are usually 1-5 and I am reduced to begging to get through them quickly because my abilities all SUCK.
Another example...please keep them coming! I do not want to see this fight die before we get a chance to make a difference!! much like the paladin in its current form :(
|
|
it was a swarm of small beasts coming at us and what happened, the Knight in the party stood in front of the door because of his difficult terrain ability and while they swarmed through we could hit them with AoOs.
Honestly, all fighter types need an ability like this - an ability to intercept movement, create difficult terrain, attacks of opportunity on 5' steps, and interfere with enemy spellcasting.
Paladins' martial abilities should not only defeat evil, but I believe protect the innocent.
the ability to intercept magical or martial attacks on the innocent would be a great addition to the paladin class. It's why I usually end up playing a crusader when I want to be a paladin character. I use Thicket of blades and a reach weapon to protect the innocent. If a shield user, I take abilities to add my shield bonus +4 to an ally's armor class and heal a small amount on my allies when I strike an enemy.
These are other possible paths of "specialization" we could take with the paladin.
|
it was a swarm of small beasts coming at us and what happened, the Knight in the party stood in front of the door because of his difficult terrain ability and while they swarmed through we could hit them with AoOs.Honestly, all fighter types need an ability like this - an ability to intercept movement, create difficult terrain, attacks of opportunity on 5' steps, and interfere with enemy spellcasting.
Paladins' martial abilities should not only defeat evil, but I believe protect the innocent.
the ability to intercept magical or martial attacks on the innocent would be a great addition to the paladin class. It's why I usually end up playing a crusader when I want to be a paladin character. I use Thicket of blades and a reach weapon to protect the innocent. If a shield user, I take abilities to add my shield bonus +4 to an ally's armor class and heal a small amount on my allies when I strike an enemy.
These are other possible paths of "specialization" we could take with the paladin.
i agree
the first and paramount objetive of the paladin should not be to bakish evil at all cost, but to protect goodness... what good cames if to destroy the evil warlord you let the toen die from hunger
1) they need or more or better smite evil
but i would preffer to actually give them alwaysa bonus on their attack versus evil and chaos... i recommended somehwere a +1 or +2 every few levels,
in Dogberts prestige class (which is beautiful in every sense, and no oen could get itbeffore atleast level 8 making the paladin quite unique) he gives the bonus as a way to return the "Holy Avenger" which every paladin was supposed to get in high levels...
an aura of protection versus evil (i will add chaos), where he is more difficult to hit... but not only him, also his allies around him (this is how the 2nd Edition Paladin was since the very 1st or 2nd level)
the mount need to be soemthing more decent...
sorry if someone else has mentioned this before... but i am at work and unable to read every post :P
Yes you are all correct the paladin needs good abilities to protect the innocent as well as destroy evil.
The problem is that right now he can kinda protect the innocent but can only "hurt" evil a couple times a day....not good enough.
I like the idea of making "fighters" be able to do more qualitative things. Difficult terrain or attacking people making 5 foot steps around them is an awesome idea! My DM plays every creature as if they were master tacticians...we almost NEVER get AoO's even if it is a hord of goblin barbarians, they always move with tactics (5 foot steps and flanking whenever they can). Allowing "fighters" to interfere with things like this would add a huge effect to how combat flows!
|
|
For length
.
.
And now I'm waiting till level 5 to finally choose a cool class feature.
I never realized just how gimped the level 4 abilities are. In the game I ran before the paladin dropped out and became a ranger at level 3, and the other game with a paladin fell apart at level 2. This is the first time I've actually taken a good hard look at those features.
Channeling, 1+ cha mod as opposed to a clerics 3 + cha mod channeling, and cleric level -3 for his channeling.
So a feature that a cleric gets at first level, is stronger and gets more uses per day (or at least the same # based on the cha breakdown), and the pally has yet another class feature that isn't on par. WHY?!?
I don't get it. Why is a power gotten at higher level weaker than an ability gotten at first level. Seriously thats retarded, hey I've got a capstone power for the paladin, at 20th level he gets a character trait. We can't give him a bonus feat that steps on the fighters toes, and he doesn't get it at first level so it shouldn't be as strong as the fighters bonus feat, a character trait would fit perfectly.
Sound rediculous? then why is that the mantra for the paladins channel energy? I could understand it if the paladin got it at first level. He has all his martial abilities so he doesn't have as good a channel, but this is 4th level. In one level Wizard are going to be throwing fireballs and I have yet another ability that only has utility out of combat.
Let me break this down, 1d6 damage healed is 3.5 average damage. At level three I already showed you how healing 3 damage was a waste of an action so now the difference is that I can do it at range, and if I waste a feat, not heal my enemies as well. Do I need to playtest this, I will, next session I'll try to use this. but I can tell you what will happen, the same that happened when I used lay on hands. Nothing worthwile.
So now we move onto spells. OK I'm a caster now. Lets look at my spell list, after all I have to memorize it. well lets see, hm, bless weapon is good if I'm fighting evil, or divine favor if I'm just fighting random mooks, but each day I have to know which its gonna be before hand or I'm wasting breath. Lets not even get into all the situational spells that would be great if I could cast spontaneously but are as of now never going to get cast because I won't have them memorized when I might actually need them. So lets go look in my splat books, okay nothing there is really any better, one spell lets me take damage to do extra damage but it lasts 2 rounds because my caster level is half my paladin level. Jeeze yet another instance of feeling gipped, one spell a day that may be the wrong choice and leave me screwed with a selection of spells that could be useful but never will because I never have enough spell slots to make memorizing them worthwile.
I'm really starting to get discouraged, I'm beginning to think the only thing that will save the paladin is a complete overhaul. I mean tear down and rebuild from the ground up.
Just repasting from my playtest thread
So I'm not good at fighting and I'm even worse as a cleric yipee
|
|
I have been DMing for over 20 years. The paladin has been a staple in nearly all of those years. Not every campaign has had one, but many have. I believe the paladin is a necessary component to the stable of Base classes. He fights, but is not the fighter. He turns, but is not the cleric. The abilities that the paladin possesses do not make him the paladin. The abilities that the paladin possesses are because he is the paladin; the one man or woman who when faced with evil beyond comprehension, beyond understanding will stand up, alone if need be and say No...
I like the 3.5 Paladin, I wish he were stronger. I wish there weren't some cosmic curse that everytime one of them declares a smite in my campaign he or she fails to hit. The joke at my table is "when you absolutely possitively need to roll a 1, use a smite." This must be fixed.
The solution at my table is the Paladin adds his Cha bonus to the number of times he may smite per day. Also it is a charge (like a touch attack spell) that stays a number of rounds equal to paladin level or until discharged. This has helped. You still lose it if you use it against a non-evil, a small price I believe. Try it, I dare you. You'll be surprised how it makes the paladin work. He does what a paladin is supposed to do.
Detect Evil is a Swift action. Come on he is a paladin...Let him act like one.
If you give up on the paladin though, you lose something special to the game.
|
|
I have been DMing for over 20 years. The paladin has been a staple in nearly all of those years. Not every campaign has had one, but many have. I believe the paladin is a necessary component to the stable of Base classes. He fights, but is not the fighter. He turns, but is not the cleric. The abilities that the paladin possesses do not make him the paladin. The abilities that the paladin possesses are because he is the paladin; the one man or woman who when faced with evil beyond comprehension, beyond understanding will stand up, alone if need be and say No...
I like the 3.5 Paladin, I wish he were stronger. I wish there weren't some cosmic curse that everytime one of them declares a smite in my campaign he or she fails to hit. The joke at my table is "when you absolutely possitively need to roll a 1, use a smite." This must be fixed.
The solution at my table is the Paladin adds his Cha bonus to the number of times he may smite per day. Also it is a charge (like a touch attack spell) that stays a number of rounds equal to paladin level or until discharged. This has helped. You still lose it if you use it against a non-evil, a small price I believe. Try it, I dare you. You'll be surprised how it makes the paladin work. He does what a paladin is supposed to do.
Detect Evil is a Swift action. Come on he is a paladin...Let him act like one.
If you give up on the paladin though, you lose something special to the game.
I'm not giving up on the paladin (its just sad that the class that's all about not giving up in the face of overwhelming odds, has me almost ready to give up, irony) but even the fixes you propose (which if you look around the board I have pushed for 1+cha mod to smite and the swift action detect evil, but question even the swift action still has you concentrating for two rounds unless you are saying swift action gives you all the info of a three round detect evil) aren't really enough to bring parity to the other classes just enough so that the sucking isn't quite so apparent. As for trying them, can't, only changes I'm allowed to make to the class are official, so until Jason suggests some changes I'm stuck with running what I've got.
|
|
Shameful, my one smite missed, and I was mr NPC warrior while the knight was using his feature to the max benefit.
Hey, at least you got to attempt a smite!
I'm letting a player test a PF paladin in AOW, and he never got to use his smite while he was level 1. Animals, vermin & constructs; then the first actually evil creature jumped the party, the round after he'd been KO'd by an elemental.
Oh, the irony.
|
|
Shameful, my one smite missed, and I was mr NPC warrior while the knight was using his feature to the max benefit.Hey, at least you got to attempt a smite!
I'm letting a player test a PF paladin in AOW, and he never got to use his smite while he was level 1. Animals, vermin & constructs; then the first actually evil creature jumped the party, the round after he'd been KO'd by an elemental.
Oh, the irony.
Wow, thanx I needed that laugh.
Not to be bashing the Paladin. But if I were fighting demons or devils, I would rather be a high level Ranger with Favoured Enemy than a Paladin. It's nothing personal, I just think the ranger would be better, and that's wrong, seeing as demons and devils should be what the Paladin should be best at fighting at higher levels.
|
|
Not to be bashing the Paladin. But if I were fighting demons or devils, I would rather be a high level Ranger with Favoured Enemy than a Paladin. It's nothing personal, I just think the ranger would be better, and that's wrong, seeing as demons and devils should be what the Paladin should be best at fighting at higher levels.
I suggested giving Favoured Enemy to the Paladin. It's always 'on', and it sets him up for a bunch of other feats/PrC.
It's a tried & tested mechanic, and it won't take up more than a couple of lines ("see Ranger, page XX").
Maybe FE:Undead, at lower levels, so he can hack through skels and zombies, with FE: Evil Outsider kicking in later?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Not to be bashing the Paladin. But if I were fighting demons or devils, I would rather be a high level Ranger with Favoured Enemy than a Paladin. It's nothing personal, I just think the ranger would be better, and that's wrong, seeing as demons and devils should be what the Paladin should be best at fighting at higher levels.I suggested giving Favoured Enemy to the Paladin. It's always 'on', and it sets him up for a bunch of other feats/PrC.
It's a tried & tested mechanic, and it won't take up more than a couple of lines ("see Ranger, page XX").
Maybe FE:Undead, at lower levels, so he can hack through skels and zombies, with FE: Evil Outsider kicking in later?
My similar suggestions were what amounts to "favored enemy (evil)" at half the value of a ranger's FavEn, or that a specific use of "smite evil" would give the bane quality to a weapon for a round (or CHA bonus # of rounds) or some such.
Perhaps FavEn (evil outsider) would work just fine, with the stipulation that it also applied to any fiendish or half-fiend creature. While you don't meet too many true outsiders at low levels, if you run up against evil Clr/Sor/Wiz you have a pretty good chance at them using summon monster to bring in a fiendish whatzit or three that you could use the ability against.
Like everyone else, I'll look forward to seeing the in medias res paladin revision.
I think the main roleplaying problem with palas in my campaigns was: "So, who will distract him while we torture the goblin for informations ?"
I once played a pala alongside a evil char who constantly had to hide his alignment .
So restrictions can be fun to play, but can easily annoy the rest of the group.
That said i see the paladin more as the fanatic "smiter", but thats just my gaming experience and i´m glad that this concept is supported by some of you guys.
My paladins were indeed the most recognizable characters i ever played (since AD&D). They were the guys who wouldn´t sneak into a castle but charge the front gates (while the rest of the group is still planning).
They were the ones who rallied the town guard to storm the local thieves guild (and so bringing down a whole campaign). I love those guys.
So give them back the means to do awesome things once in a while !
Let them shine in their niche like every other character can !
Some examples / archetypes ?
When i think of paladins i think of warlords leading their men into battle, inspiring courage and holding up the banner !
William Wallace (in Braveheart) inspiring his men ? -> Paladin
Jean D´Arc ? -> Paladin
I picture leaders who excel normal fighters in their fight against evil
WarCraft 2 Palas ? -> build a church and bring them on !
When i think of paladins i also think of great warriors drawing their sword to call down the might of their god and strike fear into the hearts of evil !
He-Man - raising his sword and calling for the power of Grayskull ?
-> defintitely more Paladin than barbarian
King Arthur pulling the sword out of the stone ? Arthurs Knights of the Round Table ? -> If they don´t embody Palas, nobody does.
But as others have stated, as it is now, a "modern" Pala is NOT able to express those concepts, so he should either be transformed into a prestige class or (better) be pushed up a lot !
As i stated in another thread regarding fighter vs.caster i think too much balancing does not necessarily improve good roleplaying.
For me it could even be more fun to play a "normal" fighter who fights side by side with a Paladin who can make his stand against the BBEG much better than i could, at least more fun than having a weak buffer or supporting class that won´t excel in any area.
For this we have the bard ;-)
You seem to have misread my intent. I NEVER said the Paladin does not need an offensive capability increase. I even mentioned ones I have suggested and supported. I'm suggesting instead of a focus on just offense, a combination of offense and defense. Something in addition to improving Smite Evil, granting bonuses against evil that can be used every fight, Lay on Hands, and letting them have full caster level. Instead of trying to replicate what other classes have take the Paladin in a different direction. Have him be the Enduring Foe of Evil.
Instead of trying to make him the one man army against evil have him be the one who is still standing when the dust settles. You mentioned the "Paladin in Hell", and you will notice he is standing alone. Could it not be that of all his companions he is the only one who is still standing.
Perhaps we should be picturing the Paladin as the one the BBEG is yelling "Why won't you die?" at.
I am sorry if I came off as rude. I did not mean to. I like your ideas for the defense, the paladin does need it! But the only problem is, if the paladin is the last one standing and the BBEG is saying "why wont you die" the paladin is saying the same thing, and its not because the BBEG has great defense its because the paladin used all his smites to GET to the BBEG and is now not much of a threat.
So yes please give him a bit more defense....but PLEASE give him a good portion MORE offense. I do not want him to slay everything, i just want him to be a FORCE against evil, someone who stands out.
Hey there all,
Great thread. Just an FYI, I am rewriting chunks of the paladin this week and will post them up as soon as they are ready.
Stay tuned
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Jason, thank you very much for reading. I hope this thread has some impact on what happens to the paladin. I hope to read good things when you get those things posted! If you wont give up when that will happen will you supply us with WHERE they will be posted?
Just wanted to chime in my support for the ideas here. I'd like to have the old heroic Paladin from the "Paladin in Hell" illustration return to my table.
Thanks for the great post, Marty! Very entertaining read.
And of course thanks to the OP for getting it rolling here!
|
|
I'm really starting to get discouraged, I'm beginning to think the only thing that will save the paladin is a complete overhaul. I mean tear down and rebuild from the ground up.
Amen! That's what I've been saying all along - hence the title of my thread i started was titled "Paladin - in need of an overhaul"
Great feedback LastKnight.
I too am playing a paladin in our playtest sessions - involved in Curse of Crimson Throne - I'm 5th level now finally - and my experiences thus far have been quite synonymous with yours. I look at our rogue and our cleric with a bit of envy in every battle.....
But I just love roleplaying that LG hero to give it up.....so I trudge along and try to find a way to be useful - usually as a shield to hold off an enemy till they get there to do damage to em....
Robert
|
|
Lots of wonderful nostalgic goodness!
Marty - what a wonderful post to read. I've been away from the boards for a few days - been out of town. I was looking forward to getting back into the discuss of the needs of our paladin, and was genuinely pleased to read what you wrote.
Wow, what memories you brought back. I remember falling in love with paladin way back then. I, too, started in 1982. My aunt bought me the AD&D PHB with the big devil idol on the cover (with the thief prying out the jewel-eye) on my 10th birthday. The Unearthed Arcana is to me the best thing that ever happened to a paladin. I remember growing up a Superman fan (bigtime) and playing a Paladin in my early teens was a way to emulate that comic book hero I idolized - which carried into my adult life; even though they were no were near as good in 2nd edition, and even worse off than in 3rd.
The paladin in those yesteryears were the cats meow at the table. Everyone viewed them as the hero. All players knew who the paladin was - even at conventions. They made all the difference.
They were so special for the fact that they were so hard to qualify for with their prerequisites and super high advancement chart, and their vow of poverty and code of conduct left them in the hands of those players who REALLY wanted to play one - and be something special. And the power that they wielded was unbelieveable - especially when the DM granted them a Holy Avenger!!! But as I illustrated before - that power came at a price.
The problem, as I see it now, stems from the fact that they no longer have most of those qualifiers: no more pre-req stats, no more vow of poverty, and they advance the same as everyone else. So as it stands, if the paladin was as powerful (in relation to everyone else) as he was then, without those balancing factors, it really would skew the system.
IMO, the code of conduct issue is a steep restriction, but I say, go ahead and add the vow of poverty back in (in 3.5 when magic items are so much more ingrained into the necessity of a build - that would really make a statement), to where they're limited to the number of magic items they can have, have them tithe their 10%, keep their rigid code of conduct in place - and then make them the badass sonovab&@$@ evil-stomping servant of god that they should be!!!
The fighter used to stand in awe at what the paladin can do - let him cringe again. Those that want to play restrictionless reckless damage dealers - let them play fighters....but then let them see what can truly be special with a lot of discipline and alot of faith. Let them say, "I knew I should have listened to my priest and become a paladin....."
I still have the Paladin in Hell module. I love that artwork. Paladins have always created an imagery in one's mind that just means - unstoppable, and evil should begin to get nervous. In early edition modules, it was often times that a certain item or task that needed to be done could ONLY be done by a paladin. (temple of elemental evil T1-4 comes to mind). Gygax obviously meant for the paladin to not have an equal. I never minded playing with the restrictions etc with the class - because the aesthetic rewards - when everyone at the table breathed an audible sigh of relief when it was the paladin's turn.....that always made me smile.
Robert
I'ld also like to say I am in favour of a paladin who has a little more offensive and defensive powers.
Make him the Hero he needs to be. The defender of the weak. The beacon of light in dark times.
The symbol of hope etc. etc. etc.
I'd would be quite oke if he gets to tithe 10% or even 20% of his gained wealth again to "the good cause".
Give him a maximum number of magic weapons (or even a complete vow of poverty with armor boosting)
It would also be okay to give him a code and take all his special abbilities from him if he behaves badly and lawless.
In return he needs to get some powers mentioned above (or some of your own Jason :)
Let it make it worthwhile to play a paladin again. Please.....
Paladins have always created an imagery in one's mind that just means - unstoppable, and evil should begin to get nervous. In early edition modules, it was often times that a certain item or task that needed to be done could ONLY be done by a paladin. (temple of elemental evil T1-4 comes to mind). Gygax obviously meant for the paladin to not have an equal. I never minded playing with the restrictions etc with the class - because the aesthetic rewards - when everyone at the table breathed an audible sigh of relief when it was the paladin's turn.....that always made me smile.
Oh so true :)
Does anyone remember the old Dungeons & Dragons saturday morning cartoon? Do you remember the character of the 'Cavalier?' Bumbling, selfish, useless, cowardly, sniveling. I wonder if that's what WotC was going for with the 3.0/3.5 paladin.