Mechanics aside, I've always thought that David Eddings' 'Church Knights' was an excellent depiction of paladins. Military-trained adherents to a religious code of ethics, they are members of a religious order who are trained in (a little) magic. There are multiple orders, all of whom have a different flavor, and few of them would blindly follow the tenets of the code to their own (or more importantly to their faith's) detriment. I've always suggested those books to any players considering running a paladin. I ran a paladin patterned that way (on one of my brief 'player' stints) and had a blast. FWIW, there's more detail about the books/order/etc at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Orders_(David_Eddings)
|
Wait, all this time you've been pimpin' for paladins to get Mettle, and you don't even know what it does? WTF?I obviously did not put that in the proper context. What I meant to say was that I have never read the description of Mettle from the books. But from everything I have read here on the boards (which broke it down just like you did many times) it seemed like an obvious fit for me.
I am on the same page as you as far as the paladin needing more offense than he does Defense. I think if you look around you will see that I am one of the biggest advocates for some form of always on damage. This should not equal the fighters always on damage and should probably be limited to "against evil" but it should be there.
Now as in regards to Mettle. I dont care if they can use it with the name or not and yea I dont have all the splat books in the world to have been able to read every detail in the game. But the definition of this ability really felt pretty cut and dry to me, that is why I have been an advocate for it.
Paladins should be able to stand in the flame and not get burned. They should be able to stand when all others have fallen to the evil clerics magics. This is how I see this ability and if I am wrong in my description then please feel free to insert any word you would like to show that what I have been "gung ho" for is something like this, called Mettle or not.
Honestly for me I don't see mettle as a necessity, he has a good fort and will save, and between his immunities and his healing, mettle doesn't really add that much now. I mean I failed one fort save this entire game and my will save is now +11, my fort is only +8. Mettle is overkill to me, I'd much rather see an active defense ability, or an offense ability then another passive defensive ability. YMMV And yes I get that mettle actually does thematically fit, but like I said, another passive defensive ability, meh.
I am sorry, I guess for me this one is more about the fluff then the mechanics of it. The game does not work that way unless you have something in your character "rules" that says it does. Thus something like "mettle" or whatever you want to call it would be a boon to the paladin.
Of course some sort of active defensive ability would be great! Just like an always on offensive one. I am still of the stance that the paladin has and does sacrifice so much that giving him ALL of these things does not over power him one bit.
|
|
Mechanics aside, I've always thought that David Eddings' 'Church Knights' was an excellent depiction of paladins. Military-trained adherents to a religious code of ethics, they are members of a religious order who are trained in (a little) magic. There are multiple orders, all of whom have a different flavor, and few of them would blindly follow the tenets of the code to their own (or more importantly to their faith's) detriment. I've always suggested those books to any players considering running a paladin. I ran a paladin patterned that way (on one of my brief 'player' stints) and had a blast. FWIW, there's more detail about the books/order/etc at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Orders_(David_Eddings)
I've always like paladin orders and knightly orders to mirror the knights of solamnia from dragonlance, yes there are good ones and selfish ones all in the organization at all levels.
Mettle was only useful against a will save or fort save that still did damage or some affect to you if you made the save. example: finger of death spell. It is not the same as evasion except in concept (mettle doesn't work with reflex saves). I think mettle is perfect fit for the pally.... and if we can't call it "mettle" because of some wotc thing then we can call it "perseverence" or "Heart of the Lion" or something else...
If it doesn't let a paladin beat fireball as if he had evasion, then I'm OK with it. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
Mettle was only useful against a will save or fort save that still did damage or some affect to you if you made the save. example: finger of death spell. It is not the same as evasion except in concept (mettle doesn't work with reflex saves). I think mettle is perfect fit for the pally.... and if we can't call it "mettle" because of some wotc thing then we can call it "perseverence" or "Heart of the Lion" or something else...If it doesn't let a paladin beat fireball as if he had evasion, then I'm OK with it. Thanks for the clarification.
Funny story in my game my shield founded a legacy when instead of fighting I let myself get surrounded on all sides tanglefoot bagged and seriously hurt all because I spent three rounds battering down the flames that otherwise would have destroyed the silo holding this towns livelyhood.
The first legacy ability that my shield will get is fire eater, which gives me imp evasion vs. fire based effects that allow a save for half, and allows a save for half damage against any fire based effect that doesn't allow for a save, but any fire based effect that originates from my character is automatically halved damage. So I've already got fireballs beat :)
I would suggest tying LoH and Smite Evil mechanic together, let them use the same pool to determine how many times per day they can be accomplished. So every player, every adventuring day can decide if the want to be more of a heal bot that day or more of an evil smasher.
But the best thing would be to give paladins Smite evil x times/encounter, but if the designers do not want to incorporate the new mechanic, my upper suggestion would do.
Someone mention also to use fighter Weapon training but only against evil creatures and I support that as well.
|
|
I would suggest tying LoH and Smite Evil mechanic together, let them use the same pool to determine how many times per day they can be accomplished. So every player, every adventuring day can decide if the want to be more of a heal bot that day or more of an evil smasher.
But the best thing would be to give paladins Smite evil x times/encounter, but if the designers do not want to incorporate the new mechanic, my upper suggestion would do.
Someone mention also to use fighter Weapon training but only against evil creatures and I support that as well.
No thank you, Lay on Hands finally became a good ability and we saw how it nerfed Channel when they were combined. I have no problem with combining mechanics in theory, but in practice it winds up causing a lot of unexpected problems. And personally I don't want my healing limited because I wanted to lay out an enemy, I want them both seperate as they are, but with more utility then they have (well now we just need to fix smite, LoH is wonderful as it is)
|
|
This has probably already been suggested but what about giving paladins the same bonus feat progression as fighters but limit the selection to divine only feats.
This would allow selection of feats like divine might and improved smite (assuming they are divine feats. Not got books to hand to double check).
Divine feats aren't OGL so that doesn't work, not to mention they shouldn't have the "same" feat progression because then they definitely overpower the fighter. Something like half the bonus feats a fighter gets could work. but I honestly don't see it happening.